In an inconspicuous corridor leading to the medieval bell tower of the ancient church of Saint Mary in the Greek Abbey of Grottaferrata, a small town on the slopes of the Alban Hills south of Rome, there is a cross embedded in the wall at man height. The cross is rather unusual because it is different from the well-known Greek and Latin shapes, and it is made of the rare red porphyry. Moreover, it is so well hidden that the common citizens of Grottaferrata do not know its existence and, still more, almost all the guide and learned books describing the ancient and historical Abbey seem to agree on the point of totally ignoring the cross [1,2]. However, when the few monks still servicing the Abbey are asked about the cross, they answer unanimously that it is a Crux Mensuralis (CM). But they do not know when, how and why it was brought there, although the oldest monk among them remember to have seen it in the same place as today since 1930, when he arrived as a novice at the Abbey. It is worthwhile to note that catholic priests of the same region do not know even the name of the CM, not to speak about its meaning.
Now, the CM is a slender Latin cross with the vertical and horizontal beams having the supposed dimensions of the height and width of Jesus Christ, respectively. The first ever CM was made by using silver and gold in the 6th century at the time of the Byzantine Emperor Justinian the Great, when the body measurements of Christ were taken from old relics in Jerusalem. Soon after, an image of Christ known as the Mandylion was found by accident in Edessa, now Urfa in Turkey, where it remained for few centuries until 944 when it was brought to Constantinople amid great celebrations. It was kept there as the most precious among many relics until 1204 when it disappeared along with practically all of them during the sacking of the city by the crusaders. But well before that fateful date it was reproduced in a great number of copies. At the same time the byzantine world developed a keen interest in the physical dimensions of the image believed to be that of Christ. Moreover, in order to allow every pilgrim to have a measure (mensura) at hand of Christ, a CM was erected just outside the huge basilica of Saint Sofia, most probably a stone cross.
Taking into account that the Abbey of Grottaferrata was founded in 1004 by Basilian monks coming from the southern part of Italy which was then Byzantine, it is reasonable to relate physically and temporarily the CM of Grottaferrata with the ones still existing in Constantinople at that time. Moreover, because the Shroud of Turin is believed by many experts to be nothing less than the Mandylion [3], connections between the CM of Grottaferrata and the Shroud of Turin are taken into consideration and will be critically discussed in the light of historical documents [4].

References
[1] L’Abbazia Greca di Grottaferrata, De Luca Editori d’Arte, Roma (2008), a cura del Gruppo Archeologico Latino-Colli Albani “Bruno Martellotta”. Available also in English, German, Greek.
[2] A. Rocchi: Storia e Vicende del Monastero di Santa Maria di Grottaferrata, Tipografia Italo-Orientale San Nilo, Grottaferrata (1998).
[3] I. Wilson and V. Miller: The Mysterious Shroud, Doubleday Image Book, USA (1986).
[4] S. Parenti: Il Monastero di Grottaferrata nel Medioevo (1004-1462), Pontificio Istituto Orientale, Roma (2005)

This paper examines the possible connection of sixth-century climate changes in Jerusalem and the Dead Sea area, with severe societal impact, to removal of relics -- specifically the Sudarium of Oviedo and the Shroud of Turin -- from the region around that time.
Numerous paleoclimatic studies involving geology, hydrology, palynology, seismology, meteorology, archaeological remains and historical evidence indicate that the Dead Sea region, verdant from about the first century B.C., became desert rather abruptly in the sixth century. [1, 2, 3]
The mid-sixth century is important in establishing the provenance of the Shroud. Iconography possibly reflecting the facial image on the Shroud is indisputably dated to that time -- in particular the Emessa Vase, now in Musée de Louvre, Paris, and the encaustic Pantocrator of the Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai. In the late sixth century, reference to the "Image of Edessa" (adduced as the same cloth now known as the Turin Shroud) appeared in the historical record [4]. The Sudarium is said to have been removed from Jerusalem in the early seventh century, Thus, the drastic environmental changes of the sixth century, with resulting social dislocation, may support the posited timelines of transfers of the Shroud and the Sudarium from Palestine.
In view of the extremely arid climate of the Dead Sea region in modern times, one may wonder if this could really have been a thriving agricultural area 2,000 years ago. In fact, archaeological and palynogical evidence confirms that it was. [2, 5, 6] It has been observed that in marginal desert areas, even minor climatic changes can result in dramatic environmental changes. [2, 7]

