The White Princess - General Discussion

[cathy7304]

On 5/30/2017 at 2:04 PM, Kata01 said:

That was me ;) lol I commented the scenes with Lizzie & her mother were like Jan Brady (Marcia Marcia Marcia) from the Brady Bunch moments: Richard Richard Richard!  

I still almost spit out my drink every time I read "car park Richard". Props to you! :)

[turbogirlnyc]

I can't begin to understand how this show is getting higher ratings (IMDB, Rotten Tomatoes, etc.) than The White Queen. Am I missing something? Is it because this focuses more on the Tudors instead of the Plantagenets? I despise both "Lizzie" and Henry. I don't remember hating Lizzie this much in the book. She redeemed herself a bit at the end of this last episode, but still.

I recently reread The King's Curse and it never mentions Margaret Pole believed Perkin was Rochard. And she thinks about him when remembering her brother. It's been a long time since I read TWP. Does Maggie believe it's him in the book?

Edited June 3, 2017 by turbogirlnyc
grammar

[absnow54]

The show's focus on the "curse" and insistence on legitimizing it felt silly when a descendent of Henry VII sits on the throne to this day. Yes his male line died out with his grandson, but his daughter got the job done. It's unfortunate that Margaret barely existed on this show when she'll preserve the family line the same way her mother did.

The best thing this show did was foreshadow Henry VIII's Henry VIII-ness. That actor was just so cute, yet you just knew... I also loved that during Henry's anguishing of the curse on his sons, he paused to ponder "but which son is it?" Like he was willing to sacrifice Harry if it meant they could call it a day and be done with things.  

[CindyBee]

Though the historical falsehoods were off the charts once again, I did enjoy the last episode, just for Jodie Cromer's portrayal of Lizzie.   Thought she did a great job with the silly curse plot line.   And propping up the "weak" Henry when that wasn't the case at all.

Still want daughter Margaret's story told next but the story line seemed to left hanging with the possibility of Margaret Pole taking over.   

[nodorothyparker]

So Lizzie gets no Dynasty style beat down of Margaret Beauford, leaving Henry to throttle her and publicly fling her about like he's skimming her across a pond and Lizzie ... takes that for inspiration?   You find out your mother-in-law has a history of murdering kids and now apparently babies too and your response is to think "hey I too could have inconvenient adversaries executed for fun and profit while my husband is moping about impotently behind the bed curtains over a 20-year-old curse I just told him about five minutes ago?"  

Maggie's speech about not just quietly doing what she was bid anymore would have been great if it hadn't come all of about 10 minutes before the end of the last episode and we don't know history to know that that's pretty much exactly what she did the rest of her life until it still didn't save her.  I love how highborn women can just skulk around this version of London with a hood thrown up over a crown and no one is any the wiser.  Just for kicks we throw in a silly faux Richard execution plot, giving Richard Richard Richard a royal execution instead of the historical public hanging that was deemed appropriate for the commoner they insisted he was until the end, and the added WTH ever detail that Car Park Richard was buried alive.   I wonder how they convinced the Spanish ambassador they'd executed the real deal the second time around.  Did they present him with Richard Richard Richard's head in a box Game of Thrones style?

[MrsE]

CPR buried alive?  What?

[nodorothyparker]

It was one of the many many things Henry was haunted about in this episode.  Both in his telling and in a few quick flashbacks to Bosworth Field we learn that this version of Car Park Richard apparently was still breathing when they tossed him in a grave and started shoveling.  There was a lot of sure, let's go with that despite what the historical record may say this episode for presumably plot reasons, but that one I can't even hazard a guess as to the point of it.

[MrsE]

Good God.  So the idea is that they carried him alive from the battlefield;  that he stayed alive all the way to Leicester;  that he remained alive for the two days his body was displayed;  that he remained alive while he was put in a coffin and buried in Greyfriars church?  Why?  Given that the discovery of his remains at the site of a church was all over the news not so long ago, why would they do that?  

Oh, forget it, I give up trying to make sense of this.  Gregory's book was bad enough but they've outdone even her with the murder of Jasper, Elizabeth rallying the troops, Elizabeth torching Shene and now this.

[Haleth]

I know!  The real story is interesting enough. Why the melodrama?

