Although this study extends in scope from an account of late medieval epistemology to Montaigne and Shakespeare, it rightfully belongs in a series devoted to historical theology. Its main focus is on certainty in respect of the personal faith of theologians, the confidence they express in their interpretation of holy writ, and their fear of doubt, misperception and deception. Schreiner is interested in a Collingwoodian way in the motives behind the various positions taken in sixteenth-century theological debates. The Reformers are given pride of place, as they had to establish the rightness of their inner convictions and of their use of Scripture not only to themselves but also to other Protestants and to the Roman Church. Schreiner refutes Lortz's contention that ‘Luther was cast in a subjectivist mold’ and sets out to establish that the ‘Reformers understood their experiential certainty [of salvation] to have its source completely outside of their soul’, i.e. the Holy Spirit. She makes a strong case for seeing the Reformers' practice of exegesis in the context of this certainty. However, her chapter on the discernment of the spirits reveals very clearly the circularity of many of the arguments concerning inner conviction and the Spirit's inspiration. As uncertainty was seen as an evil, it was taken to be a symptom of error if it arose in the process of biblical interpretation. Schreiner gives a nuanced account of the rules applied by Zwingli, Luther and Calvin to this activity, and of their attempts to establish their authority as interpreters. She catalogues the different verses and pericopes upon which they relied, and shows how the principle of sola scriptura, the use of the Fathers and the citing of ecumenical councils was never simple or straightforward. In her account of the Catholic response, she relies heavily on pre-Tridentine writers; her account is mainly about the period before the confessionalisation of Europe. She has much to say on ecclesiology from the viewpoint of both reformers and Catholics. Her analyses also lead her to discuss Luther's relationship to Hus, the writings of Spanish Erasmians and those of the Italian spirituali. In her conclusion, she recognises that her account leaves out some crucial figures, including Melanchthon, Bullinger and Bucer. Another figure not discussed whose views on certainty were crucial in various ways at this time is Thomas Aquinas (see especially Summa theologica 1a 5; 1a 2ae 112.5). His writings reveal the importance of metaphysics on this issue, which was to preoccupy such Catholic thinkers as Benito Pereira and create deep dissention in Lutheran ranks at the end of the century. If Schreiner is to extend her claims about the importance of the epistemic virtue of certainty beyond historical theology and elevate its status to that of ‘a unifying question of this period’, she will need to look at its wider context, including natural philosophy in which Melanchthon's role is of particular importance.