01x02 - Perkin Warbeck & The Princes in the Tower

[bunniefuu]

On the streets of London,

crowds have gathered
to watch an execution.

The condemned man
has traveled Europe for eight years

claiming to be the long-lost son
of King Edward IV.

The younger
of the Princes in the Tower.

He's launched invasions
to seize the English throne

from the new Tudor King, Henry VII.

Now, he will die
like a common criminal,

Perkin Warbeck, the pretender.

It is first to be known

that I was born
in the town of Tournai in Flanders.

But today, some historians are asking
if his confession was a cover-up.

And since then,
they called me the Duke of York.

Was he the young prince after all?

Is this one of history's
greatest injustices?

I'm Dan Snow.

And I'm Professor Suzannah Lipscomb.

Together, we're investigating
the world of the Tudors

in a whole new way,

by starting at the grizzly end.

In this turbulent time
of shifting allegiances,

volatile politics
and a clash of religions,

many of the key players end up
with their heads on the block.

We're gonna uncover
the critical moments

that led them to the executioner.

We'll discover fresh insights
and examine new evidence.

As far as the people around her
were concerned, she was innocent.

And challenge
how we see these individuals

and this pivotal point
in Europe's history.

-So Cecil is doctoring the evidence?
-Absolutely.

Because understanding why these people
were convicted and k*lled

is to understand the Tudors.

The Tower of London,

witness to so much history,
mystery and violent executions.

If only these walls could talk.

I don't know about you,

but every time
I come to the Tower of London,

I think about
the ultimate mystery here,

that we associate with this place,
the Princes in the Tower.

Edward IV dies, his two sons
are sent here for safekeeping,

looked after by their uncle Richard,
later Richard III,

but surprise, they're
suddenly declared illegitimate,

Richard is put on the throne,

takes the crown for himself,
and the boys shortly after disappear.

So it becomes
that ultimate royal mystery.

Dan, it's always been debated,
hasn't it?

And much of the evidence comes

from a visiting Italian friar,
Dominic Mancini.

We know the boys would've been here
in the medieval palace,

probably in that tower,
now called the Bloody Tower.

But Mancini says they were moved
into the tower's inner apartments,

so probably the White Tower.

He says that they were seen
at the doors and windows

more and more rarely
until they disappeared altogether.

But he doesn't actually
say they were k*lled.

That comes out in other places,
decades later.

And we're left asking,
what if they survived?

That brings us to the extraordinary
story of Perkin Warbeck.

So he says that
he is Richard Duke of York,

the younger
of the Princes in the Tower.

But then when he confesses,
he says that he's Perkin Warbeck,

a boy from Tournai in Belgium.

But of course he's gonna confess.

I would confess
if I was a prisoner of Henry VII.

I don't think
we can necessarily trust that.

That raises the possibility that
this is the ultimate Tudor cover-up.

It's winners
writing the history books.

Is Perkin Warbeck actually
one of the world's greatest imposters,

or was he Richard Duke of York,
and we have to rewrite history?

To find out, I'll be heading
to mainland Europe

to see who recognized this man
as the rightful king of England.

And I'm on the trail of the origin
of this extraordinary story.

First up, I'm heading

to where the man claiming to be
Richard Duke of York first emerged...

Cork in the southwest of Ireland...

to see if the seeds of his demise
were present right from the start.

In late 1491,

a merchant ship sailed in
through this narrow mouth,

leaving the Atlantic behind

and entering
one of Europe's great harbors.

On board was a young man

who would soon become embroiled
in the power politics of Europe.

He landed here eight years

after the disappearance
of the Princes in the Tower

and soon began attracting attention.

When I was at school
and first heard the story,

I was always told he was a pretender.

That story always starts
with a handsome young man

arriving at the harbor in Cork

and strutting his stuff
up and down the quayside.

He was really a male model.

He was wearing fancy clothing

and his job was to be
a walking advertisement

for a traveling textile merchant.

The people of Cork thought
he looked like royalty,

and, encouraged by locals,

this well-dressed man
in his late teens soon claimed

that he was
one of the missing princes,

Richard Duke of York.

That's the accepted story,

that's the version told and retold
over the centuries.