Good lord, that was awful.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Haleth

[absolutelyido]

The final episode was a more satisfying conclusion than I was expecting after the dreadful prior episode. Things I liked:

-Lizzie gave up all her secrets to Henry early in the episode and they were fully united for the rest of the episode.

-Henry got himself together for the most part. I was expecting him to be a complete basket case for the majority of the episode like he was at the end of the last episode.

-Margaret B. finally being put in her place by both Henry and Lizzie. Loved that Lizzie's last line was "step back" to her.

-No Kathy Gordon nonsense and not much Richard prancing around arrogantly. I suppose it made sense that he was so arrogant since he considered himself the rightful king, but still he bugged me. Maybe it was the actor, but I disliked him from the get go. I liked when Lizzie visited him and he told her that she and her children would have a place of honor in his court and she questioned the notion that no Tudor Lords would rise up against Richard in support of her sons. By this time both Lizzie and Henry realized that ruling was a constant battle, but Richard was too smugly naive to know that.

-Henry telling Lizzie that she was the grace of his life and he never felt that he really deserved her.

-Lizzie dancing with Arthur. He looked so proud to be dancing with her! I thought the actors playing Arthur and Harry were great.

-Wolsey! That was a fun reveal at the end.

Things I disliked or didn't understand:

-Why were Lizzie and Henry so convinced that the oncoming battle would be the end of Henry? There had been four prior battles against Henry in support of a York king (including Bosworth), and four times Henry and his troops prevailed. Why were they so sure he would lose this time? Also, I find it strange that the Scots and Irish would be so eager to once again take up arms in favor of Richard who had abandoned them in the field twice.

[nodorothyparker]

I did like that Lizzie at least posed the question to Richard Richard Richard what happens to her sons if the Yorks take back the throne.  That's something that Elizabeth Woodville, Margaret of Burgundy, and even Maggie have seemed to be glossing over or airily dismissing throughout.  And the thing is that if you believe that Richard Richard Richard is who he says he is and is as good as he claims to be, maybe he really does mean it that he would keep both boys safe, but Lizzie was right in asking what about all the other lords on both sides and later in talking with Henry that there really wouldn't be any way to guarantee their safety once the thrill of victory wore off and the reality of trying to re-establish York rule set in.  

[MrsE]

I expect they knew that Henry VII would be kept safe by the Yorks in much the same way the Henry VI was.  Ahem.

[CindyBee]

31 minutes ago, MrsE said:

I expect they knew that Henry VII would be kept safe by the Yorks in much the same way the Henry VI was.  Ahem.

Yeah I totally wished Lizzie would have brought that up to Richard Richard Richard.  

Does anyone know if a season 2 is being talked about!?  There isn't much left of Lizzie's story in reality but who knows with this production crew if they'll let that bother them.

[nodorothyparker]

She did bring it up.  Richard Richard Richard said Henry was a warrior would want to fall in battle.

There was speculation on season 2 in a couple of articles I read but nothing that sounded terribly optimistic, and as you say there isn't a ton left to Lizzie's story.

[absnow54]

5 minutes ago, CindyBee said:

Does anyone know if a season 2 is being talked about!?  There isn't much left of Lizzie's story in reality but who knows with this production crew if they'll let that bother them.

I think there's a book for Catherine of Aragon in the series, but I don't know what time period it covers, but if it starts with her marriage to Arthur, they could finish off Lizzie's story. I'd rather they go back to the seven year time gap and do a proper enemies to lovers romance between Henry and Lizzie, but that will never happen. 

[Kata01]

I wish I could go back in time and beseech Lizzie and Henry to chop off Maggie's head too...while they were at it anyway. In for a penny in for a pound. What a godawful woman she turned out to be. No regard for her husband or own son. "All my plotting has failed abysmally - how could you, Lizzie?!?!" 

[Haleth]

I'm surprised it didn't end with Arthur dying and Henry being crowned Prince of Wales.

Shut up, Maggie.

[absolutelyido]

43 minutes ago, absnow54 said:

I'd rather they go back to the seven year time gap and do a proper enemies to lovers romance between Henry and Lizzie, but that will never happen. 

Me too.