References
[1] Harris, Julie A. "Redating the Arca Santa of Oviedo." The Art Bulletin, March, 1995.
[2] Heim, Christoph, et al. "Near East Desertification: Evidence from the Dead Sea. Naturwissenschaften 84, 398-401 (1997).
[3] Migowski, C., "Holocene climate variability and cultural evolution in the Near East from the Dead Sea sedimentary record".Quaternary Research, Vol. 66, No. 3, pp. 421-431 (2006)
[4] Evagrius Scholasticus (ca. 536-600). Ecclesiastical History covering the period 431-594.
[5] Klein, C. "Fluctuations of the level of the Dead Sea and climatic fluctuations in the country during historical times." International Association of Hydrological Sciences, Symposium, Scientific basis for water resources management, September, 1985, Jerusalem, Israel, pp. 197-224.
[6] Leroy, Suzanne, et al. "Are an early Byzantine seismic event (recorded in Manyas-Ulubat Lake sediment, N-W Turkey) and the end of the Beysehir Occupation Phase linked?" in "Rapid and catastrophic environmental changes in the Holocene and human response" first joint meeting of IGCP 490 and ICSU Environmental catastrophes in Mauritania, the desert and the coast, Field conference, Atar, Mauritania, January 4-18, 2004. Atlas Conferences, camu-34.
[7] Lucke, Bernhard, et al, "The Decapolis region (Northern Jordan) as historical example of desertification. Mutual dependencies of land use, climate, soil genesis and settlement history." in Rapid and catastrophic environmental changes in the Holocene and human response. First joint meeting of IGCP 490 and ICSU Environmental catastrophes in Mauritania, the desert and the coast, Field conference, Atar, Mauritania, January 4-18, 2004. Atlas Conferences, camu-06.

The Shroud body image, faint yellow, has characteristics [1] completely different from those of the copies [2]. The analyses prove that the Shroud image is not the result of an applied material, as a painting or a printing. Moreover it was not obtained projecting a manikin on a sensitized cloth, singeing a cloth by a hot bas-relief or pressing it on a model treated by acid substances [3]. The characteristics of the Shroud image suggest that the best explanation for its formation is a short and intense burst of directional ultraviolet radiation [4].
The reddish stains are human blood not transposed by a brush but by contact with a wounded body that was wrapped already dead. No image is present under the blood stains. The deduction is that the image formation was following the blood transposition on the cloth [5].
The existence of copies of the Shroud, at least some fifty, does not constitute a problem of "rivalry" like someone, hastily and superficially, wants to make us believe. Also the most beautiful are of modest making and clearly appear like drawings. Under analysis they are revealed as composed by painting pigments.
They hardly ever copy the exact dimensions of the original Shroud. Not every copy brings the burn marks and the darns. Trickles of blood are very rarely reproduced faithfully. Most of the copies have the side wound in the correct position, that is, on the right, but in some of them it is reproduced on the left. Also regarding the hands, in some copies the left hand is positioned over the right one, in others the right hand is over the left one, but there are also copies with the hands not crossed. In some of the copies the thumb is not visible, in others, instead, it is visible. The hand wound in some cases is in the wrist, in others it is in the palm, in others it is not depicted. Some copies have the face with the shut eyes, others have the opened eyes. The feet are depicted crossed, diverging or parallel. The trickle of blood on the back is not always depicted.
Also the modern copies, realized by N.P.L. Allen, E.A. Craig, L. Garlaschelli, J. Nickell, V. Pesce Delfino, have characteristics completely different from those of the Shroud.
The aim of making a copy was not, however, to cheat the simple-minded faithful, pretending it was the authentic funeral sheet of Jesus; so much so that it is often written on the copy when it had been made and that it had touched the original relic. The existence of the copies reveals, instead, only a devotional aim: the desire of being able to pray in front of that sacred image in an age in which the photography did not exist.

References
[1] J.H. Heller - A.D. Adler: A Chemical Investigation of the Shroud of Turin, Canadian Society of Forensic Sciences Journal, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 81-103 (1981).
[2] L. Fossati: Elenco delle caratteristiche evidenziate sulle copie, Collegamento pro Sindone, 5-20 (Sett.-Ott. 1997)
[3] G. Fanti et al.: Evidences for testing hypotheses about the body image formation of the Turin Shroud, The Third Dallas International Conference on the Shroud of Turin (2005), www.shroud.com/pdfs/doclist.pdf
[4] Baldacchini et al.: Coloring linens with excimer laser to simulate the body image of the Turin Shroud, Applied Optics, Vol. 47, No. 9, pp. 1278-1285 (March 20, 2008).
[5] E.J. Jumper et al.: A Comprehensive Examination of the Various Stains and Images on the Shroud of Turin, Archaeological Chemistry III, ACS Advances in Chemistry nº 205, J.B. Lambert, Editor, Chapter 22, American Chemical Society, Washington D.C., pp. 447-476 (1984).

