Episode 5 of The White Princess marks the point where historical drama gives way to outright character assassination. While the episode introduces Perkin Warbeck and the renewed threat of Yorkist rebellion, it does so by inventing events that never occurred, misrepresenting Tudor statecraft, and (most egregiously) turning Margaret Beaufort into a fictional murderer. From a fabricated embassy to Burgundy, to a public denunciation by Elizabeth Woodville that would have been suicidal in real life, to the absurd claim that Margaret Beaufort killed both the Princes in the Tower and Jasper Tudor, this episode abandons history entirely. For viewers asking, “how accurate is The White Princess Episode 5?”, the answer is simple: very little! And what it distorts does lasting damage to the historical record.

Inside This Post:

• Traitors in the Burgundy & English Courts
• Henry VII & the Burgundy Trade Embargo
• Ennobling Prince Henry as Duke of York
• A Dowager Queen Would Not Commit Treason
• Did Margaret Beaufort Murder Jasper Tudor?
• Did Margaret Beaufort Kill The Princes in the Tower?

Episode 5: Traitors

Margaret of York plots to take the throne from Henry VII through a young man she insists is Prince Richard. Henry sends Margaret Pole to Burgundy to meet him, and she returns home with mixed feelings. Elizabeth Woodville, the Dowager Queen, denounces Henry to his face at court during a banquet. After Jasper Tudor finds out Margaret Beaufort murdered the Princes in the Tower, he threatens to expose her to Henry, so she smothers him to death.

Traitors in the Burgundy & English Courts

Court Did Margaret Pole Really Travel to Burgundy?

I get why the show sent Margaret Plantagenet / Pole to Burgundy to meet her supposed cousin, Prince Richard, but it never happened in real life. Margaret Pole lived her entire life in England, in service to the royal family. It also stretches logic here that Henry would risk sending her abroad, when she has a claim of royal blood and could conspire with her aunt to take his throne. (The show explains this away with her son remaining as a hostage in England.)

Cecily Neville & the Myth of Yorkist Exile

Grand Duchess Cecily, her grandmother, is also at court and says, “I will not return to England, not while Henry Tudor is on the throne. If your aunt has her way, we will all be restored by Richard.” But as noted in previous episodes, she never left England and lived in comfort during Henry’s reign.

Lady Catherine Gordon & Perkin Warbeck

Lady Cathy Gordon, cousin to King James of Scotland, is hanging around the Burgundy court, and midway through the episode, it’s announced they will marry. This is true; she was a distant cousin by marriage or a daughter of King James I. They started courting in 1495, and married in 1496/1497, but the wedding took place in Edinburgh.

Exposing Traitors: Sir William Stanley

The series uses an interesting way of exposing the traitors in the English court, by Sir Richard Pole coming home with the stolen wax seals of every traitor who has written to support the Pretender, as “proof of treachery from their own hands.” One of them is Sir William Stanley, brother-in-law to Margaret Beaufort, and brother of her husband Thomas Stanley. Everyone is shocked by this treachery.

This happened, and it was traditional for the Stanleys to “change sides” or be noncommittal in their loyalties. William was initially loyal to Richard III thanks to Richard granting him land in North Wales. Out of nowhere, he changed sides in 1485 and supported Henry Tudor’s bid for the throne. His decisive attack at Bosworth Field is what helped secure Henry’s victory. For this, he received the title of Lord Chamberlain.

Nobody knows whether William supported Perkin Warbeck, since the evidence was circumstantial. He confessed, hoping to avoid execution, but Henry felt that to pardon him would encourage further conspiracies and had him beheaded.

Henry VII & the Burgundy Trade Embargo

The show shows Henry VII as mainly being “reactive” in supporting the Pretender, Perkin Warbeck / Prince Richard of York, but in history, he was more proactive.

Perkin first went to Charles VIII of France, but Henry negotiated for his removal. He then went to the Duchy of Burgundy and received support from Margaret of York. Henry complained to the Duke of Burgundy about “harboring a pretender,” and when he was ignored, imposed a trade embargo on Burgundy. This was typical of the real Henry VII’s talent for getting what he wanted through diplomatic channels and financial pressure; later in his reign, he would use similar tactics (smuggling alum out of the Papal districts, withholding trade, taxing imports, and being a “bank” for bankrupt European countries). He and his advisors were very shrewd.

Ennobling Prince Henry as Duke of York

As depicted on the show, Henry ennobled his younger son Henry (the future Henry VIII) as the Duke of York on October 31, 1494, but it makes the idea Elizabeth of York’s, since this show wants to neuter all the men, so all the “good ideas” must come from their wives. 😛 In reality, Henry and his male advisors brought forward the ennobling to combat the threat the Pretender posed. Elizabeth of York had little to do with politics. She was mild-mannered, gentle, and went along with most things.

The series shows the ceremony and the banquet; but the historical event was also celebrated by tournaments in the child’s honor, who was only three years old, but no doubt enjoyed the attention!

Because this Henry is weak and insecure, Lizzie has to remind him he is God’s king, England’s king, and “my king.” Things the real Henry never doubted as soon as he won the kingship.

A Dowager Queen Would Not Commit Treason

After being brought to court because she’s ill, Elizabeth Woodville makes a fool of herself by interrupting Prince Harry’s banquet to announce in front of the court that the whole thing is a sham, her younger son is alive, and urges them to revolt. (“I would also like to propose a toast to the Duke of York, my son, Richard, who is alive and well in Burgundy. Any noble here who fears God should follow him instead of this Pretender, Prince Richard. To Prince Richard, the Duke of York, and rightful King of England.”)

Naturally, this never happened. And it’s effing idiotic.

