Though a huge tome at over 600 pages (excluding bibliography), this is probably one of the least dry and dull history books I have ever had the pleasure to read. It is an academic work, but it doesn't exactly read like one - the academic stuff is there- in abundance - but it's written in a way that doesn't make you feel like you need to go back to the top of the page and re-read it again. Plus, I really liked the subheadings in each chapter; it's so much easier to get through when you think of it as a bunch of four-or-five page sections in each chapter rather than the daunting nigh on 700 pages that it is.
As for the subject itself, Phillips presents a far more sympathetic version of Edward that we have seen in the past. He is a figure that was left a legacy that even the best of us would struggle to compete with, and his character simply wasn't fit for the job. Ironically, Edward would conform far more to modern standards of kingship than he did to his own, and I think that only makes his tale sadder. He's a complex character, and whilst he's absolutely no saint, he's not exactly the tyrannical monster he's been portrayed as either. He was vindictive, stubborn, he could hold a grudge for years. But he was also fiercely loyal - it's simply a shame he was loyal to the wrong people. He could be strategic when he wanted to, and he could play the game of kingship somewhat well when he felt like it.
The Edward Phillips shows us is flawed and complicated, but no supervillain. Perhaps it is time, as Phillips suggests, to really ask: "Who was Edward II?"