It is commonly accepted that the Holy Shroud once got to Turin, left the town only in two occasions: during the siege of Turin in 1706 and during the second world war in 1939 [1].
In the small town of Maddalene, near Fossano, 80 kilometres south of Turin, it is time-honoured a tradition according to which the Holy Shroud found shelter in the town local lord palace in the beginning of XVII century [2].
According to some researches of nineties some signs make presume that the Holy Shroud stayed in Maddalene, that was a belonging of Savoia from 1574, after being of Acaja's Princes, in 1617 when Turin was threatened by Spanish troops that already besieged Vercelli [3].
One can assume that, as it happened in 1706 and in 1939, the Holy Shroud was hidden in this place that was Savoia's property, very close to French territories, with the purpose of protect It from hazards coming from wars. Are there others data supporting this hypothesis? In this small town was founded in 1617 the "Brotherhood of the Holy Shroud" that was then officially recognized by local authorities[4]. Brotherhood or Congregations of the Holy Shroud were founded as in Maddalene, also in Chambéry and Turin. The Brotherhood was signed by a Clemente IX papal bull, that drew up a Summary of Perpetual Indulgences granted to the members of this Brotherhood and to the faithfuls. [5]. In fact it was Clemente IX that in 1669 founded a Congregation whose duty was to regulate Indulgences. As in Turin, also in Maddalene every year on may the 4th they honoured the Holy Shroud and The Brotherhood. The inside of the church is enriched by veneration signs either coeval either subsequent to the event; particularly interesting are the standards of the Brotherhood and a linen paint that portrays a Shroud exhibition happened, probably during the shelter in the small town.
All these data suggest that the Shroud, after its arrival in Turin and before the siege of 1706, secretly went out of the Savoia's capital city in the beginning of XVII century.

References
[1] Zaccone G. M.: Sulle tracce della Sindone, Elledicì, p. 21 (1997).
[2] AA. VV.: Maddalene una parrocchia e la sua gente 1604-2004, Tip. Gengraf, p. 18 (2004).
[3] Griseri C.: Le immagini della Sindone nel Cuneese con notizie e curiosità storico ambientali, Bollettino della Società per gli Studi Storici, Archeologici ed Artistici della provincia di Cuneo, n. 106, I sem. 1992, p. 181 (1992).
[4] Parish archive of Maddalene.
[5] Parish archive of Maddalene, Canonical Act in Rome 15 December 1668.

One of the more difficult steps in writing the chronology of places in which the Shroud has been preserved is the historical gap of more or less one hundred and fifty years, from 1204 in Constantinople to its re-appearance in Lirey in the 14th century. Where was It in the years between? We can state that the Shroud disappeared from Constantinople in the period between April 1204 and August 1205. Three elements confirm the presence of the Shroud in Athens in the summer of 1205. First of all a letter written on 1st August 1205 by Theodor Angel Comnenus to Pope Innocent III [1]. Moreover we have the statements of the papal legate Benedict of Santa Susanna and abbot Nicolas of Otranto.
After the splitting up of the Byzantine Empire Othon de La Roche became Lord of Athens [2]. In order to obtain more information on Othon it was necessary to visit his castle, in Ray-sur-Saône, to look for new clues. In the ancient tower of the castle are preserved numerous family treasures. Our attention is immediately caught by some relic containers could prove the direct origin from Constantinople. Behind these objects there is a wooden coffer that, according to family tradition, it could state that the Shroud, after disappearing from Constantinople, was kept in Ray-sur-Saône castle. When was it taken to France? The latest record signaling the presence of Othon in Athens is a papal bull of Honorius III dated February 12th 1225 [3]. Othon returned to France and contributed to the enrichment of Bellevaux abbey [4]. A document in the archives of the diocese of Langres states that Othon died in 1234 [5]. Othon was not buried in his own town but in the Church in Seveux, a town in the diocese of Langres.
Further proof supporting the hypothesis of a link between Lords of Ray-sur-Saône and the Shroud is a drape, preserved near the coffer. On the fabric is painted the frontal part of a male human being, extremely similar to the man of the Shroud [6]. All these elements suggest that the Shroud could have remained in the castle in Ray-sur-Saône when Othon de La Roche returned in France, probably around 1226.
Thanks to Jeanne de Vergy, related in the fifth generation with Othon, the Shroud present in France from 1226 would have been shown in public only one and a half centuries later, in a village not far away from Ray-sur-Saône: Lirey.

