What do you think?
Rate this book
Philip of Spain
Philip II of Spain, ruler of the most extensive empire the world had ever known, has been viewed in a harsh and negative light since his death in 1598. Identified with repression, bigotry, and fanaticism by his enemies, he has been judged more by the political events of his reign than by his person. This book, published four hundred years after Philip's death, is the first full-scale biography of the king. Placing him within the social, cultural, religious, and regional context of his times, it presents a startling new picture of his character and reign.
Drawing on Philip's unpublished correspondence and on many other archival sources, Henry Kamen reveals much about Philip the youth, the man, the husband, the father, the frequently troubled Christian, and the king. Kamen finds that Philip was a cosmopolitan prince whose extensive experience of northern Europe broadened his cultural imagination and tastes, whose staunchly conservative ideas were far from being illiberal and fanatical, whose religious attitudes led him to accept a practical coexistence with Protestants and Jews, and whose support for Las Casas and other defenders of the Indians in America helped determine government policy. Shedding completely new light on most aspects of Philip's private life and, in consequence, on his public actions, the book is the definitive portrayal of Philip II.
Drawing on Philip's unpublished correspondence and on many other archival sources, Henry Kamen reveals much about Philip the youth, the man, the husband, the father, the frequently troubled Christian, and the king. Kamen finds that Philip was a cosmopolitan prince whose extensive experience of northern Europe broadened his cultural imagination and tastes, whose staunchly conservative ideas were far from being illiberal and fanatical, whose religious attitudes led him to accept a practical coexistence with Protestants and Jews, and whose support for Las Casas and other defenders of the Indians in America helped determine government policy. Shedding completely new light on most aspects of Philip's private life and, in consequence, on his public actions, the book is the definitive portrayal of Philip II.
384 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1997
13 people are currently reading
345 people want to read
About the author
Henry Kamen
85 books64 followersHenry Kamen is a fellow of the Royal Historical Society in London and an emeritus professor of the Higher Council for Scientific Research in Barcelona.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
June 2, 2013
Kamen attempts a revisionist make-over of King Philip II, often regarded as one of the great villains of early modern European history. (c.f. "Don Carlos," the play by Schiller and the opera by Verdi). With great attention to the primary sources of the 16th century, Kamen depicts Philip as a well-educated Renaissance Prince who was a warm and loving family man who cultivated learning and even enjoyed dancing. He was no more intolerant than the normal ruler of his time, and not particularly avid in serving the Papacy and aggressive Roman Catholicism.
"Philip has often been presented as the Knight-errant of militant Catholicism in these years, but his priority was always peace. He never ceased to express his concern for religion, yet in practice his policy decisions were more realistic. No imperialist fever reigned at the King's court."
All those "bad things" associated with Spain in the late 16th century - the Inquisition, the Armada, the repression of the Netherlands and the disastrous war that ensued, the collapse of the Spanish economy - apparently those were not all Philip's fault. "Philip was never at any time in adequate control of events, or of his kingdoms, or even of his own destiny. It follows that he cannot be held responsible for more than a small part of what eventually transpired during his reign. To many spectators, he was the most powerful monarch in the world. In the privacy of his office, he knew very well that this was an illusion. . . For all his power, he had been unable to stop his realms being sucked into a whirl of war, debt, and decay."
That the reader is likely to finish the book less than completely convinced of Kamen's argument does not detract from the author's skill in presenting it. His scholarship is exemplary and his effort in scraping off the layers of myth about Philip's record is completely commendable. This biography is very readable and very informative.
"Philip has often been presented as the Knight-errant of militant Catholicism in these years, but his priority was always peace. He never ceased to express his concern for religion, yet in practice his policy decisions were more realistic. No imperialist fever reigned at the King's court."
All those "bad things" associated with Spain in the late 16th century - the Inquisition, the Armada, the repression of the Netherlands and the disastrous war that ensued, the collapse of the Spanish economy - apparently those were not all Philip's fault. "Philip was never at any time in adequate control of events, or of his kingdoms, or even of his own destiny. It follows that he cannot be held responsible for more than a small part of what eventually transpired during his reign. To many spectators, he was the most powerful monarch in the world. In the privacy of his office, he knew very well that this was an illusion. . . For all his power, he had been unable to stop his realms being sucked into a whirl of war, debt, and decay."
