Investigating a Dated Piece of the Shroud of Turin
Open accessAbstract
We present a photomicrographic investigation of a sample of the Shroud of Turin, split from one used in the radiocarbon dating study of 1988 at Arizona. In contrast to other reports on less-documented material, we find no evidence to contradict the idea that the sample studied was taken from the main part of the shroud, as reported by Damon et al. (1989). We also find no evidence for either coatings or dyes, and only minor contaminants.
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
A photomicrographic and textile analysis of fragment A1B, a remnant of the Arizona 1988 radiocarbon sample, found no evidence contradicting that the dated sample came from the main part of the Shroud of Turin. The authors report no coatings or dyes and only minor contaminants, and conclude there is no reason to dispute the original 14C measurements.
Key findings
- The fragment is linen (*Linum usitatissimum*) with a 3/1 twill weave, single z-twisted warp and weft yarns, warp count 30 yarns/cm (76 per inch), weft count 40 yarns/cm (102 per inch), and thickness ~250 µm; most sampled fibers had a diameter of ~11 µm.
- No coatings were visible at low magnification, and UV fluorescence showed uniformly fluorescing fibers with no indication of an overall coating; the authors also found no evidence for dyeing. Cotton fibers were observed on three occasions, with one isolated, and contamination was described as low/minor.
- The authors conclude the sample was taken from the main part of the shroud, with no evidence to the contrary, and find no evidence that the 14C samples were dyed, treated, or otherwise manipulated; they see no reason to dispute the original 14C measurements.
Methods
- Textile analysis of fragment A1B, approximately 0.5 × 1 cm and originally weighing 12.39 mg, remaining from the 1988 Arizona 14C study; six samples were taken from warp and weft fibers at different locations.
- Low-magnification (~30×) stereomicroscope observation and standard fabric analysis; high-magnification (320×) fiber identification using transmitted light, polarized light, and epifluorescence on an Olympus BX-51; Ann Hedlund was consulted on weave structure.
Limitations
- Stated: the authors recommend future sampling away from the previous area, including both textile analysis and 14C measurements, to confirm the previous results.
- Evident from the text: the study examines one small fragment (~0.5 × 1 cm) and six fiber samples, reports no new 14C measurement, and notes that one cotton fiber could not be determined as within a fiber bundle or as surface contamination.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
0 of 10 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
- Findingcitation
The fiber content of the textile is linen, Linum usitatissimum.
“The fiber content is linen, a bast fiber from the cultivated plant Linum usitatissimum (Florian 1990), as shown in Figure 2.”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · boosted
“The fiber content of the textile from which this fragment was taken is undoubtedly linen.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Florian 1990
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · boosted
- Findingown data
There is no evidence that the 14C samples actually used for measurements are dyed, treated, or otherwise manipulated.
“We find no evidence to support the contention that the 14 C samples actually used for measurements are dyed, treated, or otherwise manipulated.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The weave structure of the fragment is a 3/1 twill weave.
“Analysis of the weave structure of this particular fragment revealed a 3/1-twill weave.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
The warp fabric count is 30 yarns per cm (76 per inch).
“The warp fabric count is 30 yarns per cm (76 per inch) and the weft is 40 yarns per cm (102 per inch), creating an unbalanced weave.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
A textile fragment dyed using traditional methods viewed under UV light showed absolutely no similarity in UV fluorescence consistent with such a dye.
“We viewed a textile fragment dyed using traditional methods under UV light, and observed absolutely no similarity in UV fluorescence consistent with such a dye.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- Findingown data
There is no evidence for dyes on the sample.
“We also find no evidence for either coatings or dyes, and only minor contaminants.”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“In addition, we find no evidence for any coatings or dyeing of the linen.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
- Findingown data
The weft fabric count is 40 yarns per cm (102 per inch).
“The warp fabric count is 30 yarns per cm (76 per inch) and the weft is 40 yarns per cm (102 per inch), creating an unbalanced weave.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
There is no evidence for coatings on the sample.
“We also find no evidence for either coatings or dyes, and only minor contaminants.”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“No coatings were visible at this level of magnification, only usual types of surface debris to be expected.”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“In addition, we find no evidence for any coatings or dyeing of the linen.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
- Findingown data
Most of the fibers sampled have a diameter at the narrower end of the spectrum, at approximately 11 μm.
