Le Parlement de Paris ou la voix de la raison (1559–1589) (review)
sources. As Walsh points out, fifteenth-century ambassadors were expected to be information gatherers and to sort out rumor from reality. It was difficult, to give just one example, to assess the degree to which Charles really intended to pursue the territorial ambitions attributed to him, or whether this was only braggadocio leavened by fear or expectation. In his reading of these rich sources, Walsh at some points in the discussion seems to insist on giving us all of the information that the ambassadors reported, leaving the reader, like a Renaissance prince assessing a dispatch, to decide what is important. I do not mean to say that Walsh neglects summary and analysis altogether. Rather, it is that he frequently gets bogged down in the mass of his own data. The sheer number of names, encounters, and letters referenced is often bewildering (and occasionally leads to repetition) and one cannot help but wonder whether some judicious pruning could have made this an easier book to read, without taking away from its overall impact and importance. The thoroughness and breadth of Walsh’s treatment of the primary sources is obvious; there is no need to prove it to us in every paragraph. Ambassadors and chancery secretaries in the fifteenth century frequently complained that they were receiving too much information and struggled to make sense of it all. At times while reading this book, I sympathized with their complaint. PAUL M. DOVER Kennesaw State University