The bizarre concatenation of conspiracy and intrigue contemporaries called “the horrid popish plot” occupies a rather ambivalent place in the historiography of the later seventeenth century. Invariably mentioned in accounts of the period, the plot often receives only cursory attention. But the plot was in fact a moment of exceptional importance, and Peter Hinds, in his excellent new book, brings the plot front and center. The book is not a narrative but rather an interdisciplinary examination of reactions to the plot, using insights derived from political history, biography, literary criticism, and bibliographic studies. Hinds summarizes his aim: “the concerns of this book reduce to these simple questions in relation to the popish plot: who and what did people believe, and why?” (18). He uses as his focal point Sir Roger L’Estrange, the Tory polemicist whose voluminous publications sought to undermine or refute the charges laid by Titus Oates and his confederates.

L’Estrange has sometimes been depicted as not much more than a ruthless hack, and his politics—stridently antidissenter, militantly pro-Tory—are not much esteemed today. Nevertheless, as Hinds amply demonstrates, Sir Roger was a key player in the dramatic transformation of English politics that took place under the later Stuarts. He published indefatigably, and his work was extraordinarily popular: Hinds says that 64,000 copies of his works circulated in England between 1679 and 1681 (217). Not only did his works shape contemporary political discourse, but they provoked a cascade of opposition replies. Had Whig propagandists like Henry Care not had Roger L’Estrange, they would have been forced to invent him. Hinds’s choice of L’Estrange as a subject makes it possible, then, for him to offer a panoramic view of Restoration political discourse.

Each chapter of the book examines a significant aspect of the plot: demonstrating, for example, that English fears of Roman Catholicism were neither wholly unfounded nor, as some have had it, “hysterical.” Deeply ingrained fears of Catholics shaped the popular response to Oates’s revelations, Hinds shows. His examination of Edward Coleman’s letters (in chap. 6) clearly shows how Coleman’s ill-advised enthusiasm fit the plot’s narrative perfectly and reinforced popular belief in the conspiracy. The book also provides a fascinating glimpse of the political press of the later seventeenth century. His close examination of many of the pamphlets and books generated by the plot—some by L’Estrange himself, others by his enemies—sheds a great deal of light on the busy world of scribblers and the publishers who profited from their works.

Hinds also has much to interest historians of the Exclusion Crisis. While not a narrative, he offers several corrections to John Kenyon’s 1972 account of the plot—he traces the key trials and various public accounts of them very carefully. More important, he has much to say about the ways in which political actors used the press to advance their cause. L’Estrange, of course, was a master at this; his newspaper, the Observator, broke new ground, providing much ammunition for Tories. Whigs were not slow to reply, and Hinds well illustrates the ingenuity of writers and printers in getting their points across. An interesting example of this was Benjamin Harris’s The Protestant Tutor. At one level a primer for schoolchildren, this book was also a work of Whig propaganda, stoking anti-Catholic sentiment with tales of the Marian martyrs told as moral lessons.

Hinds is interested in the ways in which commonly accepted “truths” about Roman Catholics, Dissenters, Whigs, and Tories were circulated and how they were received. The picture he draws is of a political culture still in transition—still reliant on older forms of discourse, such as the sermon, public trials, and executions—but also one in which newer forms of communication, both printed and performative, were making rapid headway. Newer printed forms such as the daily or weekly newspaper were obviously important, but the massive Accession day pope burnings organized by Whigs were also key developments. Meticulously choreographed and stage managed, these processions were particularly effective combinations of traditional forms and innovations, appealing to spectators of every social rank—or at least those sympathetic to the Whig narrative.

The Horrid Popish Plot is an outstanding work of history. Usefully informed by a wide-ranging array of other disciplines, Peter Hinds has given new impetus to the study of a decisive moment in British history, and he offers an impressive template for future work on the late Stuart era. The plot can now be seen more clearly for what it was: a catalyst for a new style of political discourse in the evolution of what would become a two-party system.