Jesus’s Burial Cloth or Medieval Forgery? DNA Evidence Further Complicates the Debate Over the Shroud of Turin
A new analysis revealed traces of various plants, animals and humans on the controversial linen cloth. But outside experts are skeptical of the findings, which could complicate efforts to identify the shroud’s original wearer
/https://tf-cmsv2-smithsonianmag-media.s3.amazonaws.com/accounts/headshot/SarahKuta.png)
:focal(720x542:721x543)/https://tf-cmsv2-smithsonianmag-media.s3.amazonaws.com/filer_public/f1/ed/f1edb8bc-9ecb-4d34-a7d5-fb225005c9a1/shroud_of_turin_4783906352_2.jpg)
_(2).jpg){kind=link}
The Shroud of Turin has long been a source of fascination. First documented in France in the 14th century, the 14-foot-long linen cloth purportedly wrapped the body of Jesus after he was crucified some 2,000 years ago. However, while some individuals believe the shroud was Christ’s burial cloth, others consider the artifact to be a medieval forgery.
New research further complicates the debate. Scholars have discovered a wide variety of plant, animal and human DNA on the shroud—a mix that will likely hinder efforts to pinpoint its original wearer.
The scientists described their results in a study posted in March to the preprint server bioRxiv. It has not been peer-reviewed.
“Since the object has been touched by people coming even from distant places, as well as by objects likewise originating from faraway places, it was contaminated in various ways, without any possibility of reconstructing all the stages and the point of origin,” Andrea Nicolotti, a historian at the University of Turin in Italy who wasn’t involved in the new study, tells Scientific American’s Stephanie Pappas.
The rectangular cloth features imprints of a man—front and back—with injuries consistent with crucifixion, as well as numerous stains. Some individuals believe the man is Jesus of Nazareth, and the stains are his blood. But radiocarbon dating suggests the shroud was made sometime between 1260 and 1390—more than a millennium after Jesus was said to have been crucified.
Additionally, some scholars, including Nicolotti, point out that the shroud was likely created with a four-shafted treadle loom that wasn’t invented until the Middle Ages. A study published last year suggested the image on the shroud was probably created by placing it atop a low-relief sculpture rather than by wrapping it around a human body.
Did you know? Religious relics
In Christianity, some of the most important religious relics are what adherents believe to be pieces of the cross on which Jesus was crucified. These fragments of wood are often housed in elaborate decorative objects made from precious materials and displayed in churches.
Either way, the shroud has amassed an eclectic collection of DNA over the centuries. In 1978, a researcher named Pierluigi Baima Bollone collected samples from the cloth, which is housed at the Cathedral of Saint John the Baptist in Turin. Now, decades later, scientists have revisited that material using modern techniques. (Bollone was also part of the team behind the recent study, but he died in November 2025.)
The researchers identified genetic material from numerous animals, including cats, dogs, chickens, cows, goats, sheep, pigs, horses, deer and rabbits. They also found traces of fish, from gray mullet to Atlantic cod to ray-finned fishes, as well as marine crustaceans, flies, aphids and arachnids.
The shroud contains DNA from various plants, including carrots, wheat, peppers, maize, tomatoes, bananas and peanuts. Some of these species have long been agricultural fixtures in Europe and the Mediterranean, but others weren’t introduced from the Americas until at least the 16th century.
Taken together, the results highlight the “significant environmental contamination of the shroud that likely occurred in recent centuries, particularly following the voyages of Marco Polo and Christopher Columbus,” lead author Gianni Barcaccia, who studies genetics and genomics at Italy’s University of Padova, tells Live Science’s Chris Simms.
Additionally, the investigation revealed the presence of Mediterranean red coral. It’s possible that the cloth originated in or passed through Mediterranean regions, but the traces may also have come from “the coral crucifixes and rosaries, or reliquaries, that we know were placed in contact with the cloth,” Nicolotti says to Live Science.
Importantly, the researchers also identified DNA from multiple humans, including Bollone, the man who collected the samples some five decades ago. Nearly 40 percent of the human DNA comes from individuals of Indian heritage, a finding that aligns with earlier research suggesting the shroud may have been made in India.
The scientists also performed radiocarbon dating on two threads from the shroud. One dates to between 1451 and 1622, while the other dates to between 1642 and 1800. This time range matches with two instances when the shroud was repaired and conserved after a fire—first in 1534 and again in 1694, the study notes.
However, some outside experts remain skeptical of the new findings. “I still see no reason to doubt that the shroud is French,” Anders Götherström, a paleogeneticist at Stockholm University, tells New Scientist’s James Woodford. Speaking with Scientific American, Allison Mann, a biological anthropologist at the University of Wyoming, says, “There is a lot of legwork that needs to be done to actually convince me of any of these results.”
/https://tf-cmsv2-smithsonianmag-media.s3.amazonaws.com/accounts/headshot/SarahKuta.png)