{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020241171403962102, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0008613264427217916, 'mean_word_length': 5.129287598944591, '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}}
Annotations and Meditations on the Gospels. Volume 1, The Infancy Narratives, and: Annotations and Meditations on the Gospels. Volume 3, The Resurrection Narratives (review)

court system. In addition to analyzing the arguments on each side, he links the evolution of law and its administrative structure with broader political developments in each reign. For example, the courts failed to reach a decision during the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella in the late fifteenth century, in part because the monarchs and the judiciary were still too dependent on patronage to view the dispute purely in terms of law. By contrast, Charles I (Charles V as Holy Roman Emperor), gained citizens’ loyalty through cooperating more effectively with local institutions. The Court of Appeals (Chancillería) in Granada eventually found in favor of Toledo, as well as contributing to ongoing debates about legal norms. During the reign of Philip II the king and his Council of Castile reversed this verdict, signifying for Owens that they had moved away from the notion of “absolute royal authority” as a guarantor of the rule of law and toward the notion that it allowed the king to act above the law. This breach of faith broke the bonds of cooperation and loyalty that supported state power and led to the decline of royal authority in the seventeenth century. The argument is most effective in analyzing how the interplay of ideas and political contingencies over time shaped the adjudication of the lawsuit. It is least effective in inferring broader conclusions about Spanish power at home and abroad from that history. Spain’s situation, and the changing mixture of circumstances and personalities, were simply too complex to be explained by a single lawsuit, however fascinating. On a stylistic note, quotation marks throughout the text quarantine words and phrases such as bureaucracy and state power, without demonstrating their pathology. Apart from irritating the reader, this confuses the demarcation of proper direct quotations. Nonetheless, handsomely-produced and extensively documented, the book is essential reading for scholars interested in the evolution of the European state, although it is not accessible to a broad audience interested in the history of Spain. CARLA RAHN PHILLIPS University of Minnesota, Twin Cities