The book is a collection of papers, resulting from a colloquium on the Theodosian Code in 2003 at the University of Paris X-Nanterre, on the occasion of the start of a French translation of the Code. Its title and structure reflects this. The first part, with contributions by Jaillette and Malosse, Jaillette and Huck, deals with the printing history of the Code and its structure. The second part, with contributions by Callu, Delmaire, Crogiez-Pétrequin and Richard, concentrates on the problems which arise when translating. For the church historian Delmaire's essay with some examples from book xvi, on ecclesiastical matters (p. 75–87), and Richard's on the meaning of the word christianitas (pp. 105–16), may be of interest. Part iii is divided into sections on the state (with contributions by Di Paola on the curiosi, Pottier on occultatores and Rivière on CTh xvi.12 de emendatione servorum), religion and society (with essays by Soler on CTh xv.7 De scaenicis and Laurence on women in the Theodosian Code). The section on religion consists of three contributions: N. Belayche, ‘Ritus et cultus ou superstitio? Comment les lois du Code Théodosien (ix et xvi) de Constantin à Théodose parlent des pratiques religieueses traditionelles’ (pp. 191–208), L. Guichard, ‘L’Élaboration du statut juridique des clercs et des églises d'après les lois constantiniennes du Code Théodose XVI, 2' (pp. 209–23) and K.-L. Noetlichs, ‘Éthique chrétienne dans la législation de Constantin le Grand?’ (pp. 225–37). In itself the book is very useful, but this section will be the most interesting for church historians. The constitutions directed against paganism are at the same time a source of information on pagan rituals and cults (Belayche). Guichard examines how the legal position of the Church and clerics gradually changed and increased in strength, but also how imperial legislation adapted itself to these changes. Noetlichs revives an old question: did Christianity influence legislation? Although some still do think so, Noetlichs rejects this in general outside the specific religious legislation (correctly to this reviewer). That Constantine was called a Christian legislator may have rested on measures of his which the Christians considered to have been inspired by Christianity. Constantine himself, however, might have made no distinction between philosophical or general moral grounds and Christian ethics; which puts the question in a different and more subtle light.