References
[1] Rinaldi P.: La Sindone. Scienza e fede, pp. 109-113 (1983).
[2] Vignon P.: Le Saint Suaire de Turin devant la science, l'archéologie, l'histoire, l'iconographie, la logique, Masson et C., pp. 107-108 (1938).
[3] Regesta Honorii papae III, 332-986, 1819, 3924-4503-4514.
[4] Hopf C.: Chronique gréco-romaine, Weidman, (1873).
[5] Vignier J.: Décade historique du diocèse de Langres , T. III , f. 6.
[6] Piana A.: Sindone gli anni perduti, Sugarco, Photo supplement (2007).

In two articles [1] I provided the following points. A. The legend of Abgar V discusses bishops Palut and Serapion and Abgar's letter to the Roman magistrate at Eleutheropolis--Beth Gubrin renamed by Emperor Lucius Septimius Severus (193-211) [2]. All these belong in the time of Lucius Septimius Severus Megas Abgarus VIII (177-212), who took his nomenclature from this emperor, his conqueror. After Edessa's flood (201) Abgar VIII built a royal complex (Syriac: "birtha") on high ground [3]. Clement of Alexandria (165-211) wrote that Thaddaeus was buried in "Britio Edessenorum." "Birtha" thus became Latin "Britium." Abgar VIII also visited Rome in the time of Pope Eleutherus (171-185) [4]. The Liber Pontificalis (550) said Eleutherus received a letter from "British King Lucius" requesting guidance in the Faith [5]. (Rome = "Eleutheropolis.") Conclusion: Abgar VIII retrojected his own conversion back to Abgar V to give Edessa an apostolic foundation [6]. Bede's British Church History (ca.700) mistook this for a king of Britain. Before Bede, no Roman or British writer ever knew of a British King Lucius [7]. Yet after Bede, widely read, Lucius was accepted in Britain. B. On Easter Edessa's Jesus image was displayed at the first hour (6 a.m.) as infant, third hour as boy, sixth hour as youth, ninth hour as crucified. Christ-Child has changed to Christ-Crucified. In Grail stories, the best knight sees the Christ-Child in the Grail, then the Crucified. To witness Jesus born and sacrificed is the true secret of the Grail [8]. C. The Abgar legend was known in Latin from 769 on [9]. Around 1200 Chrétien de Troyes invented the legend of the Grail. Soon after, using the New Testament and ancient apocryphal stories, Robert de Boron wrote its history as the cup of the Last Supper [10]. A major source for Robert is the Lydda legend: Pilate permits Joseph to bury Jesus. On Golgotha Joseph catches Jesus' dripping blood in the Shroud [11]. Robert's near-verbatim version adds: Pilate also gives Joseph Jesus' Last Supper cup (now called "Grail"). He catches the blood not in the Shroud but in the Grail [12]. Grail stories have a crippled king healed by the Grail. Edessa's crippled Abgar V was healed by the Shroud. D. In 1136 Geoffrey of Monmouth's fictitious King Aruiragus (ca. 50 CE) was used as King Lucius' ancestor by Glastonbury to falsify Christianity's apostolic origin in Britain. Aruiragus (scribal variant: Aruigarus) is a virtual homophone for Abgarus (Greek: Augaros) [13].

References
[1] D. Scavone: "Joseph of Arimathea, the Holy Grail, and the Edessa Icon," Arthuriana vol. 9, no. 4, 3-31 (Winter 1999). see . It is cited here as "Scavone 1." See also "British King Lucius, the Grail, and Joseph of Arimathea: The Question of Byzantine Origins," PMAM vol. 10, 101-142 (2003). It is cited here as "Scavone 2."
[2] George Howard, tr.: The Teaching of Addai, Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 88 and 105 (1981).
[3] Scavone 1: n. 27.
[4] Ibid.: 114f. and n. 18.
[5] L. Duchesne: Le Liber Pontificalis, Paris: Ernst Thorin, cii (1886).
[6] Scavone 1 and 2: passim.
[7] Leo Sherley-Price, tr.: Bede, Ecclesiastical History of the English People, London: Penguin, 49 (1990).
[8] Scavone 2: nn. 2 and 3.
[9] Ian Wilson: The Turin Shroud, London: Gollancz, 135 (1978).
[10] Scavone 2: 101ff. and n. 2.
[11] Adolph Harnack: "Ein in georgischer Sprache überliefertes Apokryphon des Josef von Aramathia," Sitzungsberichte der königlich preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften vol. 17, 920-31 (1901).
[12] W. Nitze: Robert de Boron: Roman de l'Éstoire dou Graal, Paris: Honore Champion, vv. 507-572 (1927).
[13] Scavone: "Edessan Texts as a Source of British Pseudo-History: the King Arviragus/Aruigarus of Geoffrey, Ch. IV, 12-17.'' Paper read at Medieval Ass. of the Midwest Conference, Univ. of Indianapolis (2004).