Malcolm Richardson's study of middle-class writing in late medieval London overthrows the standard view that the “triumph of English” began with Chaucer and reached its fulfillment when William Portman wrote in the Brewers’ guild book in the early fifteenth century that henceforth English would be the language of record. Instead, Richardson has traced the gradual use of the written word among the middle class and the tentative emergence of English as the language of choice, overtaking the traditional Latin and French. Employing genre theory and rhetorical analysis, with an occasional excursion into sociolinguistics, he has investigated the genre systems that bourgeois Londoners used. He is interested in the “pragmatic” more than the belletristic writing from roughly 1270 to the early sixteenth century, concentrating on civic and economic documents. He is consciously carrying forward in time and in social class M. T. Clanchy's From Memory to Written Record, 1066–1307 (Cambridge, MA, 1979).

In the first chapter, Richardson discusses what he terms London's “records revolution” from 1270 to 1400. The royal government began sending out writs to cities, forcing cities to keep records of them. (A small correction here: it was Edward I not Henry II who started the quo warranto proceedings.) London began their Letter Books, the Plea and Memoranda Rolls, and the Husting Rolls of Deeds and Wills at the end of the thirteenth century. Record keeping necessitated a clerical branch to handle the writing. Fitz-Thedmar compiled the first custumal during this period, followed by Andrew Horn's more thorough collection of charters and city records in the early fourteenth century. Guilds also began to keep records of their charters, ordinances, and oaths. French or Latin were the languages of choice, although sometimes an English translation was made for the general populace or guild members. Professional writers also appeared to write letters, deeds, wills, and other personal records. By the end of the fourteenth century, the London middle class was thoroughly immersed in a textual culture for business and governing.

To explore the fifteenth century, Richardson has chosen to frame his analysis around Robert Chichele, a prominent member of the Grocers’ Guild and twice mayor of London. Chichele's Town Clerk was John Carpenter, compiler of the Liber Albus. This chapter investigates the use of the dictaminal epistle (the ars dictaminis), which formed the basis of most nonliterary and nonreligious writing. Business letters, bonds, royal charters, petitions to parliament, royal letters, and most communications fall into this genre with a formal address at the beginning, the body of the text, and a formal closing. Petitions, some of them by women, had a formal address, identification of the petitioner, explanation of the grievance, request for specific remedy, and an exhortation for mercy. Collective genres of the period might draw on dictaminal sources, but, like the Letter Books, Journals, Repertories, and guild minute books, they are compilations of a number of different genres. The city custumals by Fitz-Thedmar, Horn, and Carpenter fall into this category. Richardson suggests that an analysis of these varied sources should expand the cannon of the older studies of rhetorical forms.

By the mid-fifteenth century, the middle class had embraced the convenience of a culture of writing. No one called for the good old days of orality. But did they actually write, and could they read? Apprentices were increasingly required to have a knowledge of reading and writing, and masters might be required to provide education to those who did not have the skills. Scribes, however, did most of the writing. Reading among middle class men and women was becoming increasingly common. While some inroads have been made in using English for official records, particularly after Henry V began to use English, most records were still kept in French and Latin. Guilds, particularly the Brewers’ guild, began keeping records in English in 1422, and the others finally followed, confessing that their members could no longer read French or Latin. But the greatest use of the vernacular appeared in letters among individuals, such as the Cely and Paston families. The form of the letters, however, retained the familiar one of the dictaminal genre or, as Richardson calls it, dictaminis without the ars. The more formal aspects are gradually dropped in the rapidity of exchange, and the “bullet” letter, letters with a number of items reported, makes an appearance. This new textuality has its roots in the past but also provides the literate reading audience for Caxton's printed books.

Richardson takes up the issue of women's participation in the textual culture in chapter 5. He reflects, as have others, on the problem of finding a woman's voice in the formulaic letters and petitions, since male scribes were crafting and embellishing them. A further problem is that most of the surviving letters, with the exception of those of Elizabeth Stonor, were from gentry women. By the end of the Middle Ages, London men were having books anthologized for household collections or for references for business and law.

A chapter by chapter review of Richardson's book does not present a fair picture of the wit that is present throughout. It reads easily and pleasantly, making one chuckle in places and reflect in others. He asks the readers, for instance, to consider a common piece of modern text, a driver's license, that has only the signature of the licensee but that participates in wide and varied textual environments. The London middle class also entered very broad textual environments with their bills, letters, petitions, directives, collections of charters and ordinances. Richardson asks us to give these bourgeois Londoners their due in preparing for the cultural revolution of the sixteenth century called “Humanism.”