[WatchrTina]

Does anyone know whatever happened to Kathy Gordon?  Did she really marry a "pretender" who was hanged publicly as a fraud?  Did she bear him a son who "died" in infancy?  Did they really keep her at court thereafter?

[cathy7304]

Did anyone notice little Prince Harry faking sleep & listening while Lizzie was reassuring Prince Arthur that "nothing would happen to you, not you"? He widened his eyes at that. Thanks lady mother, thanks.

Edited June 5, 2017 by cathy7304

[MrsE]

4 hours ago, WatchrTina said:

Does anyone know whatever happened to Kathy Gordon?  Did she really marry a "pretender" who was hanged publicly as a fraud?  Did she bear him a son who "died" in infancy?  Did they really keep her at court thereafter?

She remarried three (I think) times and did remain at court as a favourite of the queen and stayed until HVII's death.  They seem to have been very close friends prompting one observer to speculate as to the nature of the relationship, but no one else seems to have thought anything untoward was going on.  They could of course have married but didn't.  She had no children that survived, and if she did have a child with Richard The Three it died in infancy.  When she was brought to court after Warbeck's capture she was in mourning and that might have been for a child.

IN her will she refers to each of her husbands with the exception of RRR.  She died in 1537, aged 67.

Edited June 5, 2017 by MrsE

[BooBear]

9 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

There was speculation on season 2 in a couple of articles I read but nothing that sounded terribly optimistic, and as you say there isn't a ton left to Lizzie's story.

It seemed like they left it open to have further stories but I don't think I would be back for it.  Perhaps the next series would be half Lizzie's story and something else. Frankly, I didn't love this one. Mostly because it seemed like what should have happened 3 episodes ago. And kind of reminded me of the ending of the godfather.  You know... Lizzie just taking everyone out. Maggie bothered me in the end because she seemed so obsessed with getting Teddy back when that was long since settled.  Plus it would seem she would put her brother above her son and family.  The entire series to me was just a treatise on why you should just take out your enemies immediately because nothing good comes of keeping them around. 

[KBrownie]

4 hours ago, cathy7304 said:

Did anyone notice little Prince Harry faking sleep & listening while Lizzie was reassuring Prince Arthur that "nothing would happen to you, not you"? He widened his eyes at that. Thanks lady mother, thanks.

Yep. 

Proving that she was no better than everything she complained about in regards to her own mother. How many times did she and Henry reference their "beautiful beautiful boy(s)."  At least Elizabeth Woodville didn't kill any innocents. Whoever she cursed had made a move against her. The same was true of Henry. They both ended up just like everything they claimed to dislike about their respective mothers. Murderous hypocrites willing to do whatever it took to retain power for their "boy."  In the context of the show, they acknowledged they were the usurpers and did whatever it took to keep it, no matter how much blood on their hands it took.  Margaret Beaufort was absolutely right at the end. She and Elizabeth were one and the same. And Henry was mad at her for a couple days? And then he was okay?  What was even the point of all that?

And Team Maggie, party of one if necessary. She'd basically been Lizzie and Henry's hostage from day one. They'd used her son and brother as leverage against her, so good for her for not being their good little soldier for once. She was trying to do what was best for her and her brother for once and not what was best for Henry and Lizzie. She knew her son was safe because of his father. I don't blame her for trying to save Teddy. He was an innocent. Maggie didn't owe them anything at that point. It was crystal clear they had no loyalty to her if it went against their goals.  I don't think she had to just accept her brother's fate if there was something she thought she could do. I'm sorry, but I will never be on board with everyone just having to forget their own loved ones and their best interests in favor of Lizzie and Henry's.  Neither of them were worthy of such devotion.  

None of the main figures were worth rooting for at the end. None of them. 

*My comments are based on the context of the show, not whatever the real history may have been. 

Edited June 5, 2017 by KBrownie

[rove4]

13 hours ago, absnow54 said:

I'd rather they go back to the seven year time gap and do a proper enemies to lovers romance between Henry and Lizzie, but that will never happen. 

Yes, I could've tolerated a lot of rearranging of historical facts if they had given me this.  Damn you, seven year time gap!

Lizzie still never said those three little words to Henry or did I miss it?

The last episode was okay, better than the last episode anyway, but I wanted to see a proper comeuppance for the Duchess of Burgundy.

