{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03394433129667346, 'fraction_numerical': 0.021045485403937542, 'mean_word_length': 5.272340425531915, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Jeffrey R. Collins: In the Shadow of Leviathan: John Locke and the Politics of Conscience. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020. Pp. xiii, 430.)

philosophy as presented in Rabelais’s books” (39). It seems odd, then, that he frequently develops comparisons between Pantagruel, the first book to be published (1532), and the Third Book (1546), but he presents the prologue of Gargantua (1534/35) as the opening sequence of the series, which privileges the internal chronology of the plot instead of the publication order, which would show the evolution of the author’s thinking. All this being said, there is still much to be learned from these pages, and one wishes the book had been twice as long to address the above shortcomings in a satisfactory manner. Haglund’s knowledge of political philosophy is commendable. The juxtaposition of a morally benevolent reading and a philosophically benevolent reading of the Rabelaisian chronicles is certainly worthwhile, especially within the framework of the aforementioned main topics, and some chapters show the potential of the approach. The reading of Plutarch (71–73) and the discussion of Pantagruel’s classical individualism (86–87) are but two examples that illustrate the varied sources and approaches sketched out in these pages. This ambitious book is certain to open up promising venues of interdisciplinary investigation that will enhance our understanding of political philosophy in early modern literature.