SHROUD GONE FOR A BURTON?
Was the controversial relic a Staffordshire tablecloth?
While the Turin Shroud has been condemned as a fake almost since it first appeared in the historical record in the 14th century, its origin and the techniques used to create it have been disputed ever since (see FT301:6, 324:24, 335:23 for recent updates). Now, independent historian and anthropologist David Akins says that he believes that the relic is, in fact, from Burton-on-Trent in Staffordshire, and started life as a monastic tablecloth.
Akins believes that after the suppression of the Knights Templar and the execution of their Master, Jacques de Molay, in 1307, the remaining Templars fled to England with their treasure, probably including the Holy Grail and the Ark of the Covenant. He concludes that they took refuge at Burton Abbey because of their connection to the local knight Hughes de Payens, who co-founded the order, and the presence of a vast tunnel system alleged to be under the Abbey, making it ideal for hiding their sacred relics. Akins says that “it is almost beyond doubt that after the Templars brought their hoard to Burton they would have created a statue in memory of the event” and he believes that this statue would have been made of alabaster, as Burton’s main industry at the time was mining the local alabaster deposits. As to what the statue represented, he says: “To the mediæval mind there could only be one possible symbol of the fabled hoard and the Holy Grail – and that was the Fisher King.” So the Templars would have had local craftsmen carve a life-sized statue of this legendary figure to stand guard over the treasures in the Abbey. “This statue, no doubt, had pride of place at Burton Abbey for years, until Abbot Ibstock rebuilt the Abbey Church in 1350. This date is critical, as during the construction work many fine statues and effigies in the Abbey would have been placed into storage,” he explains. “They would have been wrapped in
They had local craftsmen carve a life-sized statue of the Fisher King
cloth and linen to protect them and, no doubt, stored in the Abbey’s vaults and cellars. It is highly likely the statue was left slumbering in the vaults of the Abbey for over a decade – or at least until the new Abbey Church had been completed”.
Akins believes that it was during this period of storage that the “Shroud” came into existence, created by a chemical reaction between water and the alabaster in the damp vaults, leaving an image of the Fisher King on the cloth wrapping it. Once the image was visible, he says, “no doubt one of the monks noticed a similarity between the features of the Fisher King impregnated onto the cloth and those of Jesus Christ and came up with a plan to present it as the Shroud of Christ himself. Rumours of the Templar treasures at Burton would have abounded at the time and it is, therefore, no great leap to see how people would have accepted it as coming from the Templar hoard – and being, to all intent and purposes, genuine.” He thinks the monks might also have destroyed the original statue to avoid anyone noticing the similarities and enhanced the image by adding blood where Christ’s wounds would have been. Then, taking advantage of the Abbey’s links with Florence through the wool trade, the monks would have sold it to a devout noble there for a considerable amount of money.
Akins is sure the science backs up his conjecture. Traces of gypsum have been identified on the Shroud during scientific testing, so he asserts that “the presence of gypsum in the Shroud confirms, in my mind, that the cloth was indeed originally used to wrap up a statue of the Fisher King in Burton-on-Trent where the minerals alabaster – and particularly gypsum – originate. This can be the only explanation for finding it on a Shroud.” Analysis has also found pollens from all over the world on the Shroud, as well as DNA that apparently comes from a marine worm. This, too, backs up his Shroud theory Akins claims, saying, “I believe the Shroud itself was actually an old tablecloth from Burton Abbey” with the pollen and DNA coming from things eaten by the monks, who ate a diet rich in fish and vegetables. The dimensions of the cloth, 13ft by 3ft (4m by 90cm) and its herringbone weave also make it far more likely to be a mediæval tablecloth than Christ’s burial cloth. He also feels that the radiocarbon dating and historic record support his conjecture, as “radiocarbon dating of the Shroud… puts it between 1260 and 1390. This fits the timeframe perfectly.” He adds that “the Shroud is first recorded officially between 135357 on mainland Europe, which also ties in with the rebuilding of the old Abbey Church by Abbott Ibstock between 1340-1350.” He believes, too, that close scrutiny of the image proves it is the Fisher King and not Christ, as the figure’s hands have been carefully positioned to cover the groin area and the fingers of the right hand exaggerated in length, and he feels this is because they are covering the wound in the groin that was the mark of the Fisher King. “The inescapable conclusion is that this was an obvious depiction of the key figure from Arthurian legend and not the Messiah,” he says.
Akins now hopes to get permission to excavate in the Abbey grounds to see if he can locate the remains of the Fisher King statue, or any other evidence to support his ideas. coventrytelegraph.net, 27 Jul 2021; staffordshire-live.co.uk, 13 Mar 2022.