But all that depends
on what we learn from the confession.

For the moment, let's forget all that
and try to look at the evidence.

What do we really know
about the arrival of this young man

on the scene in Ireland?

I'm meeting Dr. Simon Egan to find out
why Warbeck surfaced here in Cork,

a city at this time
under English control.

Tell me about Cork in the 1490s.

Cork is a town on the edge
of the edge of the English world.

Most of the center
of English government

is concentrated
on the eastern seaboard,

at Dublin,
and the further west you go,

the more impressionistic
English power becomes.

Does that mean it's a place
that's ripe for instability,

a little breakaway occasionally?

Cork has the nickname
the Rebel County.

Inhabitants of Cork have benefited
enormously from the instability

created by the Wars of the Roses.

They've been making money,
operating outside

the bounds of royal authority
and many of them would be quite keen

to see this instability continue on
for as long as possible.

The Wars of the Roses
had been a brutal 30-year conflict

between the Royal Houses of York
and Lancaster over the English throne.

In 1485, it finally ended
when the last Yorkist, Richard III,

was beaten in battle
by Lancastrian Henry Tudor,

now King Henry VII.

But his victory wasn't good news
for the residents of Cork,

who had backed the Yorkists.

For them, Perkin Warbeck
was an opportunity to hit back.

So what's the first that Henry hears
about what's stirring here?

Henry's no fool. He has spies
in different places. Rumors travel.

He hears that there
is an individual impersonating

one of the Princes in the Tower.

By the spring of 1492,

Henry dispatches
a warship to Irish waters.

Cork is not specified,
but the timing is very interesting.

Henry had good reason to be worried.

While the Princes in the Tower

were directly descended
from King Edward IV,

Henry VII was connected
to the royal line more tenuously

via an illegitimate bloodline.

To bolster his connection,
Henry married Elizabeth of York,

sister of the two princes.

Their union forged
the new Tudor Dynasty.

But if one of the Princes in the Tower
was still alive,

he would have a stronger claim
to the throne than Henry.

The news of this young man
traveled fast

and it wasn't long before
he was invited to an audience

with one of Henry's great enemies,
the King of France.

You can see why Henry VII
is getting nervous at this point.

Things are gathering pace.

This young man is on his way
to meet with the King of France.

I'd love to know
what they're all thinking.

Do they believe that this is Richard?

Or do they think something else
is going on?

Across the channel, Warbeck was about
to become Henry's worst nightmare.

I'm tracing the next leg
of Perkin Warbeck's journey.

In the summer of 1492,
the French King,

Charles VIII promised
to support Warbeck's claim

to the English throne.

So the young man traveled from Cork
to Amboise in Central France,

to join him here at the French Court.

Back then, the Chateau of Amboise
was even larger

and one of the most
lavish palaces in France.

Whether prince or imposter,

Warbeck had arrived at the heart
of European power politics.

What I want to know is,

did the French King really believe
this young man was Richard?

Or did he have his own motives
for helping a pretender?

-How nice to have you here.
-Lovely to be here.

I'm hoping Prof. Charles Giry-Deloison
can shed some light.

Tell me about Charles VIII
as King of France.

What sort of man was he?

He's a young king.

I believe he wants
to bring a change to France,

to his kingdom
and his first preoccupation

is how to get hold of Brittany.

Brittany was an independent Duchy
with close ties to England.

Charles wanted to unite it
with the rest of France

and this worried Henry.

He feared that a French presence
all along the Channel

might make it easier to invade England
and so vowed to protect Brittany.

Charles invites Perkin Warbeck here
to France.

Why does he do that?

I think Charles wants to use Perkin
in his negotiations with Henry VII.

Does he believe Perkin is Richard?

That nobody knows.
But that doesn't really matter.

What matters is how can he use him
to get what he wants?

Henry knew all too well

what the backing
of the French King could mean.

Seven years earlier, Charles
had supported another young man

with a dubious claim
to the English throne,

Henry himself,

providing the funds and troops
vital for his defeat of Richard III.

Fearing Charles was about
to do the same for Warbeck,

Henry attacked northern France.

