[wideawake]

The original material in Foxe's Book is largely a tissue of lies that sometimes references real events. And the cribbed material is poorly translated.

Butler's Lives is a far more judicious work that stands up better to historical scrutiny. Butler also makes it clear in his text what can be known for sure and what is only said to have happened.

Of course, Catholics do not put Butler's work on the pedestal that radical Protestants put Foxe's on.

I don't regard Butler as the authoritative historical text.

[Wallace T.]

Both books are largely polemical and neither pretend to be detached histories. Can you back up your assertions about the better quality of The Lives of the Saints?