Nevertheless, there are three general theories that attempt to explain the controversy. The first of these supposes that the ban was simply a response to satirical writing that was getting out of hand. Richard McCabe refers to the ban as an effort to target social critique that was "too close to the truth for comfort." More recently, William Jones contends that the bishops' primary concern was the satirists' harsh, Juvenalian approach to social commentary. This interpretation draws its force in part from the Bishops' sentence "That noe "Satyres" or "Epigrams" be printed hereafter." However, though many of the books in question fit the generic category of "satire," the Bishops' Ban problematically also limits the printing of some "English histories" and "playes", which may themselves be satiric. An alternative theory on the event supposes that Archbishop Whitgift engineered the ban specifically to protect his friend, the Earl of Essex, from political satire. This nuanced, political interpretation points out that Essex's failure during a military campaign in Ireland had recently captured the attention of the English public, and figures that the banned books seize upon this controversy. Because Robert Tofte's "Of Mariage and Wiving" and the anonymous "xv ioyes of marriage" are literary translations that do not directly relate to England's contemporary political climate, some scholars suppose that the anti-marriage rhetoric of these two books was perceived as sedition against Elizabeth I. A third explanation for the ban reasons that the bishops were reacting specifically to the malicious and pornographic content in the books, as opposed to their generic or political implications. Charles Gillett argues that the seven books were burned "because of their offence against morality." Lynda Boose has claimed further that the bishops "attempted to cut off the hostile, malcontented political aggressions of the violently sexualized discourse they heard in these new hybrid literary constructions."