“Most of the fibers sampled have a diameter at the narrower end of the spectrum, at ~11 m (see Figure 3).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationcitation
The 3/1 twill weave of the fragment is consistent with the rest of the Shroud of Turin.
“This is consistent with the rest of the Shroud of Turin (Tyrer 1981).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Tyrer 1981
- Interpretationcitation
The diameters of ultimate fibers are consistent with surveys of Linum fiber widths.
“The diameters of ultimate fibers are consistent with surveys of Linum fiber widths (Catling and Grayson 1982;Garside and Wyeth 2006).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Interpretationcitation
The low levels of contamination by a few cotton fibers are consistent with original observations on the shroud that there are a few cotton fibers on or in the shroud.
“We can also state that the linen fibers observed in this study have only low levels of contamination by a few cotton fibers, consistent with the original observations on the shroud (e.g.Raes 1976) that there are a few cotton fibers on (or in) the shroud.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Raes 1976
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationreasoning
The sample studied was taken from the main part of the Shroud of Turin.
“In contrast to other reports on less-documented material, we find no evidence to contradict the idea that the sample studied was taken from the main part of the shroud, as reported by Damon et al. (1989).”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“We conclude from our observations and the history of our sample, that our sample was taken from the main part of the shroud.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Damon et al. (1989) source
- Rests on an assumption: Those removing the samples at the time were aware of repair material.
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
- Interpretationcitation
Small dark spots visible in small quantities are small iron oxide particles.
“Small dark spots were visible in small quantities and do not reflect at all under UV light, which leads us to believe these are small iron oxide particles (Morris et al. 1980;Schwalbe and Rogers 1982).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Study design and conductnone given
The sample studied was split from one used in the 1988 radiocarbon dating study at Arizona.
“We present a photomicrographic investigation of a sample of the Shroud of Turin, split from one used in the radiocarbon dating study of 1988 at Arizona.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
There is no reason to dispute the original 14C measurements.
“Hence, we find no reason to dispute the original 14 C measurements, since our sample is a fragment cut on the arrival of the Arizona 14 C sample in Tucson on 24 April 1988 by coauthor Jull, and has been in his custody continuously.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationcitation
Debris on the sample would have been removed by the pretreatments used in Damon et al. (1989).
“This debris would have been removed by the various pretreatments used in Damon et al. (1989), which included standard acid-base-acid treatments, and ultrasonic cleaning in water or detergents for different fractions.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Damon et al. (1989) source
- Interpretationreasoning
The presence of a few cotton fibers is not unusual.
“The presence of a few cotton fibers is not unusual.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 3
- May combine two claims. 6
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataThe thickness of the textile is approximately 250 μm.
“The thickness of the textile is ~250 m.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Findingown dataMold spores are visible in a few places, and the spores and surrounding regions fluoresce more brightly.
“In a few places, mold spores are visible, and the spores and the surrounding regions fluoresce more brightly (see Figure 7).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
FindingcitationThe yarns of both the warp and weft are single yarns, and both are twisted in the z-direction.
“The yarns of both the warp and weft are single yarns, and both are twisted in the zdirection (Emery 1980).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Emery 1980
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataCotton fibers were observed on three occasions.
“Cotton fibers were observed on three occasions, with one isolated shown in Figure 4.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe warp has a high degree of twist with irregularities common in hand-spun yarns, and the weft has a comparatively lower twist.
“The warp has a high degree of twist in the yarn with irregularities common in hand-spun yarns, and the weft has a comparatively lower twist.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe sample has only minor contaminants, with low levels of contamination by a few cotton fibers.
“We also find no evidence for either coatings or dyes, and only minor contaminants.”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“We can also state that the linen fibers observed in this study have only low levels of contamination by a few cotton fibers, consistent with the original observations on the shroud (e.g.Raes 1976) that there are a few cotton fibers on (or in) the shroud.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Variations are going to be present in any hand-made textile, and small amounts of foreign materials are to be expected on any textile hundreds of years old.
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
May combine two claims.
Findingown dataUnder UV fluorescence, the fibers fluoresce uniformly and do not show any indication of an overall coating.
“Under UV fluorescence, the fibers fluoresce uniformly and do not show any indication of an overall coating.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Study design and conductnone givenThe sample is a fragment cut on the arrival of the Arizona 14C sample in Tucson on 24 April 1988 by coauthor Jull, and has been in his custody continuously.