The real Dowager Queen Elizabeth never denounced her son-in-law in public, nor made any such claims about Perkin Warbeck. And the script makes this one really stupid for doing it. She has seen people killed for less than treason, and she would have been actively conspiring against her own flesh and blood and the murder of her Tudor grandchildren.

(At least the show has Duchess Cecily show reservations against sending “Richard of York” to England. “A betrothal means marriage, and this marriage means war. He is my grandson. How can I be happy about that?” she asks. This is more realistic in terms of how a woman would think about her grandchildren in those times; not eager to send them off to be slaughtered like Elizabeth of York, but concerned that landing in England might get him killed.)

Elizabeth knows Margaret Beaufort was behind the murder of her sons in the Tower (one son, the other escaped) and says divine wrath is coming for her. Historically, she blamed Richard III for the murder of her sons, which is why she and Margaret conspired to bring Henry to England. If her boys could not rule, at least her daughter could be Queen and their children could rule. Her “revenge” was against Richard, not Henry.

Did Margaret Beaufort Murder Jasper Tudor?

Now we come to the worst part of the episode, and the scenes that made me scream bloody murder when this first aired on Starz. I don’t know what Philippa Gregory and Emma Frost have against Margaret Beaufort, but this is character assassination on the highest level, and I won’t stand for it. 😛

(Philippa is a hardcore Richard III fan, so she can’t fathom him doing anything as heinous as getting rid of his nephews, so it has to be someone else’s fault. But she has no problem with him banging his niece. Weird.)

In this series, Margaret Beaufort is responsible for the Princes in the Tower’s death, and everyone except her son and his uncle Jasper seems to know it. She knows it. Her husband knows it. Elizabeth Woodville knows it. After hallucinating about a basin full of blood in her room and freaking out, she runs into the chapel to pray and accidentally confesses the murders to Jasper Tudor, who is furious and accuses her of a terrible crime.

Jasper threatens to tell Henry, who will also be furious, and the entire conversation toward the end is… odd. He says if Henry does not know the truth, he will continue to “execute traitors, while the greatest traitor of all is by his side” (Margaret).

Let’s pause here. Why would it make any difference to Henry who murdered the princes years ago? He won the throne from Richard in battle. In those times, that was interpreted as a sign of divine favor and God choosing you for the throne. If He didn’t want you there, you would have lost. People in that era placed huge amounts of credence in divine authority. Henry’s mother paving the way for him to become king would be sad, but not a disaster; just a step to the throne. It would not make her a traitor, since she is on his side. Henry never mentions God in this show at all, so there’s no sign he’s religious or holds anything sacred, so it wouldn’t even be a violation against the divine order.

Margaret can’t have her son find out the truth, so she smothers Jasper to death in his sickbed. A 5’5” 90 pound rail-thin woman somehow kills a six-foot dude with stick arms (she calls out to God for help; maybe that’s how this miracle occurred!).

Yup. This show has finally gone full “Girl Boss.”

She never murdered Jasper. That’s stupid.

Did Margaret Beaufort Kill the Princes in the Tower?

No. She never killed the Princes in the Tower, for two reasons: 1) She had no access to them, and 2) It does not fit her character.

No Access: Most historians believe Richard III did it because he had the most to gain from their disappearance. They were under his supervision; they vanished from his Tower, and he needed them dead to declare himself King of England rather than to rule as Regent. He is the agreed-upon prime suspect among historians, because the Princes were “closely guarded.” Richard dismissed the boys’ servants, and only his most loyal guards had access to them.

No contemporary sources link Margaret to the crime, and there is no evidence of it. Profiting from the situation (it paving the way for her alliance with Elizabeth Woodville) does not automatically mean she had anything to do with it. She had limited influence at the time and no access to the boys. Yes, she had money, but she could not have offered ANY sum worth the life of the man who killed the princes without Richard’s approval; it would have been an instant death sentence and the wrath of the king would fall upon him and his entire family.

It Does Not Fit Her Character: The White Princess (and The White Queen) paints her as a delusional fanatic who gets accused by various characters of assuming God’s will always align with her own will.

The real Margaret Beaufort was kind, generous, and pious. She strived in every way to live in a way that embodied her Christian faith, including funding colleges, promoting the education of peasants, insisting on public education for girls (not just boys), and opening her house to homeless people, feeding them, educating them, and caring for them until they could find a decent position in a trade or in service. She bought many properties and turned them into halfway houses or donated them for good causes.

She could be a little stubborn and prideful (she wanted to be acknowledged as the King’s mother), but that is not a “sin” and certainly no sign that she would conspire in murders. Her faith does not automatically expunge her from all bad behavior, but a person’s character matters, and what’s written about them in hindsight tells you a lot about who they were and what they valued; she obviously valued her faith.

Her belief at the time would be that murder is a grave sin, one that could condemn her in the afterlife if she went to her death unrepentant and unconfessed. And she never confessed to it.

Unfortunately, Philippa Gregory’s version of her has cemented her in the minds of many people as the “murderer” of the Princes in the Tower. It’s a shame, because Margaret Beaufort was one of the few feminists of the 1500s. A strong, opinionated woman who advocated for women’s rights (education, and for them not to marry too young). A young mother who survived being pregnant at 13. She negotiated her own marriages, actively put her son on the throne, separated from her husband (happily, since she would rather “live as a nun”), and was beloved by her family.

She deserves better than to be maligned by anti-Tudor propagandists.

See you next week, when we talk about Perkin Warbeck!

About the Author: Charity Bishop writes historical fiction, historical fantasy, and suspense novels that explores the darkness in human hearts, and the light that refuses to be extinguished. Discover her books.