That the reader is likely to finish the book less than completely convinced of Kamen's argument does not detract from the author's skill in presenting it. His scholarship is exemplary and his effort in scraping off the layers of myth about Philip's record is completely commendable. This biography is very readable and very informative.
August 29, 2013
Though he ruled over Spain at the peak of its "Golden Age" of power and influence, Philip II has long suffered from a negative historical image. Henry Kamen's book seeks to address this by providing a rounded portrait of a conscientious and diligent monarch, one who was surprisingly modern in many respects. Kamen succeeds in describing both the grandeur of Philip's reign and the many challenges he faced as a monarch, from perennially impoverished treasury to the unrest and rebellion in the Netherlands. Yet the biography suffers from a lack of analysis: space used to detail innumerable processions and court intrigues would have been better spent explaining the operations of Philip's government or the factors underlying the problems he faced. This limits Kamen's achievement with this book, which demonstrates the need for a better understanding of this important ruler without fully meeting the demand for it.
May 3, 2018
Link to my review of this book:
https://flhwnotesandreviews.com/2018/...
https://flhwnotesandreviews.com/2018/...
September 20, 2012
Excellent with details, greatly researched and one of the best biographies I read. I highly recommend this and Geoffrey Parker's Philip II.
Just a word of caution though on Kamen. His style is very different from Parker, whereas Parker in his last edition "The definitive work of Philip II" is laden with much more details than all his previous editions and even more than Kamen; Parker does not tend to excuse Philip from his acts and association regarding the Inquisition and the role he played in it (especially the 1568 burnings which were amongst the most numerous Spain had seen at that time and hundreds were gathered, including the King for that spectacle); whereas Kamen does and while he is right that Kings did not enjoy the absolute power movies show, nonetheless, Philip II was not excusable of many of the acts, particularly having to do with the Inquisition during his reign.
Just a word of caution though on Kamen. His style is very different from Parker, whereas Parker in his last edition "The definitive work of Philip II" is laden with much more details than all his previous editions and even more than Kamen; Parker does not tend to excuse Philip from his acts and association regarding the Inquisition and the role he played in it (especially the 1568 burnings which were amongst the most numerous Spain had seen at that time and hundreds were gathered, including the King for that spectacle); whereas Kamen does and while he is right that Kings did not enjoy the absolute power movies show, nonetheless, Philip II was not excusable of many of the acts, particularly having to do with the Inquisition during his reign.
March 6, 2017
An incredibly readable book! Philip II's travels through Europe as prince-regent (yo el rey principe, he signed himself after his elevation as King of Naples on the eve of his marriage to Mary I of England). Philip the ladies' man. Philip the king, of course. Also interesting on Mary Queen of Scots and Elizabeth I of England. It has been claimed by another biographer that this book is a hagiography; this is definitely not true. It does show though that Philip was human, and a rather average person.
August 24, 2013
Not Kamen's best (and I've read parts of his other books). His book lacks important analysis and insight and instead focuses too much on family issues and drama. He portrays phillip as under his father's wing, but never says why or how that's important. More of a summary than a scholarly work in my opinion. Still a rather decent book, but I don't think I will finish it. about 100 pages short.
March 6, 2024
Philip II of Spain apparently has a rather poor 'reputation' amongst the history literati at least those writing in English. The Armada, the Inquisition, the treatment of natives in the Americas are among the negatives ascribed to Philip, but there are multiple aspects to even those 'stories' as Kamen details in his fine book. This biography by Henry Kamen published in 1997 certainly goes a long way toward rehabilitating the view of Philip. Kamen qualifies as expert (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_K...) on Spain with at least a dozen books on various aspects of Spanish history most dealing with the period of empire, say 1492-1763 (one of his books covers that exact period). I read his 1998 revision of his own work on the Spanish Inquisition a few years back so I knew what I was getting into with respect to style. If not a full-blown scholarly book, it is written in a fairly pedantic style with minimal attempts to embellish or dramatize the events which certainly could be. Moreover there is not a whole lot of interpretation on the meaning of events. It assumes the reader has some grounding in the complex issues in Flanders, the interplay of the Holy Roman Empire and the Hapsburgs or some understanding of the Italian question. Yet these are all complex subjects in and of themselves and with a full roster of participants, so to provide details and background would probably double or triple the length. I would not call that a criticism but an observation, do not go into this expecting to have your hand held.
