In large part this book consists of revised versions of papers offered at a conference held in Edinburgh in July of 2006. In their introduction, the editors make the point that Justin ‘is a veritable mine of information about mid-second century Christian and even Jewish and Roman theology, attitudes, and practices’; and the purpose of the volume, against that background, is to present some contributions to ongoing debates about Justin and to open up his works to ‘a new generation of scholars with new concerns’ (p. 1).

The volume is divided into three parts. The first part, ‘Justin and his text’, is introduced by Michael Slusser with an essay on the trends and trajectories of Justin scholarship. Particular and appropriate emphasis is placed upon the work of Carl Andresen from an earlier period, and Oskar Skarasaune's more recent contributions. Slusser notes that the present trend can be categorised in terms of a movement from the Justin of the Apologies to the Justin of the Dialogue; and goes on to note some desiderata for future study which include a more thorough examination of the question of Christian and Jewish identity in this period, a reexamination of the appropriateness of the description of Justin as an apologist, and a reconsideration of what a more general book on Justin might look like in the light of more recent scholarship. The two other contributions in this section come from Paul Parvis and Denis Minns, both of whom are involved in the production of a new edition of the text of the two Apologies. In his piece Parvis, amongst other things, argues for the view that the so-called Second apology was added to the First apology after his death by his pupils from portions of the latter work that he had edited out at an earlier stage. Minns's contribution argues for the genuineness of the rescript of the emperor Hadrian to Minucius Fundanus, and shows both how it relates to the sentiments of the Pliny–Trajan correspondence and how its contents make perfect sense of some of the emphases of Justin's First apology. The second part of the volume is entitled ‘Justin and his Bible’. Oskar Skarsaune, in the volume's longest and most authoritative essay, argues for Justin's knowledge of much of what we would now call the New Testament but for his lack of any real interest in its textual variants of which he appears to have knowledge. This contrasts with his treatment of the Old Testament where Justin shows genuine interest in its actual wording, particularly in the variants between what Skarsaune assumes to be Christianised versions of that text, available to Justin in a testimony-like book with commentary, and Jewish manuscripts of the LXX. Here, and elsewhere, Skarsaune draws on conclusions already worked out in his earlier significant volume, Proof from prophecy. Bruce Chilton examines Justin's use of Old Testament prophetic material, pointing up its dynamic character and comparing it with Jewish targumic and Mishnaic material. In making this comparison, he notes how in the Jewish material the systemic centre is the Torah whereas in Justin it is the Logos, a not unsurprising point made in a helpfully informed way. Charles Hill argues for Justin's knowledge of the Fourth Gospel; and Susan Wendel contrasts Luke's understanding of the descent of the spirit in Acts as a restoration of Israel, with Justin's understanding of the same idea in terms of the Church's supersessionary relationship to Israel, noting that, for Justin, Jesus' baptism is the moment when the spirit ceased to be able to be poured out on Jewish prophets. This section ends with an essay by Paul Foster in which it is denied that Justin knew a version of the Gospel of Peter. The final section is entitled ‘Justin and his tradition’. Sara Parvis looks again at the question of Justin and the apologetic tradition arguing that he should be thought of as the tradition's founder. Larry Hurtado examines Justin's ‘name’ Christology and argues that Justin thinks that the name Jesus is another divine name and that Jesus' person is the embodiment of that name. The failure of name Christology to appear in the Apologies can be explained by reference to their different intended audience. Will Rutherford argues for the possibility that lying behind Justin's ‘second God’ proof-texts in Dialogue 52–62 may be material from the now lost Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus; and Sebastian Moll looks at Justin's reference to Marcion in 1 Apol. 26.5 and 58.1–2. He teases out the content of these two references, accounts for their presence in the First apology and also for the absence of characteristics of Marcion's teaching probably known to Justin. Colin Buchanan analyses what Justin tells us about the development of Christian liturgy in the middle of the second century; and Rebecca Lyman presents a lively discussion of Justin's relationship from the fashionable postcolonial perspective. Amongst other things, she shows how discussion of Justin's Hellenism has often, from different perspectives, led to negative views of his attempts to integrate Christianity with Hellenism – his an unclassifiable hybrid. Lyman goes on to assert how Justin does not deny the differences between these two entities, and to show how he uses Hellenism to oppose Roman power. In this reading, Justin's engagement with philosophy both indicates complicity with and opposition to the dominant culture.

This is a helpful collection of essays. Unsurprisingly, it reflects its origins in a set of papers delivered at a conference with some essays strikingly particular in their interest and others more wide ranging. The editors have made as good an effort as possible to bring order to the disparate collection by dividing it into three parts but some may think the parts too general to be meaningful. If the reader is looking for a useful introductory book to Justin, rather than a set of sometimes stimulating forays into various aspects of his thought and wider contribution to the study of the second century where, as Skarsaune insightfully notes, he can appear like a transitional figure between the Apostolic Fathers and the later Irenaeus and Clement, this, unsurprisingly, is not it. We still await that book even if the present volume helps us in our consideration of what such a book should look like.