Don’t you just love conspiracy theories?! 911, Roswell, the moon landing, JFK, Princess Diana, Michael Jackson…the list goes on, but did you know that there is a conspiracy theory relating to Elizabeth I which, if true, would make our present day Queen actually Queen Elizabeth I rather than Elizabeth II?
Before I go into the story, I must say a big thank you to Elizabeth Files visitor Jenny for mentioning this long forgotten legend or conspiracy and making me research it some more. I had heard that there were those who believed that Elizabeth I was actually a man but I had never really looked into it before and now I’m glad I did, it’s a fascinating story.
Bram Stoker and Bisley
This conspiracy theory has its roots in the writings of Bram Stoker, the famous writer of the Gothic novel Dracula (one of my favourite books!).
Stoker wasn’t just an author, he was also the personal assistant of the actor Henry Irving who had been looking for a house in the Cotswolds in Gloucestershire, England. It was in the village of Bisley that Irving came across the legend of “The Bisley Boy” and he passed the story on to Stoker who was keen to investigate. Both Stoker and Irving were intrigued by the fact that the village’s May Day celebrations involved a boy May Queen dressed in Elizabethan costume. Such traditions are generally based on an historical event or legend and Stoker wanted to find out more about this one – why a male Queen? His digging resulted in a chapter of his book “Famous Imposters” being devoted to “The Bisley Boy”.
You can read the whole story of The Bisley Boy legend in Bram Stoker’s “Famous Imposters”, which can be read online at Internet Archive or downloaded at EbooksRead.com, but I will give a synopsis of the story here and why some people have given credence to this conspiracy theory – Stoker seemed to be convinced of it!
The Bisley Boy Legend
The Story
According to legend, Princess Elizabeth (or rather the Lady Elizabeth) was sent to Overcourt House in Bisley sometime around 1543/1544 to get away from London, where the plague was rife, and enjoy the Cotswold country air. Unfortunately disaster struck and the ten year old princess was taken ill. As the princess lay gravely ill, her governess received word that the King was on his way to visit his daughter and while the house was preparing for the royal visit the princess died from acute fever. What on earth could the governess do? The King was famous for his awful temper and rages and the child’s governess was in a state of despair and complete panic – how could she tell the King of the death of his daughter?
Fearing for her life, the governess searched the local village for a suitable girl to replace Elizabeth so that they could delay this bad news, hide Elizabeth’s body and tell the King at a later date. Her search was utterly futile, no girl of the right age and colouring could be found but suddenly a thought struck her, there was a fair, red headed boy that had actually been a playmate to the little princess. He was a pretty boy, had the right colouring and was close at hand. In desperation, the governess dressed him in the princess’s dress and the deception began.
According to legend, the King, who did not frequently visit his daughter, did not notice the substitution, after all, Elizabeth had always been wary of him and he was in rather a hurry any way. The plan worked and worked so well that the King was never told the truth and Elizabeth’s body was never moved from the stone coffin in the garden at Overcourt where it had initially been hidden. Over three hundred years later, the Reverend Thomas Keble told his family of the discovery of the remains of a girl’s body in a stone coffin at Overcourt while building work was being carried out at the manor house. The remains included rags of fine, Tudor style clothing – cue “Twilight Zone” music!!
The Reasons Stoker Gave it Credence
Well, you can be forgiven for calling this story”tommyrot”, which is what The New York Times said of it in in its 1911 review of Stoker’s book, but here are some of the reasons why Stoker gave it so much credence:-
- Elizabeth’s secretive nature – Her actions during her lifetime seemed to suggest, according to Stoker, that she had a closely guarded secret. Sir Robert Tyrwhitt wrote to Protector Somerset in 1549: “I do verily believe that there hath been some secret promise between my Lady, Mistress Ashley [Elizabeth’s governess] and the Cofferer [Sir Thomas Parry] never to confess to death. “
- Elizabeth’s close relationship with Kat Ashley, Thomas Parry and Blanche Parry – She treated them all with favour and kept them close to her.
- Elizabeth’s refusal to marry
- Rumours that Elizabeth could not bear children – In April 1559, when Elizabeth was only 25, the Count de Feria wrote: “If my spies do not lie, which I believe they do not, for a certain reason which they have recently given me, I understand that she [Elizabeth] will not bear children.”
- A significant change in literary style between the letters Elizabeth wrote Catherine Parr in 1543 and 1544.
