Seite - 52 - in JRFM - Journal Religion Film Media, Band 05/01

city. The well-orchestrated argument touched on multiple aspects of the relic with the aim of legitimizing the existence of a second burial shroud of Christ, proving its authenticity and its devotional importance. Ancient Jewish funerary rites were thus at the treatise’s center, and specifically those performed after the death of Jesus, in an effort to adduce unequivocal historical evidence that explained the size, appearance and exact function of the textile preserved in Besançon. Chifflet started out with a general discussion of the burial customs of antiquity. Certain aspects were of particular interest to him, especially the importance and rightness of laying bodies to rest in the ground, this being the oldest kind of burial and a pagan anticipation of the Christian faith in resurrec- tion.16 The following pages dealt with the rites of conservation of dead bodies, namely the types, shapes and materials of the fabrics involved and the way the rites had spread from the Egyptians to other peoples. A detailed and thorough explanation of all the single steps was necessary, as the author wrote, because the Gospels stated that Jesus had been buried following these rites. As there had been and still were frequent debates on the subject, mainly on the number and function of the textiles used, these points were to be defined once and for all so as to allow for a dispassionate analysis and decisive and necessary clari- fication of the matter.17 Chifflet went on to deepen the discussion of Egyptian burial, giving rich details on how the corpse was covered with a byssus shroud adhering to the body and how it was subsequently wrapped with linen cut into strips, on the way the arms were crossed over the chest and on the special bandages and straps for the head. In the context of this description, the author introduced his first illustration: the image of an antiquitas, an Egyptian statuette integrated into the page layout, as he explicitly stated, offered further clarifica- tion to the readers (fig. 1). It was a valuable piece of visual evidence, deliberately reproduced against a neutral background and carefully chosen, as Chifflet pointed out, as the only example known to the author bearing no hieroglyphic marks, allowing the on- lookers to concentrate solely on the wrapping method.18 16 Chifflet 1624, 4. 17 Chifflet 1624, 6: “Aegyptijs &Iudaeis, qui abluta & aromatis medicata cadavera linteis candidis involu- ere: quo ritu Christum Servatorem sepultum legimus in Evangelio, ubi dicitur: Acceperunt corpus Jesu, & ligaverunt illud linteis cum aromatibus, sicut mos est Judaeis sepelire. Qui sane mos, licet prima fron- te cuiuis clarus & perspicuus videatur; non pauci tamen Criticis occurrunt nodi circa eum, & in numero linteorum, & in ratione involucri; quos omnes solvere intendimus, ut linteorum Christi sepulchralium crisis expeditior sit.” 18 Chifflet 1624, 13: “Unicum hic exhibemus, absque notis hieroglyphicis, ut involucri ratio melius percip- iatur.” In his observations Chifflet repeatedly referred to Polish duke Nicolaus Christophorus Radzivi- lus’ account of his pilgrimage to the Holy Land (Hierosolymitana Peregrinatio, Brunsbergae: Georgius Schönfels, 1601), and specifically to Radzivilus’ description of such small statuettes found in Egyptian graves. 52 | Paola von Wyss-Giacosa www.jrfm.eu 2019, 5/1