This isn’t really a quote from the book, but I found it extremely interesting that John Bossy believed that comparing writing styles would be a legitimate form of investigation in this case. Honestly, I believe that you could never use a comparison of handwriting styles in an investigation like this, especially because the author is looking for a spy. One would think that a spy might change his handwriting style, specifically for circumstances like this. Obviously, not because s/he believed that people would be investigating this topic hundreds of years later, but because s/he felt that the opportunity for the letters to be leaked was a distinct possibility. Stylistically, it seems as though Bossy cannot decide whether or not he would like to write a narrative monograph or a historical research piece. While his book is chocked-full of legitimate footnotes, he has yet to tell the story in such a way as to make it accessible to the reader. The result is that his story is extremely dry, even for me. That being said, I thought his act of tracing of Chérelles name from Chérelles to Arnault was both informative and interesting, and provided me with some necessary information for the rest of part one. Although, honestly, I’m still not sure what is happening in the book, other than the fact that there is a spy working for Elizabeth, but claiming allegiance to Mary, Queen of Scots.