Many Outlander characters draw inspiration from real historical figures, and one particularly intriguing example is a man who largely operated behind the scenes: the Duke of Sandringham.

First appearing in season 1, the Duke’s role expanded significantly in season 2, where he quietly worked in the shadows to help fund the Jacobite cause. His secret involvement wasn’t entirely unexpected. Earlier, Frank Randall had mentioned that Sandringham was suspected of being a covert Jacobite supporter — though no concrete proof ever surfaced.

As we examine which Outlander characters were rooted in history and which were purely fictional, the question naturally arises: was the Duke of Sandringham a real person at all?

The Duke of Sandringham was fictional

Despite the existence of Sandringham Estate — famously associated with the British royal family and recently in the news due to Prince Andrew — there has never been an actual Duke of Sandringham in the British peerage. The title itself was invented for the series.

The character appears to have been conceived as an English counterpart to Simon Fraser, Lord Lovat, a real historical figure notorious for shifting loyalties during the Jacobite era. Like Lovat, Sandringham maneuvered between opposing sides, seemingly hedging his bets as history unfolded.

Including such a character makes sense. While Simon Fraser is one of the most well-documented examples of someone playing both sides — ultimately paying dearly for it — he certainly wasn’t alone. It’s reasonable to assume that others, particularly among the English elite, acted similarly, unsure of which faction would ultimately prevail.

Although Sandringham himself is fictional, it’s possible he shares traits with multiple historical figures. That said, any resemblance was likely unintentional, as Diana Gabaldon has noted that Sandringham effectively “revealed himself” as she wrote the first Outlander novel.

Where did Sandringham’s loyalties truly lie?

Determining Sandringham’s true allegiance is nearly impossible — and it’s likely he never fully committed to one side himself. In the end, he was killed by Murtagh, who delivered justice of sorts by bringing Claire and Mary his severed head. This act avenged Sandringham’s earlier failure to stop the men he sent — men whose actions led to Mary Hawkins’ assault, intended as a means to harm Claire.

Ultimately, Sandringham seemed motivated by self-preservation. By maintaining ties to both sides, he positioned himself to benefit regardless of the outcome. History shows how dangerous that strategy can be — something Simon Fraser himself learned the hard way.

At the very least, Claire eventually uncovered the truth behind Sandringham’s fate, solving the mystery that had once troubled Frank as he speculated about the duke’s sudden and unexplained disappearance.