“Hence, we find no reason to dispute the original 14 C measurements, since our sample is a fragment cut on the arrival of the Arizona 14 C sample in Tucson on 24 April 1988 by coauthor Jull, and has been in his custody continuously.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
Variations are going to be present in any hand-made textile, and small amounts of foreign materials are to be expected on any textile hundreds of years old.
“Variations are going to be present in any hand-made textile, and small amounts of foreign materials are to be expected on any textile hundreds of years old.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Those removing the samples at the time were aware of repair material.
“Those removing the samples at the time were aware of repair material.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Freer-Waters and Jull (2010) conducted microscope examinations on material from the Shroud sample that Tucson retained from the dating study and reported having observed no coatings on either the threads or fibers.
“Freer-Waters and Jull (2010) conducted microscope examinations on material from the Shroud sample that Tucson retained from the dating study.These investigators reported having observed no coatings on either the threads or fibers”
From An instructive inter-laboratory comparison: The 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin (2020) · cites this paper as Freer-Waters and Jull (2010)
Cites
Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin
Damon, P. E., Donahue, D. J., Gore, B. H., Hatheway, A. L., Jull, A. J. T., Linick, T. W., Sercel, P. J., Toolin, L. J., Bronk, C. R., Hall, E. T., et al. (1989) · Nature · doi:10.1038/337611a0 · Cited by 239 · cited 2× · see citing works
“This debris would have been removed by the various pretreatments used in Damon et al. (1989), which included standard acid-base-acid treatments, and ultrasonic cleaning in water or detergents for different fractions.”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationIdentification of Vegetable Fibres
Catling, D., & Grayson, J. (1982) · doi:10.1007/978-94-011-8070-2 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
Physics and chemistry of the shroud of turin
Schwalbe, L. A., & Rogers, R. N. (1982) · Analytica Chimica Acta · doi:10.1016/s0003-2670(01)85263-6 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
The remarkable metrological history of radiocarbon dating [II]
Currie, L. A. (2004) · Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology · doi:10.6028/jres.109.013 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of turin
Rogers, R. N. (2005) · Thermochimica Acta · doi:10.1016/j.tca.2004.09.029 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Garside, P., & Wyeth, P. (2006) · Studies in Conservation · doi:10.1179/sic.2006.51.3.205 · Cited by 88 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The diameters of ultimate fibers are consistent with surveys of Linum fiber widths (Catling and Grayson 1982; Garside and Wyeth 2006).”
ResultThe conservation of artifacts made from plant materials
Florian, M.-L. E., Kronkright, D. P., & Norton, R. E. (1990) · Cited by 79 · see citing works
X‐ray fluorescence investigation of the shroud of turin
Morris, R. A., Schwalbe, L. A., & London, J. R. (1980) · X-Ray Spectrometry · doi:10.1002/xrs.1300090203 · Cited by 31 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Small dark spots were visible in small quantities and do not reflect at all under UV light, which leads us to believe these are small iron oxide particles (Morris et al. 1980; Schwalbe and Rogers 1982).”
BackgroundDutton, D. (1988) · Nature · doi:10.1038/332300a0 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
(1981) · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Discrepancies in the radiocarbon dafing area of the Turin shroud
Benford, M. S., & Marino, J. G. (2008) · Chimica oggi · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
2 of the 13 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Walsh, 1963, The Shroud of Turin
- Emery, 1980, The Primary Structures of Fabric: An Illustrated Classification
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Regression analysis with partially labelled regressors: carbon dating of the Shroud of Turin
Riani, M., Atkinson, A. C., Fanti, G., & Crosilla, F. (2013) · Statistics and Computing · doi:10.1007/s11222-012-9329-5 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
“Justification for this physical model comes from Freer-Waters and Jull (2010) who comment that the various pretreatments used by Damon et al. (1989) ensure that the dates are not so sensitive as to fluctu- ate over small distances due, for example, to handling.”
