Despite its flaws, this book offers an important contribution to studies on Martin Luther's doctrine of the two kingdoms (the distinction between life and righteousness in this world and the righteous life of faith in Christ for the world to come). Wright argues that Luther's distinction between these two realms stood with the likes of Lorenzo Valla and represented his answer to other humanists (especially neo-Platonists like Pico but also Erasmus) who viewed religion and even knowledge with great scepticism (here consistently defined in a classical, not modern, sense). After an overview of the vast literature on the two kingdoms in chapter i, which includes helpful criticism of its appropriations in twentieth-century Germany, Wright examines the development of two strands of Italian humanist thought representing both a sceptical and anti-sceptical approaches to knowledge and God (chapter ii) and their appropriation in northern humanism, including Luther among the humanists (chapter iii). In the final two chapters he examines Luther's thought in more detail, arguing that the two kingdoms doctrine is more worldview than political theory (chapter iv), and sketching its importance in the Christian life (chapter v, using especially Luther's commentaries on Ecclesiastes and Genesis). Wright succeeds in showing (for the first time in such detail) just how important the two kingdoms (which for Wright includes the distinctions between law and Gospel, the old and new creature, and divine and human righteousness) were for Luther's criticism of sceptics. But the book contains unfortunate flaws. For one thing, there are the small factual errors: Cicero, not Aristotle, wrote De oratore; Luther wrote no commentary on Corinthians but delivered sermons on 1 Corinthians xv and published two commentaries on Galatians (not distinguished here). Then, too, Luther's works (American edn) should not be cited without reference to the critical edition. There is also a lack of clarity in certain terms: a failure to distinguish Luther's two uses of the law (to maintain order and restrain evil on the one hand and to reveal sin and drive to Christ on the other); a lack of references to Luther's theology of the cross. While Luther had some good things to say about Valla, this does not necessarily prove influence, especially when Philip Melanchthon, Wittenberg's other reformer, called Valla a quarrelsome speculator. Most disturbingly, Wright fails to understand Luther's view of the human being, who is not simply ‘enjoined to be passive’ (p. 171) but is truly passive before the God who justifies the ungodly. Although Wright's use of secondary literature is often limited to a few favourite (older) sources and he is sometimes guilty of assuming what he needs to prove, his book does underscore the role of humanism for the development of Luther's two kingdoms – in order to attack ‘Epicurean’ scepticism and defend the certainty of God's promise. This book may not replace earlier work of Cargill-Thompson and Gustav Wingren on the subject, but it does provide a new way to view Luther's work.