I also wish that Dowager Elizabeth had lived to see her daughter finally and definitively end her (DE's) dreams of power and victory. This show took so many other liberties with history so they may as well have done it.  Henry's forceful expulsion of Margaret B. from his rooms was, however, quite delightful.

It was sad to see Teddy be excuted.  Maggie OTOH should be thankful she still has her head...for now.

I want Prince Arthur to live!!! The Prince Henry actor was very cute but he was uber creepy in that scene where he's supposed to be asleep but he opens one eye as he hears his mother tell Arthur that no harm will come to him.

Ah well, now what saucy period drama to watch next?

[shockermolar]

Quote

Margaret Beaufort ...Henry was mad at her for a couple days? And then he was okay?  What was even the point of all that?

On 5/3/2017 at 11:45 AM, 918lux said:

Well, within the context of the story, he was still not talking to her as of the last scene. Lizzie basically orders H7 to "greet" his mother because they want to present a united front. He bows slightly to her, which shows she's back in the fold, but doesn't actually speak to her. 

[IndianPaintbrush]

So the series ends with Lizzie becoming almost as bad as her mother-in-law?  Ugh.

Wikipedia tells me RRR and the Earl of Warwick attempted to escape the Tower together in 1499.  That seems like pretty good television to me, and I don't understand why they strayed from the real story. It certainly gave Henry a more legitimate reason for executing them.

[iMonrey]

Actually, IndianPaintbush - that part of the story followed historical fact more than I would have expected. Teddy was executed for plotting with Perkin Warbeck to escape. I felt really sorry for him, but apparently the notion that he wasn't quite right in the head is a radical interpretation of just one written statement about his mental stability after years of confinement and isolation in the tower. The show made out like he was never quite right from the start.

The finale was really the only only episode where the titular character played more than a passive role. For a show called The White Princess, Lizzie was surprising peripheral to most of the action. On a pass/fail scale I'd have to say the series was a fail because of that.

I also agree with the poster above who thought more should have been done with their daughter Margaret - the whole series purports to be from the women's perspective and Margaret Tudor is who would ultimately carry on the Tudor line. We could have at least seen her. And why couldn't they have gotten a little red-headed kid to play Prince Harry? It's not as the kid had much acting to do.

I really wanted Henry to kill his mother. I know that didn't happen in real life, but most of this show didn't anyway.

Edited June 5, 2017 by iMonrey

[Scarlett45]

I'm afraid to see the finale- The White Queen was a strong mini series with complex acting and varied perspectives among the women protagonists. The White Princess left the title character so PASSIVE as @iMonrey stated above. This is what they did with 8 episodes?! It started out okay and just went down, down, down hill. 

[Kata01]

The bar was set low after last week's episode (in my opinion the worst of the series, followed closely by Episode Time Jump 5), but the finale was better than I expected.

From the moment her mother pushed her into the Tudor marriage and her first son was born, there was almost an obstinate refusal among her Yorkist relations to recognize or have any empathy toward her divided loyalties. Her husband? Her children? Just blithely throw them away to put her brother on the thrown? Certainly dear old cousin Maggie was on the ready to throw down her own little family in favor of Richard Richard Richard. It became quite clear, crystal, that although she was of a higher station in birth, Richard was better than she deserved. The poor man begged for her life. Both Henry and Lizzie were more than kind in sparing her life. Her lack of gratitude, conflict or any contrition for her actions was appalling, as was she. 

I liked some of the juxtapositions in this episode. For instance, the difference between RichardRichardRichard/Cathy "...but...but...but our titles, the crown, we are royal, we are entitled" of last episode to Henry/Lizzie and their genuine overriding concern above everything for the safety of their sons and Henry's for Lizzie.  Their ultimate choice to choose the crown was less about power and more about it being the only way to ensure the safety of their children. 

Which brings me to the other juxtaposition: even if Perkin believed his assuring words of safety to Lizzie for her & her children, the episode made it clear that the machinations of those closest around him would ensure the opposite in fact. From Cathy Gordon's vow to make Margaret B suffer/pay when she is queen  to the exchange where the Duchess of Burgundy confirmed with a look that Maggie's husband would be killed - no Tudor was safe. If Lizzie became colder, it's because she recognized the reality/the difference between how she may have wanted to reign versus how circumstance forced her to reign. Sometimes there are no winners. For me, clearly, Lizzie/Henry were forced down this path by the endless plotting and machinations of the Yorks. The blood is on York hands.