He agreed to sign a peace treaty
only if the French King promised

never to support Warbeck

or any other claimant
to the English throne.

Perkin Warbeck is clearly
having an effect.

But I love the fact that
before that treaty came into being,

Perkin was ahead of the game
and he had fled.

While Suzie tracks down
Warbeck's next move,

I'm taking a step back

to find out more
about the two Princes in the Tower.

Because if Henry VII was so worried,

surely that suggests
people at the time

thought it possible
that one or both of them survived.

And that question's brought me here
to Canterbury Cathedral.

What a space.

It's one of the finest,

most overwhelming
historic sites in Britain.

I never tire of seeing this.
The scale of it.

England's first cathedral,

it has been
central to the country's religious

and political life for centuries.

And some amazing


has secrets to reveal.

Well, that is the window that
I've come to see, the Royal Window,

and in a band across the middle

you have a remarkable family portrait
of Edward IV and his royal family.

You've got his wife over there
to the right, Elizabeth,

their daughters to the far right,

and this is the exciting bit,
you have the two princes,

you have Richard and Edward kneeling
at prayer, crowns on their heads.

Now that is one of the only
contemporary images

we have of the princes.

It was installed around 1480.

So just two, three years

before they apparently disappeared
in the Tower of London.

What a treasure.

The accepted view is that
the princes were k*lled

on the orders of their uncle,
Richard III,

but historian Matt Lewis...

-Hey Matt.
-Hi Dan, lovely to see you.

...believes that one or maybe both
of the princes could have survived.

There is no record within England

of the death
of the princes in the tower

during Richard III's reign.

It's a story that seems
to arrive with Henry Tudor

and he has an interest
in allowing that story to spread.

Remember, Henry's claim
to the throne was tenuous.

The worse he could make
his predecessor look,

the more secure
his own position would be.

What's the most compelling case
that they didn't die there?

I'm quite interested
in the human evidence,

so the behavior of people who
would be affected by either the deaths

or the continued existence
of the princes in the tower.

Key amongst them is their mother,
Elizabeth Woodville.

So, in 1484, she gives
all of her daughters into the care

of their uncle, Richard III.

If she is absolutely convinced

that Richard has m*rder*d
his nephews, her sons,

how are you handing
your daughters over to that man?

One of the other key things is
Richard's actions around this time.

If he's k*lled the princes,

he could've just claimed
that they died of natural causes,

he could've mourned his poor nephews.

Why allow the mystery
to linger and develop?

These are just some
of the many arguments

historians have presented to suggest
the princes could have survived.

Of course, this doesn't prove
Warbeck was one of them.

But it does at least show
how people at the time

could have believed he was.

The question now is who else
could Warbeck convince to back him?

I want to find out who else

Perkin Warbeck managed
to convince of his royal blood.

So I'm retracing
the next stage of his journey,

from France east to Malines.

Modern-day Mechelen in Belgium.

In 1492, it was a wealthy city
ruled by the State of Burgundy.

Warbeck came here to meet
a powerful figure, Margaret of York.

The widow of the Duke of Burgundy,

she was also sister
to the Yorkist Kings,

Richard III and Edward IV,
and the aunt of the two princes.

Keen to meet the young man
claiming to be her nephew,

Margaret received Warbeck
here at her palace.

This was a moment

that could define everything for him

because if he was
Richard Duke of York,

this was a family reunion,
but if he was a pretender,

this was his moment of greatest risk,
the biggest test yet.

So, would he be welcomed
with open arms?

Or would he be outed as an imposter?

Dr. Margreet Brandsma
has explored this pivotal encounter.

The strongest evidence we have
is a letter which Margaret wrote.

She describes in much detail
how she was immediately,

completely certain that it was him.

By all accounts,
it was an emotional meeting.

So, was Margaret convinced
the person standing in front of her

was her nephew?

I think it had been decided in advance
that she was gonna recognize him,

because Henry VII
made an alliance with France,

and that was very much
against Burgundy's interests

because they were at w*r with France.

So that's fascinating

'cause you're reframing this
not as a moment of sentimentality,

a family reunion, but as something
deliberate and strategic.

It was really
a high-level political game,

because by recognizing him,
that was a threat to the English King.

