ABSTRACT
At the close of the seventeenth century, a laudatory biography of the nonconformist minister Philip Henry praised him as ‘a very candid Reader of Books, not apt to pick Quarrels with what he read, especially when the Design appear’d to be Honest’.1 ‘Candid’ readers, combining the qualities of generosity, impartiality, sincerity and perceptiveness, had been sought by writers across the second half of the century and solicited in numerous prefaces and addresses.2 Ideally, the relationship between authors and their readers would always be one of candour, of mutual honesty, respect and tolerance. But it was not an ideal world, and even a reader of Mr Henry’s exceptional candour was required to have an eye to the possibility that an author’s design was not ‘honest’. Hence writers, while attempting to construct a relationship of candour with their own readers, stressed the need for acuity over generosity when interpreting the works of others. The ‘wary reader’ was to be commended, for he assessed works carefully and was not ensnared by erroneous and false claims.3 The ‘unwary Reader’, in contrast, came in for a great deal of opprobrium. He was tricked by ‘specious’ title-pages; prevailed upon by ‘passionate expressions, and vehement asseverations’; beguiled by ‘Verbal shift’; corrupted by mere ‘facetiousness’ of style; deceived by ‘any Romantick Story’; imposed on by ‘the grossest Falsities’; and, finally, cheated out of ‘his Creed’.4 Appearing in works from seventeenth-century
1 [Matthew Henry], An Account of the Life and Death of Mr. Philip Henry (1698), p. 217.
