for the past have become central, and highly controversial, issues inside and outside claims research. Ray takes readers through some of the knotty intellectual and eviden- tiary problems with which anthropologists and historians, among other scholars, have had to grapple in producing research in the context of Indigenous claims. A common issue, particularly in the four majority settler states, was that anthropological representations of Indigenous land tenure regimes – critical to assessing the original land holdings of Indigenous peoples and therefore evaluating claims to ongoing ‘‘native title’’ rights or the basis for compensation – did not necessarily yield information that translated into common law notions of property. In order for such an accommodation to become possible, anthropologists, historians, and, significantly, Indigenous claimants themselves had to teach lawyers and judges, who were often unfamiliar with Indigenous ‘‘use and occupation’’ of lands, about those practices, histories, and legal systems. Ray pays close attention to how Anglo-common law has often con- strained and sometimes misrepresented scholarly argument. The adver- sarial culture of settler legal institutions divided scholarly communities. In the 1950s, the American anthropological community split over whether or not individuals should present their research to the Indian Claims Commission. The historical reports produced by New Zealand’s Waitangi Tribunal became the subject of sharp critique in the mid-1990s when some historians became concerned about the presentist nature of the narratives produced. ‘‘History Wars,’’ which were sparked in part by native title legislation in Australia, profoundly politicized historical research in that country in ways that continue to play out within the academy and in public life today. Only in the South African case, where extensive scholarly debate about race and dispossession had already taken place, did the legal process of restitution not provoke bitter division among experts. Nonetheless, Ray’s conclusion is that claims research has forced the law to adjust in aiming for a more ‘‘balanced perspective.’’ Why this attempt to find a balance has not translated into public debate might warrant further exploration. Miranda Johnson, Department of History, University of Sydney Lynn Coady. Who Needs Books? Reading in the Digital Age. CLS Kreisel Lecture Series. University of Alberta Press. xviii, 54. $10.95 Giller prize-winning author Lynn Coady does not buy laments about the death of the book in the Internet age, all those stories about declining bookstores, struggling publishers, and disappearing readers. As she 284 letters in canada 2016 university of toronto quarterly, volume 87, number 3, summer 2018 6 university of toronto press doi: 10.3138/utq.87.3.8 University of Toronto Quarterly 2018.87:284-286.