Just as in Amboise,

here we have another big player
with an ulterior motive.

Margaret's adopted land of Burgundy
would benefit politically

if Henry were ousted
from the English throne

and replaced with an ally.

It was also personal.

Her brother, Richard III,
had died at the battle of Bosworth

where Henry had won the crown.

She had so much to gain from saying
that he was Richard Duke of York.

In the end,
this piece of evidence doesn't tell us

whether he was Richard
or whether he wasn't,

it just tells us that
it was useful to say that he was.

Warbeck stayed several months
at Margaret of York's court

and during that time,

he used her connections to start
approaching other big names.

I've heard that one of his letters,

written in August 1493,
is here at the British Library.

Look at that. That does not look old
enough to be written 500 years ago.

-I know. It's beautiful, isn't it?
-Beautiful.

-Very neat hand.
-What are we looking at?

This is a letter
sent to Queen Isabella of Spain

from Perkin Warbeck.

The main body of the letter
was written by a secretary

but I'm certain
that he added the name Richard.

Isn't it amazing to be able
to see that after all these years?

And what makes this
particularly special

is that it gives us
a firsthand account

of his life, his claims.

He is really making the point
that he is Richard Duke of York,

second son of the late King Edward IV.

He tells the story
that his older brother,

the Prince of Wales,
died a miserable death.

Whereas "I, my life was spared

due to my tender age
of about nine years

and my innocence."

The letter details how,
after he left the Tower,

two men took him to the continent

and crucially, it asks Isabella

to support him
in an invasion of England.

You've got to be sure of yourself
if you're signing yourself "Richard",

writing these diplomatic letters
to the Queen of Spain Isabella.

I mean, if he's an imposter,
he is really into this role, isn't he?

Yeah, absolutely.

Queen Isabella did not end up
supporting Warbeck.

But behind the scenes,

Henry VII was gathering information
on the young claimant

and soon he began
readying England for w*r.

Henry must have thought
Warbeck was a credible threat

and that there were
other powerful people backing him.

I want to know who they are
and what they were hoping to achieve.

We have got to follow the money.

Back in Mechelen,
I've been digging into who else

Margaret of York
helped Warbeck approach.

When Henry made peace
with Charles VIII,

he cut-off one source of support
for the pretender.

Unfortunately for Henry,
this created another.

Maximilian I was a powerful
and ambitious German king

who would later become Emperor
of the Holy Roman Empire.

He had been a close ally of Henry's,

but he didn't like England and France
making peace.

Perkin was Maximilian's chance
for payback.

In November 1493, Warbeck arrived
in Vienna at the court of Maximilian.

And we have this note, which
is kept in the Vienna State Archives,

which talks about why Maximilian
decided to back Warbeck.

It's absolutely fascinating.

It says that this Duke of York

is willing to present himself
before the King of England

to prove
that he is the legitimate heir

and he will do so by showing them

"three natural signs on his body
that cannot be counterfeited",

which are on his mouth, on his eye
and a mark on his thigh.

And it's said if it's found
that he is not the true heir,

then he submits himself entirely
to justice.

But if it turns out that he is,
he should be received as a king.

This is tantalizing evidence
that makes me start to wonder

if this really could be
Prince Richard.

We've heard people believed

the princes could have
escaped the Tower,

and Warbeck's letter to Queen Isabella
supports this story.

Now we hear he's prepared
to parade himself

not only in front of King Henry VII

but also Henry's wife,
Elizabeth of York,

Richard's own sister.

And this bold gesture pays off.

It's convincing enough
to secure Maximilian's help.

And that backing means money,
and it means troops.

This young man was now ready
to stake his claim

to the English throne.

In July 1495, Perkin Warbeck,
or Prince Richard,

launched his first invasion

here on the beaches
of Southeast England,

near Deal in Kent.

Now funded by King Maximillian,

Warbeck and his troops
planned to gather local support

and march on London.

An advanced party of 300 men
hit this beach,

they move inland and plant
their standards on English soil.

Perkin Warbeck, though,
doesn't come ashore at that point.

Perhaps he felt
things were going a little too well

and it was a wise move.