 

*I had a good long belly laugh when during the Lizzie/Perkin Tower scene he made the remark that Henry was a "soldier" and would fight to the death. Yes, yes, yes he's a soldier-unlike you, son, who runs from battle; deserts his own men in order to flee toward sanctuary. Even Car Park had a chuckle there. 

Edited June 5, 2017 by Kata01

[Haleth]

1 hour ago, iMonrey said:

I really wanted Henry to kill his mother. I know that didn't happen in real life, but most of this show didn't anyway.

As to that,

Spoiler

Margaret outlived both Lizzie and Henry.

[iMonrey]

So much of the latter half of this series relied on the concept that Perkin Warbeck actually was Richard, son of Edward IV and Lizzie's brother. Yet that's generally not a widely held historical belief. It's sort of frustrating that the show all but said "Hey, he's the real deal" - I mean, it was heavily implied by the end but there's still a knowledge gap in there. Where was he between the time he was left in the attic hiding and showed up in Burgundy? It seems like if they wanted to focus so much on this character they should have just made the show about him and fleshed the story out a bit more. And told us one way or another whether he was really Richard. 

Did everyone come away with the impression he was really Richard? Because historically not many people believe he was.

[MrsE]

I have seen it argued that he was living with the merchant in Tournai because he had to in order to be safe and until he was old enough to take the throne for himself.  Bollocks.  He'd have been as safe as houses in Burgundy.  Henry himself lived in exile for 14 years and managed to evade attempts to drag him back to England and he didn't have the power of Burgundy looking after him.  

[nodorothyparker]

Not many historians I've read really think so, but Gregory in her author's notes at the end of these books asserts that she does believe it to be true and so wrote the books to reflect that belief.  

It does seem like if there was any truth to it that he would have surfaced at the court in Burgundy long before he did.  As it was, he was dealing with either European heads who had never met the real Richard or any of the royal Yorks in person or Yorks at the Burgundian court who would at best have last seen the real deal when he was a small child.   I have read that Warbeck bore a general resemblance, which would support one theory that he might have been one of Edward VI many many bastards scattered throughout.  

[Kata01]

1 hour ago, iMonrey said:

Did everyone come away with the impression he was really Richard? Because historically not many people believe he was.

I did not. I believe Lizzie and the rest believed he was or convinced themselves he was, but I said last week that I didn't care either way yet came to the conclusion he was a very good charlatan and I stand by that. He had the looks down, memories down, York demeaner down, but there was something missing about him, something not quite right, lacking. He lived in Burgundy within the York busom for 7 years...the same laugh as her father Lizzie references could have been learned, events memorized (especially with Woodville writing so regularly), etc. He probably did become Richard Richard Richard in his mind like a good con artist. And I don't think it would be so hard to convince them he was. 

[MrsE]

My sons' paternity is beyond dispute;  they both grew up with their father.  Neither laugh like him.  His son by a previous marriage doesn't laugh like him either. I don't know anyone who laughs like their parent(s).  They don't laugh as they did when they were children either.   If he laughed like Edward IV the likelihood is that he learnt to do it.

[nodorothyparker]

Family traits are such a crap shoot that a perceived similarity may mean something or it may be coincidence.  Or, as has been suggested, it may be a practiced deliberate thing.  It's not like any of these people were awash in snapshots to be making any kind of comparisons.  

My oldest child makes a face when he concentrates where he sticks the tip of his tongue through his teeth.  It's something I remember seeing both my maternal grandmother and her father, my great-grandfather, do when I was a child.  Both died long before my son was born.  He would only know that's a family trait if I or somebody else who remembered and specifically wanted him to know about it told him.  His siblings don't do it.

[MrsE]

Or the gesture might be completely his own.

[Constantinople]

I'm guess I'm alone in being the only fan of Maggie.