- Roger Ascham’s warning in one letter to Kat Ashley not to be too zealous in her teaching of Elizabeth and to go slowly and then a later letter written by Roger Ascham to John Sturmius, Rector of the Protestant University of Strasbourg in 1550 where he writes: The constitution of her mind is exempt from female weakness, and she is endued with a masculine power of application. No apprehension can be quicker than hers, no memory
more retentive. French and Italian she speaks like English; Latin with fluency, propriety and judgment; she also spoke Greek with me, frequently, willingly, and understanding well. Nothing can be more elegant than her handwriting, whether in the Greek or Roman character. In music she is very skillful but does not greatly delight. With respect to personal decoration, she greatly prefers a simple elegance to show and splendour, so despising the outward adorning of plaiting the hair and of wearing of gold, that in the whole manner of her life she rather resembles Hippolyta than Phaedra.” - Catherine Parr’s encouragement of the “horseplay” between her husband, Thomas Seymour, and Elizabeth – Did she know that Elizabeth was a boy and this was her idea of revenge on her husband?
- Elizabeth’s huge stock of wigs – Were they to cover male baldness?
- Elizabeth’s refusal to see other doctors – Stoker cites the occasion when Elizabeth was ill during her house arrest at Woodstock. Apparently, Elizabeth’s usual physicians were not available and Elizabeth refused to see anyone else.
Others who believe this conspiracy theory have also pointed out that Elizabeth left instructions for no post mortem to be carried out on her body and that she liked to wear big dresses and high necklines, which would have hid her male body and use thick drag queen-like makeup.
Who was the Boy?
You must read Stoker’s chapter on “The Bisley Boy” to fully understand this, it’s rather long-winded and complicated, but Stoker believed the boy to be the Duke of Richmond’s son by Mary Howard. As the Duke of Richmond was Henry VIII’s illegitimate son, this would explain the boy’s colouring being similar to Elizabeth’s, the resemblance and the intelligence.
Reasons to Discredit this Theory
As much as I love Bram Stoker, I have to say “Poppycock!” very loudly.
I just cannot believe this story has any truth in it whatsoever and I think it’s just people’s attempts to try and understand how a woman can live life without sex and marriage – she must have been a man!
Here are some of my reasons for not believing:-
- Henry VIII was not thick – Surely he would have noticed a change in his daughter even if he hadn’t seen her for a while!
- Elizabeth was not bald – She chose to wear wigs for her image and then to hide her greying hair. When the Earl of Essex famously burst into her bedchamber, he saw a grey haired Elizabeth and according to courtier Rowland Whyte the Queen was “newly up, her hair about her face”.
- Elizabeth had periods – When Philip II’s emissary bribed the Queen’s laundress for details on Elizabeth’s health, the woman reported that the Queen was functioning normally, i.e. menstruating regularly.
- According to Tracy Borman, Elizabeth delighted in wearing low necklines, even into old age. If she was trying to hide a lack of breasts then this was not the way to do it!
- Puberty – Could a teenage boy really have hidden all of the changes involved in puberty?
- Robert Dudley – Whether or not you believe that Elizabeth and Dudley had an intimate relationship, surely Dudley would have noticed that she was a man. I guess you could argue that this was why they never married or why Elizabeth never got pregnant – they could have been gay lovers! – but I’m sorry, I just don’t believe that.
- The secret would have got out – As much as Stoker argues that Bisley was very cut off and that Kat Ashley and the Parrys kept this secret to their graves, I cannot believe that they could have got away with it.
- Doctors – I know Elizabeth was very fussy about her doctors but a whole panel of doctors once examined her during marriage negotiations to see if she could still bear children and they decided that she could. Wouldn’t they have noticed that she was actually a he!
What do you think?
Is this just a story to satisfy those who can’t believe that a woman could rule England so successfully or live without marriage and children or do you think there’s some truth in it?
I do love conspiracy theories!
I have to agree with you Claire..they (crusty historians) always fall back on the ‘well she was too aggressive, witty, inelligent, (whatever) to have been a woman’..as you say POPPYCOCK!!
Oh, I thought it was a theory that Elizabeth had always been male from birth. That absolutely didn’t make sense as it would have been to Anne’s advantage to have a male heir.
I still think it’s bunk, too. Elizabeth simply proved that a woman can indeed do a man’s job more than adequately.
Hi everybody,
I suppose I like to put “spanners in the works” but this idea was reallyplayed iup in Madrid theatre duringtheb80s and 90s so I had to look into it although I got veyr little information.
In repy to Claire’s comments –
.1)Yes Henry was not thick but I don’t think he had much interest in a daughter who was considered a bastard.
2) We all know Eliabeh’s love of wearing wigs – but to hide her greying hair? It is a known fct thta redheads (and I am one) tend to be the last people to lose their colour and it goes from red to white. I had an aunt in her late 70s who stil, had shocking red hair.