'Cause a group of English defenders
up there in Sandwich

march down the coast
and hurl themselves

at the men on this beach.

Arrows thudding down,
the 300 men are forced to retreat.

They pile into the sea
clinging onto rowing boats,

heading back out to the fleet.

Warbeck is absolutely helpless.

He's got no choice
but to sail on down the coast.

Warbeck was not ready to give up

and his next attack
would come from the north.

In November 1495,

Perkin Warbeck made his way here,
to Stirling Castle.

At this time, Scotland was a separate
sovereign kingdom to England,

and Stirling was its most important
royal residence.

It was here, four months
after the fiasco at Deal,

that Warbeck met
with Scotland's ruler, King James IV.

When Warbeck arrived here at Stirling,

he was welcomed by the Scottish king
as if he were a prince.

He was treated like a royal guest
and dressed in clothes fit for a king.

Everything suggested
that James thought that

he was Prince Richard Duke of York.

This was a game changer for Warbeck.

Scotland was the perfect ally,

this the ideal place
to launch an invasion.

Young and fiercely ambitious,
James had come to the throne

heading a rebellion
against his own father.

In Warbeck, he saw an ally

whose cause could bring him
fame and glory.

Golly, look at that!

But Prof. Michael Brown...

Michael, what an amazing place to be.

...believes there was more
than personal glory motivating James.

There's a pragmatic value

to treating Warbeck
as the rightful King of England.

Scotland is geographically
on the edge of European politics,

and I think Perkin Warbeck
provides James

and his advisors with a way
to elevate Scotland's standing,

to give them a chip in the game.

And James went a step further
than most in backing Warbeck.

He also arranged his marriage.

Who does he choose as a wife?

Perkins' chosen bride is a noblewoman,
Catherine Gordon,

the daughter of the Earl of Huntley,

probably the most powerful nobleman
in Northern Scotland.

So it's demonstrating,
I think, James' belief in Perkin.

It's part of showing that

this man is being treated
as Richard Duke of York.

For James, the union ensured
that if Warbeck succeeded,

England and Scotland
would be inextricably linked,

and it wasn't long before the two men
launched an attack on King Henry VII.

As the army crossed over into England,
Warbeck issued a proclamation.

In it, he called Henry
his extreme and mortal enemy.

He said that Henry
had abused people's minds,

that he had called him
false nicknames,

"Perkin Warbeck,"
and that he had bribed the lords,

giving them vast sums of money
in order to follow him.

Warbeck clearly thought
that all this would stir the crowds

into following him in their thousands.

But they didn't.

Warbeck and the Scots King were
met with almost total indifference.

When the uprising didn't happen,

James' troops laid waste
to English villages.

Warbeck's response
tells us something new,

he was horrified.

Less than two days into the invasion,

he told James
his kingship meant nothing

if it was obtained by destroying
the land of his fathers.

Whether these were the actions
of an imposter in over his head

or the genuine concern
of a true English prince,

it seems Warbeck was unprepared
for the dirty side of kingship

and he soon left James' court.

Warbeck was on the move again.

But here in Scotland, we've
got a glimpse of his character.

There's the invasion attempt
from which he retreated

and it was James, particularly,
who wanted to make w*r.

When it comes to Margaret of Burgundy,
Maximilian and others

we've seen they all had their own
agendas when it came to Warbeck.

Did he actually want the throne?

Or was he being manipulated
by the most powerful rulers in Europe?

A pawn from the start?

I'm heading
to the far southwest of England

because I think there's a clue to this
in Warbeck's next move.

He'd received a timely invitation
to go to Spain,

but then he heard the Cornish
were planning their own uprising

against Henry VII,

so now Warbeck faced a choice.

Head off to sunny Spain
or harness this ready-made rebellion,

march with the Cornishmen,

and have one more crack
at the English throne?

Warbeck didn't take the easy option.
He chose Cornwall.

In September 1497,

Warbeck arrived by ship
near Land's End with about 120 men

and then began to journey inland
to drum up support.

By the time they reached Bodmin,

his force numbered over 3,000 men.

Finally, Warbeck was gaining traction.

Initially, it felt like
he was in with a chance.

