Explain why Perkin Warbeck remained a threat to the security of Henry VII for so many years.

Authors Avatar

History

Explain why Perkin Warbeck remained a threat to the security of Henry VII for so many years.

Perkin Warbeck was the second Yorkist pretender to the English throne after Lambert Simnel was defeated at the Battle of Stoke in 1487. Between the years 1491-99, he posed a significantly destabilising threat to Henry VII in dynastic terms, impersonating Richard of York, the younger son of Edward IV. The successes of Warbeck, which led him to remain a threat to the King’s security, may be largely categorised into the support from foreign powers during this period and discontent existing in England due to Henry’s methods of ruling with relation to sustaining an authoritative and respected status both within his own country and abroad. Whilst it is possible to challenge such a concept of a threat, Warbeck was eventually executed in November 1499, demonstrating in a modern context that the King’s perception of this pretender was one of great concern for his position.

        Steven Gunn has suggested that ‘Henry was a usurper and carried with him the problems of this title’. Upon taking the English throne, it was inevitable that Henry would face opposition to his rule, particularly in consideration of his lack of familiarity with English politics and those supporters of the Yorkist claim. With the knowledge that Richard III intended John de la Pole to inherit the crown and having already fought at the Battle of Stoke to secure his position, it would seem almost equally likely that Henry would be a paranoid character by the time that Perkin Warbeck came to attention, and he could not predetermine the reactions of the De la Pole family, who were largely responsible for the pretenders. It is significant not only that Warbeck was the second embodiment of discontent within Henry’s reign, but also that political unsettlement had been apparent under his predecessor – also a usurper. Henry is likely to have feared reaching the same fate as Richard III, whose reign had been plagued with suspicions surrounding the Princes in the Tower controversy and indeed, the dating of his coronation to appear three days before his victory at Bosworth suggests paranoia existing even before his rule. Thus Warbeck is best viewed in one sense as a non-military threat, being an encouragement of this paranoia through the exploitation of Henry’s potentially weak position. He reminded the King of the existence of dissatisfaction within his own country and later among foreign powers.

Join now!

        The princes had never been seen again and were presumed murdered by their uncle, Richard III. In this way, there was an immediate simplicity for Warbeck to exploit the lack of clarification as to what had happened to them. Whereas Lambert Simnel’s claim was flawed in that Henry was able to parade the true Earl of Warwick through London during the crisis, Warbeck was imitating Edward IV’s younger son, Richard of York. Hence this crisis was much more serious, for Henry was unable to prove the existence of the true Richard and if Warbeck truly was the prince he impersonated, ...

This is a preview of the whole essay