Abstract
WHILE thoroughly agreeing with Prof. Meldola's remarks regarding Dr. Paul Vignon's é tude scientifique of the remarkable relic known as the Holy Shroud, reviewed at p. 241 of the current volume, there are a few points which he has not enlarged upon, but which may possibly deserve attention and show how largely imaginary and unsupported by the records Dr. Vignon's theory is. No valid determination of the nature of the impressions or of the manner in which they have been produced can, of course, be made without a critical examination of the relic itself, so that any arguments based upon mere assumptions must be purely hypothetical.
Similar content being viewed by others
Article PDF
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
WATERHOUSE, J. The Holy Shroud of Turin . Nature 67, 317 (1903). https://doi.org/10.1038/067317a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/067317a0
This article is cited by
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.