Here at Bodmin, he was acclaimed
King of England by his followers,

King Richard IV.

But this glory was not to last.

As they continued their march
up country,

they were confronted by Henry's army

and the Cornish rebels melted away.

Warbeck was finally captured.

So who had Henry caught?
A pretender to the throne?

Or the real deal,
Richard Duke of York?

After six years journeying
through the courts of Europe,

Perkin Warbeck had finally been caught
by King Henry VII.

For the c*ptive, it could all be over.

First, Henry wanted to meet him
face to face.

It was here at Taunton Castle
that the two men finally met,

and it is in here
that Henry manages to secure

that all-important confession
from Warbeck

that lies at the heart
of this whole story.

I've always been fascinated about
what that meeting was actually like

and the vital question,

did Warbeck make that confession
under duress?

Prof. James Clark has researched
this dramatic moment.

What was
this extraordinary meeting like?

The accounts we have tell us

Warbeck almost immediately
falls to his knees

and wants to beg for mercy.

The King says to him,
"Look at these men around me."

"These men knew Richard Duke of York,
as a young boy,

which of these men do you recognize?"

You must imagine that everybody
is holding their breath.

Because if there is any authenticity
in this whole story,

it's gonna come out
and Warbeck immediately says,

"I don't recognize any of them.
I don't know any of them."

The accounts, albeit all written from
the point of view of the Tudor regime,

want us to believe that
he is very ready to sort of be freed

of this whole great conspiracy
that has been built up around him.

That's swept him along.

Yeah, and he wants to shrug it off
and be free again.

Warbeck then allegedly made
the now famous confession,

telling Henry
that he was just Perkin Warbeck,

a boy from the Low Countries.

And Henry immediately prints copies
and spreads them far and wide.

On the surface, it seemed
like an open and shut case.

Perkin Warbeck brought here,
meets the king,

goes down on his knees,
confesses to everything,

seems pretty happy actually to have
the burden of it off his shoulders.

The problem is that's what
Henry VII wants us to think

and he's in charge of this scene.

He's in the charge of the reports,
the information that gets out.

Henry had
such a strong vested interest

in pushing this story,

he needed to protect the new dynasty
he was creating.

And what's also intriguing
is the reaction,

or lack of it, from Henry's own wife,
Elizabeth of York, Richard's sister.

If the young man was a pretender,
why didn't she say publicly,

"This isn't my brother"?

But she stays silent
and Warbeck is kept at court,

rather than in jail, for eight months.

All very strange
if he was an imposter.

We need to take a closer look
at the authenticity of the confession.

Back in Belgium, I'm tracking down
an intriguing version

of this much debated text.

All surviving copies of the confession
in English

are derived from those
distributed by Henry VII

and were printed years later.

Light on detail, it's impossible
to know if they're real

or just Tudor propaganda.

But here in Kortrijk, close
to Perkin's alleged hometown Tournai,

is the only other known version
in the world.

It's in French

and it seems it was copied
from a collection of papers

sent to Belgium not long
after Warbeck supposed confession.

Wow!

This is where the confession starts.

Fantastic.

Here is the name
of Pierrequin in French. Perkin.

Pierrequin.

It makes much more sense.

"Perkin" in English is a strange name,
whereas Pier or Pierre is normal.

It's very normal.

And actually the "quin" means
it's little Pierre, little Peter.

Little Peter?

Yes, because he wasn't
officially an adult yet

at that time.

Oh, wow! Gosh.

And the confession
is equally exciting.

There's a whole chunk of text
that isn't in the English versions.

The confession tells us

he was the son
of the controller of Tournai,

and lists his family members,

but it also gives
all kinds of other details.

A man called Jean Baudoulle

had taught him
to play the manichordium,

it's a clavichord,

and he'd done so at the Cathedral
of Notre Dame in Tournai.

The confession charts
Warbeck's movements around Europe,

specifying the names of people he met,
including a knight with one eye,

and even the name of the ship he took.

"Le Nez de la Reine."
"The Queen's Nose."

So my sense about this confession

is that it gives
all sorts of telling details.