In reading several fine reviews including one by historian Hugh Thomas in the NYT (1997) Philip has an even worse 'reputation' than I realized. Kamen's book goes a long way then in redressing what seems to have been a real imbalance in the reporting on Philip. Some of these stem right from the start as explained by Kamen on page 241 where he describes the very effective propaganda campaign of the Protestant states beginning around 1580. Philip on the other hand made next to no attempt to combat the lies and distortions about him and his regime during his life, a failure that left him besmirched in most of the histories and biographies (Prescott and Merriman and later Parker) especially those in English. The genesis of the so-called 'Black Legend' of Spain seems to emerge from the period of Philip. Anyway, this book covers his life in a sympathetic though certainly not hagiographic manner and is supported by numerous primary references, letters and documents. Philip's reign was a momentous one in Spanish history with perhaps the apogee of it's Empire and this is a fascinating and informative story despite Kamen's somewhat dry style.
He quotes the great French historian Ferdinand Braudel about Philip: 'He was imprisoned within a destiny in which he himself had little hand'. And Kamen adds: 'His only choice was to play the dice available to him'. As a gamer, I loved that! 3.5 stars rounded up.
In reading several fine reviews including one by historian Hugh Thomas in the NYT (1997) Philip has an even worse 'reputation' than I realized. Kamen's book goes a long way then in redressing what seems to have been a real imbalance in the reporting on Philip. Some of these stem right from the start as explained by Kamen on page 241 where he describes the very effective propaganda campaign of the Protestant states beginning around 1580. Philip on the other hand made next to no attempt to combat the lies and distortions about him and his regime during his life, a failure that left him besmirched in most of the histories and biographies (Prescott and Merriman and later Parker) especially those in English. The genesis of the so-called 'Black Legend' of Spain seems to emerge from the period of Philip. Anyway, this book covers his life in a sympathetic though certainly not hagiographic manner and is supported by numerous primary references, letters and documents. Philip's reign was a momentous one in Spanish history with perhaps the apogee of it's Empire and this is a fascinating and informative story despite Kamen's somewhat dry style.
He quotes the great French historian Ferdinand Braudel about Philip: 'He was imprisoned within a destiny in which he himself had little hand'. And Kamen adds: 'His only choice was to play the dice available to him'. As a gamer, I loved that! 3.5 stars rounded up.
June 20, 2023
Kamen's approach to Philip II of Spain is in no way apologetic as some did argue, he is just trying to prove the "dark legend" that was cast upon him was exactly that... mostly innuendo bolstered by the Dutch and English since Philip never cared about creating a myth around his own person. Kamen argues Philip was in line with other rulers, in fact, he worked in tandem with the customs and rules of the land, which, sometimes worked to his own detriment. Other contemporaries didn't.
The main issue is that some people do name him as the culprit of Spain's decline, and the Habsburg's rule there as well, when he did basically all he could to change this, of course to no avail. Sure, the armada was one of the biggest blunders in history, he could just had assembled a navy to protect his own coast rather than spend a lot, like he did, in a very idiotic aggresion to England that backfired enormously, and yet... did he have much choice as to not try to counteract Elizabeth I? Philip is always presented as the ruler of Spain when it wasn't the case, Castille, Aragon, Navarre, and then Portugal where 4 different reigns, in fact, centralism as a whole didn't exist in Spain until Philip V won the succession war, secured his throne and basically got rid of all the stupid laws that create an impossible system, and chose Madrid as a fixed seat, that is, however, four monarchs (Philip III, Philip IV, Charles II, and finally Philip V, a Borboun) ahead, was that an option for Philip? Maybe not during his life.
Another huge mistake was his intrasigence in allowing the Dutch/Flemish to practice their own religion but his view was in line with rulers of the day, my reign = my religion, he could, however had basically followed the advice of his aunts, sisters, daughter, and everyone else of the family who mentioned that it was either toleration or lose the lands altogether which, eventually, did happen.
As for Spain's economy, it was already crippled by his own father, Charles I (and V of Germany)'s wars left the state in a dire situation by the time Philip's succession, and it wasn't much he could do to improve that giving he was at some point fighting wars in 2 different places at the same time. The irony of Americas' gold and silver was that it created a different problem of its own: inflation.
