**Like the Shroud, the Sudarium has been studied by science. Scientific studies have shown that the Sudarium and the Shroud were in contact with the same AB blood. There were over 120 points of match between the blood wounds on the Sudarium and the Shroud. With a complete match for the cap of thorns placed on Christ’s head.**
Or maybe someone wanting to become locally famous for ‘finding’ the graveclothes of the Christ in about 100A.D. or thereabouts, used a subject (possibly unwilling. possibly dead) to make these graveclothes.
**The best explanation for why there is no reversed image on the Sudarium like the Shroud is that it was likely removed before Jesus was shrouded.**
Re-read above possible explanation.
**It explains why it was folded and not with the linen cloth when Peter and others entered the tomb.**
Explains what?? If the headcloth was placed about the head, then removed (before the large cloth was wrapped around the body), and then wrapped up and laying in a separate spot by the preparers, then why would John write about that particular fact as though it was a surprising part of the whole shocking scene?
That would explain the date of 1 century, but it would not explain the photographic (for lack of a better word) nature of the Shroud:
No pigments, paints, dyes or stains were found on the fibrils of the linen cloth. It is not a painting. An image analyzer shows the Shroud has a unique, three-dimensional codex embedded in it, unlike any other two dimensional image made by humans. While some explanations of what caused the image on the Shroud are possible from a chemical point of view, there are precluded by physics and certain physical explanations are conversely completely precluded by the chemistry. To explain the Shroud image there must be a complete explanation from a physical, chemical, biological, and medical standpoint. To date no one has presented this complete solution. It is an enigma.The best scientific explanation is that the Shroud image was produced by something which resulted in “oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the polysaccharide structure of the microfibrils” of the linen itself. STURP concluded that for now that the “Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist.”
If the headcloth was placed about the head, then removed (before the large cloth was wrapped around the body), and then wrapped up and laying in a separate spot by the preparers, then why would John write about that particular fact as though it was a surprising part of the whole shocking scene?
Why wouldn't he? It is evidence, so he described it.