BackgroundRadiocarbon Dating of the Turin Shroud: New Evidence from Raw Data
Casabianca, T., Marinelli, E., Pernagallo, G., & Torrisi, B. (2019) · Archaeometry · doi:10.1111/arcm.12467 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Radiocarbon dating of archaeological textiles at different states of preservation
Margariti, C., Sava, G. O., Sava, T., et al. (2023) · Heritage Science · doi:10.1186/s40494-023-00867-x · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Development of Accelerator Mass Spectrometry and Its Applications
Chen, J., Guo, Z., Liu, K., & Zhou, L. (2011) · Reviews of Accelerator Science and Technology · doi:10.1142/s1793626811000586 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Quaternary dating and instrumental development: An overview
Banerji, U. S., Goswami, V., & Joshi, K. B. (2022) · Journal of Asian Earth Sciences X · doi:10.1016/j.jaesx.2022.100091 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Can a latent image explain the characteristics of the Shroud body image?
Fazio, G., & Mandaglio, G. (2012) · Radiation effects and defects in solids · doi:10.1080/10420150.2011.595413 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
An instructive inter-laboratory comparison: The 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin
Walsh, B., & Schwalbe, L. (2020) · Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports · doi:10.1016/j.jasrep.2019.102015 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Radiocarbon: Archaeological Applications
Jull, A. J. T., & Burr, G. S. (2013) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-095975-7.01205-5 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
On Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin
McAvoy, T. J. (2021) · International Journal of Archaeology · doi:10.11648/j.ija.20210902.11 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Lazzaro, P. D., Atkinson, A., Iacomussi, P., Riani, M., Ricci, M., & Wadhams, P. (2020) · Entropy · doi:10.3390/e22090926 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
“(c) According to [30], the thickness of the remnant of the Arizona sample is 0.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialOn Cleaning Methods and the Raw Radiocarbon Data from the Shroud of Turin
Schwalbe, L., & Walsh, B. (2021) · International Journal of Archaeology · doi:10.11648/j.ija.20210901.12 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
The Shroud of Turin: An Overview of the Archaeological Scientific Studies
Karapanagiotis, I. (2025) · Textiles · doi:10.3390/textiles5010008 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“…and Jull argued that “ the presence of a few cotton fibers is not unusual ”, as they could be contaminants which had been deposited on the entire Shroud through the years or during its production process [115]. a few fi bers of co tt on, a result which is in agreement with what Rogers reported.”
InfluentialThe Shroud of Turin: A Historiographical Approach
Casabianca, T. (2013) · The Heythrop Journal · doi:10.1111/heyj.12014 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Multidisciplinary Studies on Canvas Nature of Paintings at IFIN-HH Romania
Simion, C. A., Cozac, M. M., Florea, N. M., et al. (2021) · Journal of Cultural Heritage · doi:10.1016/j.culher.2021.09.008 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Taylor, R. E. (2016) · Encyclopedia of earth sciences series/Encyclopedia of earth sciences · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-4409-0_48 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
EVIDENCE IS NOT PROOF: A RESPONSE TO PROF TIMOTHY JULL
Oxley, M. P. (2011)
The apparent resurrection of Jesus is verisimilarPreprint
Keenan, D. J. (2022) · doi:10.33774/coe-2022-l3gpc
The apparent resurrection of Jesus is verisimilarPreprint
Keenan, D. J. (2022) · doi:10.33774/coe-2022-cld64
The apparent resurrection of Jesus is verisimilarPreprint
Keenan, D. J. (2022) · doi:10.33774/coe-2022-l3gpc-v2
(2016) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/rdc.2016.64
Analysis of textile fragments from the 1988 radiocarbon samples of the Turin Shroud
Freer-Waters, R. A., & Jull, A. J. T. (2026) · npj Heritage Science · doi:10.1038/s40494-026-02530-7
Self-citation
- Authors
- Freer-Waters, R. A., & Timothy Jull, A. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Arizona (US)
- Venue
- Radiocarbon
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2010
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1521-1527
- ISSN
- 0033-8222 (ISSN-L)
- 1945-5755
- OpenAlex
- W2125498448
- Semantic Scholar
- 2ecd742d326d6aac0c04388b571f6676b5d4b227
- Cited by
- 21
- References
- 13
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 15.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Radiocarbon (publishedVersion)
- UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona) (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (0622305, 0221594)
- Arizona State University
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Cultural Heritage Materials Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geochemistry and Petrology › Cold Fusion and Nuclear Reactions
- Keywords
- Shroud of Turin, radiocarbon dating, photomicrography, sample provenance, fabric coating, dyes, contaminants
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-25.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-25.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