On the whole, I thought The White Princess fizzled out as the series went on, much like The White Queen

[Kata01]

What grated on me regarding the show, especially when Richard Richard Richard came onto the scene was the declaration that Henry somehow usurped the crown. Car Park usurped the crown from his nephew (no mention of that through the series). Henry won the crown (Car Park). Defended it (Lambert/Burgundy). Defended it again (Perkin ran off). And again (defeated Perkin). (*On the show) How many times did the Yorks feel he needed to defend the damn thing before he was legitimate? 

[meep.meep]

The problem is with the woman who wrote the book's unusual view of history.  She postulates a Lizzie who is in love with Richard III and has to be forced into a marriage with Henry VII after Bosworth, for reasons that make no sense.

In reality, Lizzie had no romantic relationship with her uncle.  Her mother felt that Richard III had usurped the throne from her sons, and so married Lizzie to Henry VII to get it back.  I'm sure in real life Henry was more, "well, I've won the throne so it's mine" and much less "I think I'll go brood about things in the corner."

But it's over now.  The gift of time and all that.

[MrsE]

Indeed;  the crown was Henry's by right of conquest;  if he'd lost at Bosworth he'd have been dead.  The idea that Richard Cubed had a greater claim to the throne even though he'd been defeated is just silly Yorkist worship.  Go up against a king and lose and that's it, you're deaded - although Henry didn't kill him immediately which was, in hindsight, an error of judgement on the part of the man who is regularly accused of slaughtering every York in sight.

Did none of them think it odd that Richard, Richard and Thrice Richard didn't fetch up until after his mother had pegged it?  You know, the woman with absolutely the most credibility when it came to identifying him?

[Moxie Cat]

I was surprised that there wasn't some ending text that briefly explained what was to come, and followed up on Arthur/the curse (which I suppose was applied then to Henry's son Edward as well). Given Henry VIII and Elizabeth's longevities, that curse is a bit flaky, no? Anyway, the lack of explanatory text tells me that someone may be hoping to make another follow up series.

If they do, IMO, they have a good storyline in the kids. Cover Arthur/Katherine/Henry, and side stories of Margaret in Scotland and Mary in France. That way, you could cast many of the major roles from scratch. Bring back the Henry actor, Comer for an ep or two, and Fairley if you need her, but shift the focus to the kids. Use "the Constant Princess" I suppose (did Gregory write any books about the sisters?) I mean, you're not even talking about much of a time jump at this point. I'd love another series that basically links these two shows to the Tudors.

Wolsey! That was great. The actor even favored Sam Neill a little!

Edited June 6, 2017 by Moxie Cat

[Moxie Cat]

2 hours ago, Constantinople said:

I'm guess I'm alone in being the only fan of Maggie.

Nope, I liked Maggie too, and I thought the actress was good. It's not hard to see why she began to back Richard - a different York heir on the throne would have been the only key to getting Teddy out. I really felt for her, and the actress did a great job with her final scene.

[Kata01]

Someday, I hope to be able to drop the phrase "sour whore's tricks" into casual conversation. #Goals 

Edited June 6, 2017 by Kata01

[iMonrey]

Quote

He had the looks down, memories down, York demeaner down, but there was something missing about him, something not quite right, lacking.

I'm reasonably certain that even if I had not seen my sibling in 10+ years I would still be able to positively identify them. Perhaps this speaks to the utter lack of interaction between Lizzie and her brothers when they were children, but I still find if incredible that she wouldn't know for certain one way or another upon meeting with and speaking to Perkin Warbeck. There are just certain pieces of knowledge siblings share regardless of how close they were growing up. "Remember that time mom and dad were arguing about such and such? Remember when I put itching powder in your bed?" Stuff nobody else could know about.

Quote

What grated on me regarding the show, especially when Richard Richard Richard came onto the scene was the declaration that Henry somehow usurped the crown. 

William the Conqueror also "usurped" the throne and he's arguably the most famous king of England. Like William I, Henry VII won by right of conquest, which is just as legit as right of succession. I, too, find it hard to believe he would have felt deep down he'd "usurped" the throne. Both he and his mother seemed to think it was his divine birthright to be king.

One nice little detail I appreciated was the hat Henry was wearing in the final episode - a replica of the hat he wore in the best known portrait of him.