This is the sort of detail
that as a historian I look for

when I'm trying to be persuaded about
the truth of someone's testimony.

And they're the sort of detail
that I think you only get

from genuine memory.

Could this be
Perkin's original confession?

The language certainly suggests
that it was given in French,

perhaps Warbeck's native tongue.

Does this mean that
he was an imposter after all?

I've been looking through the files
in Kortrijk Archives

and I've found something exciting
in the same collection of papers

as Warbeck's confession.

This is a letter written by Pierrequin

to his mother Catherine.

I find this quite emotional.

So it starts, "Ma mère' my mother,
I find myself in such perplexity

that now if you don't help me,
I will be in great danger".

And he gives her details
so that she might know it's him.

He says to her, "Do you remember
how I left with the merchant Berlo

and do you remember when you said
goodbye to me, you were crying

and how my father walked me
to the gate and remember..."

This is almost the best detail of all.

"...remember
the beautiful pig keeper".

You can imagine, can't you,
that a boy might've noticed

that the woman keeping the pigs
was particularly pretty.

He goes on to say

that the King of England
now has him in his hands.

And then there is a P.S.

It's a very moving P.S., he says.

"Mother, please could you send me
a bit of money to help me,

because my guards are more amiable
when you give them something".

I mean, if this is a forgery,
it's a really good one.

For me, this letter is the smoking g*n

that convinces me that Warbeck
was an imposter after all.

And just down the road,
in his hometown of Tournai,

all the pieces of the puzzle
come together.

You can see the scale
and majesty of this place.

This is no provincial backwater.

And the fact is Perkin Warbeck
says in his confession

that he is the son of someone
who is the controller of the city.

So he comes from a family
that is elite and wealthy.

He learned to play the clavichord
in this cathedral, so he was learned.

This is someone who had
the aristocratic bearing

that meant he could be mistaken
for a possible King of England.

This young man
had spun a convincing tale

and had come close
to toppling the English King,

but now his days were numbered.

With our investigation
coming to a close,

it's time to meet up
back where we started,

at the Tower of London...

because after months
of relative freedom in Henry's court,

this is where Perkin Warbeck winds up.

Let's put your cards on the table.

At the end, where do you stand?
Perkin Warbeck, prince or pretender?

Well, I was genuinely starting
to be swayed by the arguments

that he was Richard Duke of York.

Then I want to see the confession
and it has those idiosyncratic details

which seem to me to come from memory.

I don't think
it's invented propaganda.

So he must be Perkin Warbeck
or Pierrequin Warbech.

Being allowed to roam free
and mix with people,

you could argue that's Henry VII
going, "Nothing to see here."

"I want people meeting him,
hearing his confession."

"Let's get it out there.
Give it oxygen."

Yes, and it is repeated.

We have it being passed around

to ambassadors,
to the royal courts of Europe.

That what it comes down to in the end,
that's why he dies,

because Henry VII wants
a prestigious international marriage

for his son, Arthur.

And the Spanish say,

"Okay, there needs to not be any drop
of doubtful blood in the realm".

And then Warbeck tries to escape
and he's captured, he's brought here.

But then he tries to escape again
and that's the final straw.

Now, armed with all we've learnt,

it's time to look again
at Warbeck's final moments.

On the morning
of the 23rd November 1499,

Perkin Warbeck was dragged
through the streets,

from the Tower of London to Tyburn.

He was to be hanged,

a punishment usually
reserved for common thieves.

And as he reached the gallows,
he read his confession one last time.

It is first to be known

that I was born in
the town of Tournai in Flanders.

Ever since this young lad
had appeared in Ireland...

They told me
that I had no reason to fear.

...he'd won the backing
of Europe's leaders.

That they would help me
with all their power

against the King of England.

And raised armies with which
to claim the throne he said was his.

And since then,
they called me the Duke of York,

second son of King Edward.

It's hard to tell
how much was down to him

and how much he was used
by Henry's enemies.

But now, he would pay
the ultimate price.

With Perkin's death,

Henry VII was able
to consolidate his reign

and establish a dynasty

that would last
for more than 100 years,

and forever change
the face of England: The Tudors.

Imagine how different
our world would be

if Perkin had succeeded.