In recent times Justin Martyr's works have been the subject of much attention. M. Marcovich has produced new editions of the Apology and Dialogue, and Philippe Bobichon has written a critical text and commentary in two volumes of the Dialogue. A number of monographs on Justin have appeared and more recently a conference at Edinburgh was dedicated to discussion of the martyr and theologian. The appearance, then, of a new edition of Justin's Apology in the well-known and much respected Sources Chrétiennes series reflects this trend and appears at a possibly auspicious time. The scholar responsible for the work, Charles Munier of Strasbourg, is highly qualified to perform the task he has been set – in 1995 he produced a critical edition of the Apology and he has written extensively on second-century Christian subjects. In his introduction, Munier argues strongly for the view that what traditional scholarship has taken as two apologies is in fact one (hence the Apologie of the title) and that the order, contrary to what we find in the only surviving manuscript of the work, the Codex Parisinus graecus 450, should be the contents of the so-called First apology followed by that of the second. This is all argued in a helpful and detailed manner, in part from a rhetorical perspective. Munier also provides the reader with lucid discussions of the genre of the text, drawing particular attention to similarities not only with Plato's Apology but also with Aristotle's Protrepticus (he rejects the view that Aristides's Apology was the direct template upon which Justin based his work). He places the text in its political and social context, here making interesting use of the Shepherd of Hermas as providing insight into elements of the work's setting. Justin's emphases and argumentative strategies are discussed as well as the question of Justin's understanding of philosophy and Scripture. The introduction concludes with a discussion of the text and an informative bibliography. The technical side of the volume then follows. Reference is made to suggested emendations in notes; and the more substantive footnotes commenting on the contents of the text are generally useful, if lacking in detail (the editor notes that he was unable to give as full a commentary as he would have liked). All in all this strikes the present reviewer as a helpful and informative contribution to the study of Justin.