Which of the two options above is correct? Who is the man so enigmatically depicted on the cloth? I contend that to anyone who has taken the trouble to investigate the matter for themselves - with an open mind - the claim made by the author, John Walsh, is likely to be their conclusion, too. If this sounds unlikely just look closely at the images below. On the left is the image as it appears to the eye. On the right is the same image in black and white and rendered as a negative - i.e. with light and dark reversed. Try and ignore the patches running up both sides. These are scars from a fire in 1532.