This monograph is primarily concerned with understanding the myths surrounding the representation of Julian the Apostate as a fervent persecutor of Christians and Christianity, and with explaining how this image was perpetuated throughout Late Antiquity. The volume is a translation and revision by T. of his shorter Dutch 2009 work. T. follows the methodology of A. Dufourcq, who terms this representation of Julian as ‘Julianisation’. He demonstrates its influence very well, while at the same time making a logical and sound argument: that, in most cases, violence against Christians under Julian was perpetrated at a local rather than imperial level.

The volume is organised as a series of short case studies in chronological order throughout the emperor's short reign. The study uses a range of literary evidence, from historical works, both secular and ecclesiastical, as well as the various martyrologies. T.’s discussion is further supported and enriched by the inclusion of epigraphic and numismatic sources. T.’s use of source material is exemplary and provides excellent nuance on one of Rome's most polarising figures.

The first three chapters provide strong introductory material. Chapter 1 focuses on Julian's early life, up to his accession as Caesar in ad 355. Chapter 2 begins with a discussion of Constantine's reign and the development of Christianity from the first century onwards, with attention paid to the persecutions of the third century. The chapter further discusses how Constantine navigated this period and its various tensions. Chapter 3 discusses Julian's accession and his relationship with the Jews. The discussion of this relationship is excellent. It notes that, although Julian was more tolerant to the Jewish community, he remained critical of their doctrine and religious practices. T. makes good use of Julian's writings, particularly his Against the Galilaeans to demonstrate this point. This introductory material provides a solid base for the subsequent chapters.

Chapters 4 and 5 deal with one of the first outbreaks of anti-Christian violence under Julian: the lynching of Bishop George of Cappadocia at Alexandria. T. notes that Julian's failure to punish those who had lynched George ‘set in motion a development that would widen the gap between pagans and Christians’ (p. 40), despite the fact that he admonished them in a letter. Examination of the Artemii passio, from the ninth century, shows that Julian was blamed for the death of the former dux Aegypti, Artemius. T. analyses this passio in relation to contemporary accounts. He concludes that the discrepancies in Eusebius’ text, Ammianus’ history and that of the anonymous author of the passio demonstrate that Artemius, a close accomplice of George, was killed by the Alexandrians, not Julian. This type of analysis recurs constantly in T.’s work, and his attention to other texts similar to the passio Artemii serves his argument well.

Chapter 6, which deals with Julian's restoration of pagan religion and temples, demonstrates T.’s excellent use of epigraphic evidence alongside the literary. His discussion is well balanced, with sensible conclusions drawn on the subject of Julian as the ‘restorer of temples’, noting that this was probably not a widely accepted view throughout the Empire or even in the cities in which relevant inscriptions are found (p. 51). T. notes the outbreaks of local violence, even among factions of Christianity. His use of Julian's letter to the citizens of Bostra supports his claim that violence was occurring at local levels without the instruction of Julian.

One weakness is apparent in Chapters 7 and 8, where T.’s analysis of the laws from the Theodosian Code, specifically those relating to blood sacrifice and Julian's School Law, does not take into consideration how the Code was compiled. These laws are truncated, divorced from their historical context, and were often not enforced as they appear (cf. J. Matthews, Laying Down the Law [2000], pp. 57–84). T. highlights the law of Constantius (with Julian as Caesar) from 356 that outlaws blood sacrifice. Indeed, this is negated by an anecdote in Ammianus Marcellinus concerning the philosopher Demitrius Cythras (Amm. Marc. 19.12.12). Besides this, however, T. provides a good analysis of the representation of these events by Socrates Scholasticus and offers a logical conclusion: ‘Julian would have liked everybody to have followed his example, but he was not prepared to go to extremes to achieve his goal’ (p. 63). This conclusion is also found in Chapter 8's discussion of the School Law, with T. using Julian's letters to demonstrate that his aims were not an attempt to stop the education of Christians.

Chapters 9 and 10 again discuss themes of local, rather than imperial violence. T. outlines the deaths of some purported martyrs under Julian. T.’s discussion of the martyrdom of Basil of Ancyra as described by Sozomen and the later (and questionable) Passio sancti Basilii presbyteri is again exemplary; it concludes that the passio is here a fictitious report (p. 75). In Chapter 10, T. relates that the deaths of Theodorus and Publia, as described by the ecclesiastical historians, were in reality false; these texts confirm his argument that ‘persecutions on a grand scale, instigated by the emperor himself, did not occur’ (p. 84).

Chapters 11 and 12 provide a departure from the analysis of these ‘martyrs’ and focus on Julian's uncle, Julianus. T.’s discussion of Julianus concludes that he was most likely a persecutor, but these crimes were later attributed to Julian. Chapter 12 includes a more careful analysis of Sozomen and his sources, especially in relation to Julian's punishment of the citizens of Caesarea for the destruction of pagan images. Chapter 13 returns to Julian's time in Antioch and studies his execution of three individuals. T. neatly discusses this as politically rather than religiously motivated (p. 102). T. returns to the passio Artemii and the passio Eugenii et Macarii, which narrate the deaths of Eugenius and Macarius, again, allegedly at the hands of Julian. T. concludes here that the major discrepancies in location are suggestive of the fictitious nature of the texts (p. 106).

Chapters 14 and 15 focus upon Julianisation in more passions épiques, this time of Eusignius, Juventinus and Maximinus. Here T. again exploits the inaccuracies of these martyrologies to demonstrate the desire of later writers to blacken Julian's name and reign. Indeed, in the case of the death of Eusiginius, T. demonstrates that this was actually at the hands of Julian's uncle Julianus.

Chapters 16 and 17 provide more evidence of the fabrication of these tales to fit into a romanticised view of Christianity. T. notes several differing Christian versions of Julian's death with emphasis upon the Julian Romance’s description of Julian's death at the hands of St Mercury. Chapter 16 discusses the issues of these romanticised tales, with the examples of the martyrdom of Apollonius and Apollonia at Rome, a city that Julian never visited (p. 129). T. uses this chapter to debunk other martyrdoms, including that of Pimenius (p. 130). This theme is carried through to Chapter 17, in that T. outlines the later martyrologies invented long after Julian's death, and their purpose in perpetuating Julian's representation as a crazed persecutor. In Chapter 18, the final chapter, T. concludes that Julian's image and reign has been used and abused in order to provide a foil to Constantine and other Christian rulers.

T.’s work provides some interesting insights on an aspect of Julian's reign that is not often discussed in great detail. While his ideas surrounding the issue of local rather than imperial persecution are often found in other works (cf. G.W. Clarke, The Letters of St Cyprian of Carthage [1984–1989], F. Millar, The Emperor in the Roman World [1977]), his discussion of this representation in the martyrologies is novel, and provides some stimulating material. T.’s work is a clear, and instructive piece that makes its argument well. His masterful use of the literary sources and analyses of martyrologies, which so effectively perpetuate the idea of Julian as a persecutor, are successful in providing nuance to Julian's reputation. The text is well organised and provides sufficient depth and explanation of the issues. It can be strongly recommended for specialists and non-specialists alike.