Page - 67 - in JRFM - Journal Religion Film Media, Volume 05/01

the illustration in the Cérémonies seem rather strange, if not outright absurd (fig. 6). The two sides of the shroud of Turin no longer mirrored each other, as would be the case for imprints of one body on a cloth. Instead, the front and back rep- resentations were arranged on the left side, one below the other, both with the head up, the back view above, but still surrounded by a soft contour simulating the borders of the cloth, making them appear as a sort of awkward duplica- tion. The Besançon linen was on the lower right. The whole page was oriented vertically. The three figures now seemed to be paintings on canvas rather than winding sheets, an effect increased by the individual labels for each one and the caption in the upper right quarter of the page.45 Through targeted variations in its rendering, the pictorial message conceived and circulated by Chifflet was challenged polemically and, indeed, compellingly on its own terms. This new representation of the relics, close enough to the original to be recognized by the public as a visual quote and yet deftly distinct from it, made all the differ- ence in the intended impact and effect of the illustration. It now seemed to serve as one more piece of evidence for the absurdities and manipulations con- cocted by priests all over the world and most particularly by the Roman Catholic Church. Such was, in fact, the goal of Bernard and Picart’s editorial endeavor, as a plea against empty formulae. Their work was intended as a contribution to the ridiculing and thus unmasking of all paraphernalia and ceremonies. In the case of the shroud of Besançon, a strategy of provocative visual confrontation thus preceded the French Revolution’s more drastic strategy of abolitio memoriae, with the former, which certainly had impact and is deserving of mention in its own right, seeking not to eliminate its object from sight but rather to make its target visible. As this analysis of De linteis sepulchralibus and the reference to a small chap- ter in its later treatment has shown, making visible can mean different things, intend different things and, indeed, have entirely different results. Chifflet’s treatise, in its genesis and changing reception, offers a many-layered testimoni- al of the central role of visuality in the dynamic process of a cultural practice of producing and sharing, of representing and circulating notions and meanings. BIBLIOGRAPHY Baciocchi, Stéphane / Julia, Dominique, 2009, Reliques et Révolution française (1789–1804), in: Boutry, Philippe / Fabre, Pierre Antoine / Julia, Dominique (eds.), Reliques modernes. Cultes et usages chrétiens des corps saints des Réformes aux révolutions, Paris: Éditions de l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales, vol. 2, 483–585. 45 Le S. Suaire de Turin, vu par derrière; Le S. Suaire de Turin, vu par devant; Le S. Suaire de Besançon. “Figure des deux fameux Suaires”. Between Erudition and Faith | 67www.jrfm.eu 2019, 5/1