All in all, I do agree with Kamen that Philip did try and given the circumstances he did what he could, he wasn't tyranical, the Spanish's reigns were calm in comparission to the mayhem both the Dutch provinces, France, and the rest of the continent were given the war of religions that never really affected the Iberian peninsula.
If I were to name a culprit, it has to be his son with his "válido" (favourite) approach to government, from then on Spain was on a constant downfall, not longer a real world power but a decadent one.
The main issue is that some people do name him as the culprit of Spain's decline, and the Habsburg's rule there as well, when he did basically all he could to change this, of course to no avail. Sure, the armada was one of the biggest blunders in history, he could just had assembled a navy to protect his own coast rather than spend a lot, like he did, in a very idiotic aggresion to England that backfired enormously, and yet... did he have much choice as to not try to counteract Elizabeth I? Philip is always presented as the ruler of Spain when it wasn't the case, Castille, Aragon, Navarre, and then Portugal where 4 different reigns, in fact, centralism as a whole didn't exist in Spain until Philip V won the succession war, secured his throne and basically got rid of all the stupid laws that create an impossible system, and chose Madrid as a fixed seat, that is, however, four monarchs (Philip III, Philip IV, Charles II, and finally Philip V, a Borboun) ahead, was that an option for Philip? Maybe not during his life.
Another huge mistake was his intrasigence in allowing the Dutch/Flemish to practice their own religion but his view was in line with rulers of the day, my reign = my religion, he could, however had basically followed the advice of his aunts, sisters, daughter, and everyone else of the family who mentioned that it was either toleration or lose the lands altogether which, eventually, did happen.
As for Spain's economy, it was already crippled by his own father, Charles I (and V of Germany)'s wars left the state in a dire situation by the time Philip's succession, and it wasn't much he could do to improve that giving he was at some point fighting wars in 2 different places at the same time. The irony of Americas' gold and silver was that it created a different problem of its own: inflation.
All in all, I do agree with Kamen that Philip did try and given the circumstances he did what he could, he wasn't tyranical, the Spanish's reigns were calm in comparission to the mayhem both the Dutch provinces, France, and the rest of the continent were given the war of religions that never really affected the Iberian peninsula.
If I were to name a culprit, it has to be his son with his "válido" (favourite) approach to government, from then on Spain was on a constant downfall, not longer a real world power but a decadent one.
September 10, 2020
This was a really well researched book, and in many ways dispelled the popular "black legend" of his reputation. It didn't exactly make him into any sort of a "hero", but it did put him in perspective, in his time & place, as a very real person, trying hard to do what he believed was right, and what he thought his own father, Charles V, Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire would have done. If he hadn't been born as the heir of the empire, it sounds like he would have been very much an average joe in whatever environment he was born into. He never would have been any kind of a superstar, but with a good education, he could have made a very good clerk, cleric or accountant for somebody.
I really learned a lot about what was going on in the world during this time period, and the inter relationships of all the powers of Europe as Europe was developing, indeed surging into the lead of dragging the world into becoming the modern world. I hadn't realized that Spain had become such a superpower at the time, nor how powerful the Hapsbergs had gotten. This gives a wonderful context to my efforts to understand what was going on in the 16th & 17th century, and why.
I really learned a lot about what was going on in the world during this time period, and the inter relationships of all the powers of Europe as Europe was developing, indeed surging into the lead of dragging the world into becoming the modern world. I hadn't realized that Spain had become such a superpower at the time, nor how powerful the Hapsbergs had gotten. This gives a wonderful context to my efforts to understand what was going on in the 16th & 17th century, and why.
March 11, 2021
I liked this book and author obvious has done enormous research, but if honestly - there were some issues, which made this book less enjoyable than I expected it to be.
Main pros: I highly appreciate the factual side of it - I learned a lot about Philip, Spanish politics, religion and conflicts in 16th century Europe. And since I knew very little about Spanish history, this biography really helped me to understand the Spanish point of view of certain historical events, the very thing which I expected to gain and received. Well done.
But I really wanted much more analysis into this. And that's where problems start - this book simply tells Philip's (and his reign's) story without giving decent examination of reasons, which stood behind king's decisions or actions (or those of other persons), and consequences which they faced. There could be more exploration of Philip's personality too - I missed it.
