I enjoyed reading Wilson's book on the history of the Holy Shroud. No doubt the author possesses great historical knowledge of this field having himself examined the Shroud several times (the first time in 1973) in his life. During a two-thousand years time span, however, there are periods when the exact location of the Shroud is unknown or when it disappeared and reappeared in different places between the Middle East and Europe. Hence, the author put forward the hypothesis that between the 6-th and 12-th centuries the Shroud was known as the Image of Edessa (Edessa is a Turkish city known today with the name of Sanliurfa). This hypothesis is fine with me but I found that the historical discussion around the Image of Edessa was too long and at some point I lost track of the whole story. The same happened when I was reading on the many details of the Knights Templar that were active during the early Middle Age (1100~1300). Personally, I expected more on the scientific aspects related to the formation of the image on the Shroud and the experiments concerned with modern attempts to reproduce the image on it. As far as I understand, no scientist has so far been able to reproduce such a realistic 3D image on a piece of linen. Furthermore, there are many scientific hypothesis about the original formation of the image on the Shroud but nothing really conclusive and generally accepted. Hence, a thorough discussion of these failed experiments can provide further support (besides history and personal faith) on the autenticity of the Shroud. I noticed that somewhere in the book it is written that copies of the Shroud are known to be preserved (in Spain); however, no comparison between such copies (fabricated during the Middle Age) and the Turin Shroud has been attempted by Wilson. In my opinion, if modern science cannot explain how such 3D (negative) image can be formed, then it is impossible to assert (as some one does) that the image is a fake made during the Middle Age. The results of radiocarbon dating performed in 1988 by three laboratories seem controversial (see the paper by Rogers published in the journal: Thermochimica Acta, vol. 425, pp. 189-194, 2005) and, at that time, marred by antagonism among the groups of scientists that were in charge of the analyses. No doubt, the scientific (and historical) mysteries surrounding the Shroud will continue for a long time.