Oxford University Press first published Herbert Musurillo's Acts of the Christian Martyrs in 1972. This volume was designed to replace early twentieth-century collections, like those of Delehaye, von Gebhardt, and Knopf-Krüger-Ruhbach. Although Musurillo's translations have occasionally been maligned, the volume has nevertheless been the standard collection of Christian martyr texts in English. Scholars’ reliance on this collection has had two consequences. First, Musurillo's selection of texts has largely determined how we view martyr accounts, limiting our appreciation of the diversity of forms and interests reflected in a larger corpus. Second, scholars whose work utilizes only the twenty-eight texts included by Musurillo are—knowingly or not—participating in the Maurist's agenda of differentiating “historical” texts from “hagiographical” ones. Musurillo makes clear that his goal is to present the reader with the earliest historical texts of martyrdom. So, only those texts that pass Musurillo's historical litmus test were included in The Acts of the Christian Martyrs.

Most scholars today eschew the labels “history” and “hagiography” as primary categories for martyr texts. Some accounts may include historical—or at least verisimilitudinous—material, but recording history was not the primary motivator for the production of martyr texts. This shift in classification raises the problem of how to publish collections of texts apart from claims to historicity. A series of chronologically ordered volumes could be useful, though the dates of a number of the martyr accounts are currently disputed (for example, Martyrdom of Polycarp). This obviously complicates the task of organization and placement. In addition, while it is typically clear enough when the narrative action takes place, it is significantly less clear when the texts themselves were written. A multivolume set of martyr texts organized by geographical location could also be useful, though again, it is not necessarily the case that the place of narrative action is equivalent to the place of composition.

In Greek and Latin Narratives About the Ancient Martyrs, Rebillard issues a call for a new way of collecting martyr accounts since the attributions previously employed are no longer viable. He chooses to bring together those Greek and Latin martyr texts that can be firmly dated before 260 CE, that is, before Diocletian's “Great Persecution.” This set of texts is further restricted by external attestation: Rebillard includes only texts that were known by Eusebius or by Augustine. There are sixteen texts that (more or less) meet these criteria: Apollonius; Carpus, Papylus, and Agathonice; Pionius of Smyrna; Polycarp of Smyrna (including both the Martyrdom and the Life); the Martyrs of Lyon and Vienne; Marian and James; Cyprian of Carthage (including two Acts and the Life); Fructuosus of Tarragona and His Companions; Montanus, Lucius, and Their Companions; Perpetua, Felicity, and Their Companions (including the Passion and the two Acta); and the Scillitan Martyrs. Although Rebillard rejects the notion of his volume as a “new Musurillo,” there is significant overlap in the two collections. Rebillard's is a smaller set of texts, but it includes two Lives (Polycarp and Cyprian) and the shortened Acts of Perpetua, which are not in Acts of the Christian Martyrs.

The translations Rebillard offers are a welcome update to Musurillo's. They, on the whole, balance nicely the need for smooth English translation while remaining true to the original texts (for example, avoiding unnecessary theologizing in translation). More useful even than updated translations of these texts, however, are Rebillard's introductions. The general introduction offers a clear and concise history of martyr collections, starting with Eusebius and moving into the modern period. The introductions to each individual text are brief but packed with information, particularly concerning the textual history of the narratives. The scholarly orientation these introductions provide readers are, themselves, reason to purchase the book.

Despite the numerous positive aspects of Greek and Latin Narratives About the Ancient Martyrs, the volume lacks a coherent and standardized organizational structure. First, it is unclear why Eusebius and Augustine were chosen as the touchpoints for the volume. Even apart from a clear rationale for those two early Christian authors, the volume itself is arranged alphabetically rather than in distinct sections (for example, Lyons in a section on Eusebius and Perpetua in a section on Augustine). Such an arrangement would have been a useful structure so that readers could determine which martyr accounts are associated with whom using the table of contents. The alphabetic order of the texts also obscures textual influence (for example, Pionius’s indebtedness to Polycarp or Marian and James's and Montanus and Lucius's reliance on Perpetua). Second, the texts included in the volume do not uniformly adhere to Rebillard's criteria for inclusion. For instance, the Life of Polycarp, included by Rebillard, was unknown to Eusebius; according to Rebillard, Augustine did not know the fifth century Acts of Perpetua; and Eusebius preserves a truncated version of the Martyrdom of Polycarp, not the modern critical edition. Recognizing this inconsistency, Rebillard explains that he includes “all extant narratives associated with the martyr in question” that date before the fifth century (27). In this case, however, it is unclear why alternative recensions of texts (for example, the Latin text of Carpus, Papylus, and Agathonice) are not included. That it may represent a different tradition than the one preserved by Eusebius (34) could be grounds for omitting it, but by that logic, so also the Acts of Perpetua should be omitted. Broadening of the scope of the volume in these ways, in the end, seems to call into question the utility of an organizational structure focused on external attestation.

It is undoubtedly the case that any new collection of martyr texts will fall short in its selections for various groups of users. Musurillo was not immune to such criticism, and neither is Rebillard. But disagreements about how an author organizes a book are not, in the mind of this reviewer, anyway, the final determinant of the book's utility. Rebillard is to be commended for such erudite examinations of the textual histories of these narratives and for translations that should become the new standard for these martyr accounts.