I also felt that there were some holes in Kamen's argumentation/interpretation - in many cases his conclusions and statements appeared to contradict the facts presented or lacked foundation. Besides the narrative's (or should I say the author's?) tone concerning Philip's actions and decisions occasionally grew a little bit too much apologetic for my taste - it was a kind of irritating.
Another issue with this work - I think that some important topics were worth more exploration than the author did: Philip's impact on the English government during Mary Tudor's reign, his marriage to Mary Tudor in general, his conflict with papacy (I can't remember if Kamen even mentioned the fact that Philip was excommunicated from the Church), his relationship with his heir, later Philip III. I also had like to know about his plans concerning the invasion in England (I mean, what they planned to do if the Armada had won?), but for some reason the only thing what Kamen has to say on the subject is "neither the king nor anyone else was quite sure what it was meant to achieve. No concrete plans were ever drawn up, either military or political, on what was to be done should the invasion succeed." Well, I don't know, but I doubt that they had no plans whatsoever.
Overall, it is a good factual biography and it encouraged me to read further about Philip. Next try "Imprudent king" by Geoffrey Parker.
Main pros: I highly appreciate the factual side of it - I learned a lot about Philip, Spanish politics, religion and conflicts in 16th century Europe. And since I knew very little about Spanish history, this biography really helped me to understand the Spanish point of view of certain historical events, the very thing which I expected to gain and received. Well done.
But I really wanted much more analysis into this. And that's where problems start - this book simply tells Philip's (and his reign's) story without giving decent examination of reasons, which stood behind king's decisions or actions (or those of other persons), and consequences which they faced. There could be more exploration of Philip's personality too - I missed it.
I also felt that there were some holes in Kamen's argumentation/interpretation - in many cases his conclusions and statements appeared to contradict the facts presented or lacked foundation. Besides the narrative's (or should I say the author's?) tone concerning Philip's actions and decisions occasionally grew a little bit too much apologetic for my taste - it was a kind of irritating.
Another issue with this work - I think that some important topics were worth more exploration than the author did: Philip's impact on the English government during Mary Tudor's reign, his marriage to Mary Tudor in general, his conflict with papacy (I can't remember if Kamen even mentioned the fact that Philip was excommunicated from the Church), his relationship with his heir, later Philip III. I also had like to know about his plans concerning the invasion in England (I mean, what they planned to do if the Armada had won?), but for some reason the only thing what Kamen has to say on the subject is "neither the king nor anyone else was quite sure what it was meant to achieve. No concrete plans were ever drawn up, either military or political, on what was to be done should the invasion succeed." Well, I don't know, but I doubt that they had no plans whatsoever.
Overall, it is a good factual biography and it encouraged me to read further about Philip. Next try "Imprudent king" by Geoffrey Parker.
March 24, 2008
After my first trip to Spain in December of 2007, I became fascinated with King Philip II of Spain. While in Spain, we visted El Escorial, an unbelievable structure designed by Philip and built during his reign. He is also a character in my favorite Verdi opera, Don Carlo.
I was hoping this biography would give me more information about Philip's personal life, particularly his relationship to his son, Don Carlo and his second wife, Elizabeth of Valois. Regrettably, there was very little information.
I found it to be a scholarly book, but rather dry when it came to the real person. Full of too many details that I found uninteresting, I must confess that I gave up before the end and returned the book to the library without finishing it. It is against my personal beliefs to not finish a book, so this one must have really been dry.
I was hoping this biography would give me more information about Philip's personal life, particularly his relationship to his son, Don Carlo and his second wife, Elizabeth of Valois. Regrettably, there was very little information.
I found it to be a scholarly book, but rather dry when it came to the real person. Full of too many details that I found uninteresting, I must confess that I gave up before the end and returned the book to the library without finishing it. It is against my personal beliefs to not finish a book, so this one must have really been dry.
August 3, 2010
My high school Spanish teacher told us that Philip had el Escorial built so he could attend Mass while reclining in his bed but the author didn't confirm that. Still the book is loaded with details of Philip's life that seem at times the reader is overwhelmed. Kamen finds much more to like about Philip than most historians do. Kamen claims that other biographers and historians have had an English/Dutch bias against the Spanish king.
September 24, 2013
It is an extensive work, before Parker gave us his definitive biography of Philip which unlike the fourth edition is massive, hugely massive. I am talking over 1600 pages; this was one of the biggest works.