[NYCNJbear06]

Now that the series has concluded I guess for me I am still stuck in a place of confusion as to why they went in the direction they did.  You have a series that is based on the Gregory books but what was shown on screen was a different take on what was depicted in the books.  So what you have is (from a historical point of view) a bastardized view of a bastardized view.  

Book discrepancies

·         There is no way that the Yorks would speak so freely about the “curse” amongst themselves let alone Lizzie’s “confession” to Henry.

·         Lizzie and others speaking so freely about her affair with her uncle and in confirming it was a thing

·         Lizzie and Henry’s trip to Spain

·         Duchess of Burgundy’s cloak and dagger trip to England

·         Lizzie’s entire interaction with Perkin and the admission that she accepted him as her brother

·         Lizzie becoming a “dark Queen” pushing the murder of her cousin teddy and turning her back on her York-ness so completely and becoming completely Tudor

·         My lady the Kings mother murdering Jasper and confessing to Henry her role in the Princes in the tower murder and the murder Perkin’s son

Speculation

I wonder if the next iteration of the story is the White Prince – the story of Arthur and Katherine of Aragon and Henry VIII’s story.  Or something around Maggie who led a very tumultuous life.  If you think she always looked on the verge of an anxiety attack in the White Princess at the hand of the Tudors this was nothing compared to how Henry VIII treated her. 

Last thought  the morbid person in me kinda wished that in the beheading scene in front of the royal children there was a more visible reaction by Prince Harry as a foreshadowing of his future acts and lasting legacy of removing heads from bodies.

[MrsE]

He wouldn't be the white prince though, as the reference is to the white rose of York.  Arthur's badge (other than his personal one) would be the Tudor rose, combining the white rose with the red rose of Lancaster.

Edited June 6, 2017 by MrsE

[absolutelyido]

4 hours ago, iMonrey said:

William the Conqueror also "usurped" the throne and he's arguably the most famous king of England. Like William I, Henry VII won by right of conquest, which is just as legit as right of succession. I, too, find it hard to believe he would have felt deep down he'd "usurped" the throne. Both he and his mother seemed to think it was his divine birthright to be king.

That didn't make sense to me either. Richard III usurped the crown from his nephews. Until "The Boy" appeared everyone assumed the two Princes were dead, but no one knew who killed them. But once Henry found out his mother had killed the Princes (or Prince Edward and a servant boy if you believe The Boy was really Prince Richard) then he felt he had no right to the crown? Huh? I think the only reason they had Henry express this doubt was so Lizzie could save the day by giving him her pep-talk about fighting for the crown. 

On 6/5/2017 at 9:07 AM, rove4 said:

Lizzie still never said those three little words to Henry or did I miss it?

Sigh, no she didn't. Emma Frost (showrunner) answered questions on Facebook on Sunday before the finale and expressed that she and the other writers were surprised that many people were unhappy about that and felt that the love story hadn't been fully developed. She said that Lizzie showed Henry that she loved him even though she never said it. I though Henry's declaration that Lizzie was the grace of his life was much needed after the Kathy Gordon stuff, and I thought that there should have been a similar declaration by Lizzie. They made much of the fact that this story was from the women's perspective and that it was an all female writing team, so perhaps they wanted to avoid a "stereotypical" women's story focused on romance and tell more of a story of women's behind-the-scenes power. But I, for one, could have used less of the mother's and Burgundy scheming and a little more romance dammit!.

[ennui]

On 6/5/2017 at 2:59 AM, BooBear said:

And kind of reminded me of the ending of the godfather.

Kind of? That was all I could think. And then I thought that The Godfather was 1972 and they were gambling that some hadn't seen it. 

[ennui]

On 6/5/2017 at 4:37 PM, meep.meep said:

She postulates a Lizzie who is in love with Richard III and has to be forced into a marriage with Henry VII after Bosworth, for reasons that make no sense.

In reality, Lizzie had no romantic relationship with her uncle.  Her mother felt that Richard III had usurped the throne from her sons, and so married Lizzie to Henry VII to get it back.

I've read that theory in other historical fiction, as well, though, that Lizzie loved Car Park. Even if she didn't love him romantically, she grew up with him, and it would be difficult to love someone who had killed your uncle.

I thought Lizzie and HVII were betrothed as very young children, as was the custom. Well before the boys in the tower.