The Spanish Princess has captivated audiences with its lush costumes and dramatic portrayal of Catherine of Aragon’s early years, but how accurate is this Tudor-era television series when held up against the historical record? Based on Philippa Gregory’s novel, the show blends fact with fiction, often taking significant liberties with real events, characters, and timelines. In this essay, we’ll explore the historical inaccuracies in The Spanish Princess, separating the dramatized narrative from the documented truth about Catherine of Aragon, Henry VIII, and the Tudor court.
With over 25 years of studying the Tudor period and a seven-book Tudor historical fiction series to my name, I bring a well-researched and passionate perspective to the lives of Henry VII, Catherine of Aragon, and the court that shaped them. If you enjoy peeling back the layers of fact and fiction in Tudor dramas, you’ll feel right at home here, and maybe even find yourself intrigued enough to explore my novels that bring this world to life in rich, imaginative detail.
Episode7: Faith
As Catherine’s fertility struggles continue, her faith becomes both a refuge and a battleground. In The Spanish Princess Season 2 Episode 7, tensions rise between Catherine and Henry over religion, legitimacy, and prophecy. This episode emphasizes spiritual devotion and personal resilience, while foreshadowing the religious and dynastic crises to come.
Mary Gets an Education (But Not the Way It Happened)
Mary’s Spanish tutor arrives, and she promptly runs away from him. Haha. This is cute.
The real tutor? None other than Juan Luis Vives, a renowned Spanish humanist. Catherine convinced him to leave the Netherlands to educate her daughter—quite the intellectual coup. Vives, born into a converso family (Jewish converts to Christianity), was already a prominent scholar. He taught at the University of Paris and Leuven, wrote a commentary on Augustine’s City of God, and published works on women’s education, many of which he dedicated to Catherine.
He came to England, taught philosophy in Oxford, and supported Catherine’s cause during the annulment proceedings in 1528, earning him royal imprisonment and exile. This wasn’t just a guy Mary ran away from. Vives was a serious intellectual and a vital part of Catherine’s vision for her daughter’s future.
Reformation, Heretics, and Book Burning
This episode touches lightly on the Protestant Reformation, but not with much clarity. In truth, Luther’s theses reached England as early as 1519, especially among reform-minded students at Cambridge.
What’s missing? Henry VIII was no fan of Luther. He wrote a furious treatise defending Catholicism and sacraments, which earned him the title Defender of the Faith from the Pope. Luther responded with characteristic fire, comparing Henry to a tantrum-throwing strumpet. Offended, Henry passed the torch to Thomas More, who argued against Luther’s ideas, just not in such perverse language. (The Tudors, even as inaccurate as it is, did a better job of handling Thomas More.)
The show stages a scene where Lena berates Catherine for endorsing book burning and, implicitly, people burning. She warns: “If you burn books, will you soon burn people? To please your husband, will you burn heretics? Muslims? Jews? My husband?” It’s a powerful scene, but manipulative. Yes, Protestant books were gathered and burned. Possibly Catherine was involved; certainly Wolsey was. But the show’s tone implies gleeful participation on Catherine’s part, as if she’s a bloodthirsty zealot rather than a woman trying to navigate a deeply Catholic court in which most of these things were seen as normal.
Margaret Pole’s Son: Not a Guard, Not a Killer
Last week, Henry Pole (Margaret Pole’s son) stabbed a rioter while serving in the London guard. None of that is true. He wasn’t a guard. He was part of the royal household and attended major events. He never worked for Thomas More, either. The show keeps recasting noblemen as minor palace employees, which undermines their actual influence and station.
Stafford’s Confusing and Completely Fictional Downfall
Where do we begin?
The real Edward Stafford, Duke of Buckingham, was a powerful noble with royal blood and a pompous attitude. He did get executed for treason, but the evidence was shaky. He dressed and acted like a king, had considerable influence, and supposedly offended Henry by meddling in royal affairs and eyeing the throne. That was enough to get you killed in Tudor England.
But in the show? Stafford stumbles upon Catherine miscarrying in the dark, carries her to bed, keeps her secret, and publicly consoles her. That single sentence (“if you never bear him a son, it is God’s will”) gets him executed.
This is ludicrous.
Catherine was never alone in the palace. She always had attendants, and miscarriages would have been impossible to hide. Stafford wouldn’t have been sneaking through corridors, and he absolutely wouldn’t have had a confidential moment with the queen. Even worse, the show implies he died because he kept her secret. That isn’t scandal, it’s character assassination.
And Catherine never defended him publicly. The trial was conducted before a jury of peers, seventeen nobles, not Henry himself. As for Margaret Pole’s dramatic outbursts? Unlikely. Her family was constantly at risk; she wouldn’t shout treason in front of Catherine by stating that Stafford’s arrest was pure spite unless she wanted to end up beside Stafford on the scaffold.
Oh, and no, Catherine, Mary, and Brandon weren’t present at his execution either.
The Stupidest Subplot: Margaret Steals the Treasury?
I almost can’t write this without laughing.
The show has Catherine suggest that Margaret Tudor and the Duke of Albany are lovers, supposedly to sabotage her case with the Pope and stop her annulment from setting a precedent. Meanwhile, Margaret, still grumbling about her fake missing dowry, steals gold from the English treasury and flees to Scotland. This subplot is so dumb I can’t even dignify it with analysis. It didn’t happen. It couldn’t have happened. But here we are.
Thomas More, Torture Master?
And now… the worst offense of all.
Lady Pole visits Thomas More and finds… a torture device dripping with blood. She flees in horror. Later, she confronts him. His reply? “It’s bloody and awful, and I take no pride in it, but it sits right with my conscience.”
He then justifies torturing Lutherans as a spiritual good.
Except… he never tortured anyone. Not even close.
Yes, More arrested and detained heretics. Yes, he believed in burning them after legal conviction. But he was also very clear (even in his own lifetime) that he did not torture prisoners, and was deeply offended at the accusation. He once whipped a servant for blasphemy and punished a man who disrupted church. That’s it.
The idea that he had a medieval bed of spikes in his home? Pure Protestant propaganda, courtesy of John Foxe, who slandered Catholic figures in his Book of Martyrs. Modern historians agree: there’s no evidence Thomas More ever used torture.
This show paints a devout man (a philosopher, statesman, and martyr) as a bloodthirsty sadist. He wasn’t perfect, but he deserves better. 😛
Step Back in Time with The Tudor Throne Series
While The Spanish Princess revamps Catherine’s story with dramatic flair, The Tudor Throne Series offers you a more historically accurate interpretation to the tapestry of events in her young life. Set earlier during Catherine of Aragon’s formative years, each novel blends rich historical details (family loyalties, dynastic alliances, and peril) with the emotional depth and suspense you crave.