However the reason why I give it four stars is because despite all the great information and great work, I found that the author excused Philip in some instances and although I am aware that Kings were not omnipresent in every single act of government, they were not all that ignorant either.
However the reason why I give it four stars is because despite all the great information and great work, I found that the author excused Philip in some instances and although I am aware that Kings were not omnipresent in every single act of government, they were not all that ignorant either.
March 31, 2014
Fascinating period and fascinating leader. The king of Spain, The Netherlands, parts of Italy, Germany,France and later Portugal. King Phillip led these countries during the Protestant Reformation, the revolt of The Netherlands, the era of Mary I and Elizabeth I of England and many more significant events. Well researched, well written.
January 24, 2008
Don't read it. I only read it because I had to for a class. The flow of the book was sucky, the characterization of Philip a little over the top and the author just let him off the hook at the end anyway.
Want to read
November 25, 2009So far, it has been good. The book is a nice break from the many Philip II books that focused mainly on his foreign policy. In this work, Kamen shifted away from studying the politics of Philip's reign and analyzed his personal life instead.
Want to read
January 18, 2010MC
March 11, 2013
Wonderful, very informative, an eye-opener!
February 7, 2021
This is a book that criticizes when need be and gives credit were credit is due,The book is deeply informative and backed up by facts and sources.Phillip II has long been criticized unfairly by His Protestant Enemies and the secular crowd.What I don't like is the author's words to describe how kicking out the Moors and/or the Moriscos was Unjust(Spain is better off.)This of course was in the epilogue,and sometimes a reference to The Church but nothing offensive per se.I find fault with The King's indifference towards The "Conversos",but It was within the context of his time.His attitude seemed to be that of not wanting to "rock the boat" or cause waves.He was not an oppressive Ruler,he could have done a lot more and he certainly could have done a lot more concerning his popularity but he was not like some monarchs at the time and those in France who wanted to enshrine popularity with their reigns.The King was a defender of the faith but sadly(at least to me not a Warmonger or As much of a Warrior AS I would have liked.,Ala Ferdinand The Catholic and Isabella and Charles the Hammer,and Charlemagne all fought for the one true faith and are Heroes to me.)He was more of a practical and pragmatic man despite being a defender of the Inquistion(which i see no problem with.)It is hard to describe him and the book does it's best,he was pragmatic but he was A devoted Catholic despite some disagreements with The Church(Which I don't like.)All in all,this is a Fair and Balanced look at the man and his times and how he ruled despite what the naysayers,Revisionists and mythmakers may say.I highly recommended giving it a read.
September 14, 2025
Uma boa obra de história, apresenta-nos uma outra faceta de Filipe II de Espanha, Filipe I Portugal. Não a classificaria revisionista, mas um olhar ao homem e às sua personalidade, gostos e maneira de estar.
Mais de que história política, é uma obra sobre como a pessoa Filipe foi reagindo e decidindo perante os acontecimentos que se lhe apresentam, o trabalho de documentação é sólido, sentimos honestidade na obra mas pedir-se-ia ao autor mais análise com mais detalhe .
Mais de que história política, é uma obra sobre como a pessoa Filipe foi reagindo e decidindo perante os acontecimentos que se lhe apresentam, o trabalho de documentação é sólido, sentimos honestidade na obra mas pedir-se-ia ao autor mais análise com mais detalhe .
December 24, 2019
This is a well researched book. The problem is that Phillip ruled for 50 years and frankly was an underachiever. While I will agree with the author that he is not the tyrant as sometimes depicted historically, he was overwhelmed by minutia. He never could delegate and decisions were always tied up in committee. A biography should tell me why a life mattered. The author fails to achieve this.
July 23, 2018
Liked it fair even handed biography of King Phillip of Spain had read numerous books on Queen Elizabeth I Henry VIII Mary Queen of Scots added greatly to my knowledge of the era
August 23, 2024
Another bedtime history book to get me to sleep. Did the job and largely forgotten already !
July 17, 2021
Kamen gives us a portrait of the often misunderstood king Philip second of Spain. Drawing on Phillip’s unpublished correspondence and many other archival sources Kamen presents the reader with a fair and balanced portrayal of the king. This is the first full-scale biography of Philip II and an important and definitive book.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews