To what extent was Philip and absolute monarch?

A-Level: History

...
However most Historians would accept that this myth has been successfully dismantled by Historical evidence, not least the observations of contemporaries, Perez included, in describing a genuine grief and prolonged distress displayed by Philip following these events. The majority of Historians would also make the point that, while Philip’s power was theoretically absolute, the vastness of his inheritance and the extent to which noble influence and power existed in domestic politics, prevented Philip from putting such power into practice. It is therefore fair to say that Philip II can be described as an absolute monarch only to a limited extent. In describing him as this one is applying the concept that he is a ruler who is not answerable or accountable to any other institution and in fulfilling their role as Gods representative on Earth, possesses divine leadership that is superior to common law. While certain Historians would utilise Philip’s attempts to centralise his monarquia as an example that illustrated Philip’s absolutist intentions, this strategy was in reality ineffective and the nature of the kingdoms over which he commanded did not permit this style of rule.

Black legend historians would however persist in their portrayal of Philip as an absolutist tyrant whose foremost ambition was the enslavement of Europe under a universal monarquia ruled over by his unwavering command. The opinions of such Historians are however undermined to an extent when one takes into account that fact that the opinion of Motley is loyal only to a Protestant cause and comes with a backdrop of 19th Century nationalism and American independence, as well as being based around unreliable Dutch Propoganda such as the ‘Advice of the Inquisition’ of 1568 which has since been proven a forgery.
...

*Very simple registration required first