Renaissance Drama and the Politics of Publication: Readings in the English Book Trade (review)
allowed the dispersed and itinerant activity of Quaker preachers to seem, and sometimes to be, unified and consistent. The final and longest section of the book addresses the ways in which the printed tracts oriented themselves toward national debate. Rather than entering into debate with their detractors, Quaker pamphleteers refused the form of the debate; instead they promoted a general critique of false ministries and provided lists of questions readers might use to provoke and challenge their ministers. Actual prosecutions of Quakers became the means of presenting critiques of ungodly magistrates and ideals of godly reformation. Tracts written against the Quakers — often accusing Quakers of blasphemy — had the effect of emphasizing both Quaker identity and their commitment to questioning and challenging established authority. Hence both Quaker discourse and discourse about Quakers attest to their importance in setting an example of universal political participation. A final case study on the crisis of James Naylor’s ministry and his parliamentary trial in 1656 once again shows how the Quaker print record of the affair carefully stages the consistency of Quaker positions, salvaging Naylor’s authority as a Quaker writer at the expense of the female preachers who defended his practices. The manuscript evidence reveals behind-the-scenes dissension, disapproval, and political lobbying quite different from the printed support for Naylor. The strategic use of print Peters chronicles is indeed remarkable, and there can be no doubt that the disciplined oversight exercised by the core leadership shaped Quaker discourse in nationally important ways. On the second argumentative front, Peters hangs fire and disappoints, concluding that the Quaker experience is “a unique and unrepresentative case-study of print culture” (254) and calling for more attention to “why and how people made use of the press” (255). Yet the evidence of her discussion offers a number of compelling entries into the ongoing discussion of print culture — the remediation of oral discourses into print, the interplay between manuscript and print circulation, and the use of print to create disciplinary habits and a quasi-institutional presence — whose articulation could have made her book into a more valuable contribution to the scholarship of print. ALEXANDRA HALASZ Dartmouth College