He argues that this issue was pervasive enough to be called a unifying characteristic of the intellectual climate of Restoration England. This is not the only book Levine has devoted to the debate, although it is the first to concentrate on its early-to-middle period, Charles II’s reign particularly. The debate is generally acknowledged to have begun with the posthumous publication of Francis Bacon’s The Advancement of Learning in 1627 and simmered until it started to rage in the widely celebrated open disagreements between William Temple and William Wotton in the 1690s. Levine’s interpretation is therefore new. It is a cultural/intellectual history which owes much to careful study of contemporary published literature, treatises, pamphlets, letters and memoirs. His sources are primarily literary and cultural rather than political.

He states: “What I have done therefore is to tell some fresh stories about some familiar people caught up in a common dilemma in an attempt to fix their collective concerns” (p. viii). And indeed, the people he has chosen for his “parallel lives” are, or have been, among the most written-about Restoration figures: John Evelyn the virtuoso and diarist, John Dryden the Poet Laureate, Sieur de Saint-Evremond the French emigré and essayist, and Christopher Wren the mathematician and architect. He justifies his choice by stating that they were all profoundly active in Restoration cultural life, grappled with this debate and contributed to it.

His approach is thorough and engrossing. He uses their writings particularly. The section on Saint-Evremond broadens the scope of the book to French writers and playwrights which is very welcome, while that on Wren leads the book into a less literary sphere, suitable for such a cultural history. He brings their social and intellectual milieus to life and relates each subject to the others, using Evelyn and Dryden most prominently as points of reference. With each, he largely deals with his output in whatever form it took, and analyses and follows the changes in attitude of its creator to the debate. He takes an holistic approach to each man, studying their education, reading, friendships, influences, leisure pursuits and opinions. This ability to marshall the usual biographical material to the thematic concern of the book indicates his experience with and knowledge of the literature.

The book does not suffer from dealing with four quite different men. If anything, the detail is overly satisfying. The only complaint may be that his empathy for his subjects is a little pronounced and hence the work tends to be more characteristic of biography than of history. However, Levine’s scholarship is thorough and extensive. Such thematic interdisciplinary historical studies should be heartily welcomed.