3) The lack of hair and the colouring could have been due to the fact that Elizabeth used lead makeup from an earliest age which would have affected the skin and the hair, It would also have hidden any “stubble”
4) Whilst low necklines were in fashion, many men had hugh chests that could be simulated to produced bosoms. The lower garment hid whether there was a penis.
5) Elizabeth’ fabourite doctor was Doctor Wendy who could have been paid off.
6)= It was in the interests of the councillors to keep an “Elizabteh” on the throne.
I am not saying I agree with the Bisley Boy theory bt there is a lot going for it. Unfortunately I am wuote busy with work so I quote often fon’t have time to sit down and read everything which is coming out .
But this is such an interesting site – All thanks to Claire for etting it up and being able to communicate with people interested in the same issues (Sory I hate the phrase “like-minded people”
As much as I love Dracula, I think that Bram Stoker might have been on the absinthe or something to come up with this one!! I know there’s a lot of contoversy over Elizabeth’s sexuality etc. but this theory is, as I said, complete poppycock and I’m not a feminist but it does strike me that it is men trying to downgrade a woman’s success by implying that she must have been a man!
Totally agree with both of you, Gwenne and Cynthia!
Hi Jenny,
Thank you for your kind comments and I’m so glad that you like the site, I don’t think of it as my site more of a community site where people can exchange their views about Elizabeth.
I think there was a mysterious period where Elizabeth was sent from court after having previously got on well with her father, perhaps there was some disagreement, but otherwise, from what I have read, Henry delighted in his rather precocious daughter. I suppose with royal children having their own households and Henry being busy with running the country, the troubles with Scotland and France, getting over Catherine Howard and marrying Catherine Parr etc. that he may not have seen his daughter that much but I can’t see how he could have not noticed.
As far as redheads are concerned, my Mum was a redhead, she used to be called “carrot top” because her hair was bright red but she went grey in her 40s, not white and is grey now in her 60s. My grandmother went white but my Mum is definitely grey.
Yes, the dresses of the time could have hidden a man, doctors can be paid off and it was in the interest if Elizabeth’s councillors to keep her on the throne but surely the story would have got out and given those who supported Mary Queen of Scots the fuel they needed to topple Elizabeth.
I do love conspiracy theories but I just can’t give this one credence I’m afraid. Great story though, I loved researching it so thanks Jenny!
Writers in Bram Stoker’s day were always on something – And you are right he was living in a man’s world. As you say Dracuka is a brilliant book. Stoker never visited Rumania ye I have been through Transylvania and recognied his descriptions of places –
But back to “Liz 1” as I call her. She has been my heroine, ever since I could read. She was a redhead, she lioved to read, she was left alone a lot and not treated that wellby her family when she was young. I emphathise with her incredibly. And now, I can say that the greatest English wioman in history not oly had read hair but was highly educated. Well I have the red hair, I am well educated but could not have done half the stuff she did.
So I think we all agree that the “Bisley Boy” story i another one of those 16th century tyoe “Hola” articles.
Dracula is amazing, I love it even though I had to tear it apart in English at uni – books tend to lose their mystique when you do that to them!! Oooh, I want to got to Transylvania! Is it beautiful?
Yes, Liz 1 was an amazing woman, a real role model and I admire her mum too.
Are you in Madrid then?
I have never heard of this. Thanks for an interesting piece! I also think it is poppycock!
One thing that I wondered about was the boy May queen at Bisley. Could the tradition of a boy Queen come from the practice in Elizabethan times of men playing woman’s parts on stage?
Hi Clairer and Carla
For Claire – yes I am based in Madrid and had to do a study of Voctoria Eurgenia (the King’s garndmother) for a project I was working on – Another sad story.
With regards to Transylvania, I went not long aftee Ceacescu died and the country was in a real mess. What was actually great was that we had a puncture in teh small van taking us to our hotel just near Drac’s Castle at midnight with a full mooon and with four Madrileños and 4 catalans you can imagine the set up. Obviously the country has changed but the Transylvania area is extremely beutiful and I believe it is now being looked after. BTW Vlad the Impaler is another interesting perso to research!!! – Lavibng Bran Sroker out of it.
And Carla – Yes the Boy of Bisley could be the fact that boys had to play women – I think bu cannot be sure that it was “Restoration” England thataloowed real actresesses.
Business wise I am workingwith tours in the Fjords of Norway (agaian a connection with England) which means more research but great.
One day I a gong to have to sit down and really look at all the site that have been set up and the comments. I Have passed the site pver to a friend of mine Enzo who lives in Saudi and am sending a copy of everything I recive to a freind in the south west of Ireland because she doesn’t think that for the mo. she can join up with us all.
I think it is absolute nonsense! Elizabeth is still the best king we never had!