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!
Since ten years old Elizabeth was just seen as a witch’s bastard who would never become sovereign, Kat Ashley wouldn’t have been blamed the way the way this story suggest! At this time the death of a child hadn’t the same impact as today: little lives are fragile, there is plague and other diseases, lot of children died and life went on. I’ve never hezrd that someone was much blamed for the death of Arthur of Wales, or for baby prine Henry’s ( Katherine of Aragon son). But placing a commoner instead of a King’s daughter would have been pure betrayal. And what about Mary’s constant defiance of Elizabeth? She would have discoverd the truth I’m sure, or at least Spanish spies at her court!
Hi Everyone – Just to put a Spanner in the works and really this should go on to Elizabeth’s men. But during her reign there was man (and I have the info. somehwere at home where I only tend to sleep thesde days) that Elizbathe did have a son by Dudley who landed up in the panish Court and for a while Phillip II `played up this “farce”
Hi Leanda,
I think you need to write a book on Elizabeth! I hadn’t heard about Dr Bakan, must look into him and his theory, and your book is sat next to me on my desk ready to read!
Hi Lexy,
I agree, even if Henry hadn’t noticed I’m sure that Mary or other people would have noticed.
Hi Jenny,
I’d like to hear more about that story, sounds interesting, I think I read that somewhere too nut can’t remember which book it was in.
Hi Claire,
Sorry I have not been in touch. My only compllaint is that these posts are absorbing more time than I have available BUT to answer your question – Can’t find the bookds at home (well am hardly ever there except to sleep) but if you go on to Google and put in Arthur Dudley, some info DOES come up. Probably Spanish propaganda.
On another note to do with different posts on why Elizabeth was so strong in a so called “man’s world” -there is a very long list of famous women who may not have been “upfront” but were definitely the power behind the thrones at some stage or another – Eleanor of Aquitaine who lived until 89!!!!, Isbaella of France (ex of Edward II) and a much longer list. Personally I think that has to do with the fact that women are by nature “multi-taskers” whereas I have found men in general can only focus on one thing at a time and/or get other people to do the rest.
I have a new theory! Elizabeth was really a vampire who only pretended to age and then left England to live in Virginia where she met Carlisle Cullen and became a vegetarian vampire. She is the English teacher in Forks, Washington right now.
I love that theory, Lisa! Brilliant!
hello everyone, i’m new to this site but i have been studying tudor history since i was 13 years old, the story of elizbeth being a man was first introduced to me by my mother, i obviously tought it was ludicrous, however after many years of reading and information, not just on elizabeth but on all the figures that were close to her I have managed to cross examine all the ambassador reports and historical eveidence, i say historical evidence with a smile as some parts of history asre written to suit the times. on the fact of elizabeth beinga man there are possibilities, we tend to be a bit naive as to think that it could not have been pulled off as she led such a pubblic life, as said before it was on englands best interest that she be kept on the throne to prevent civil war, even now days we know nothing of the secretes that are going on with pubblic figures or with events that happened, we are only told what they think we need to know. the theory that she died, might be true, but i have reserached it to be shightly different, apaprently she died after her ascension on the throne, when she contracted smallpox, she was near deaths door, she appointed Robert dudley as lord protector of the realm in event of her death, (now we know how this would have went down with the council and court!) apparently thought she survived amazingly with no marks on her face or body which was unnatural as it always left victims horribly disfigured, this is how the swap took place, had she died she had only been on the throne for a few years, leaving country with no heir, and the possibility of a catholic queen, unrest, invasion, so they swapped her witha man closely resenbling her hence the unscarred face, and the need of wigs, it is evident through reading evidence that her way of ruing changed drastically from this point on, and her fashion changed over night, as she hadn’t always worn wigs or painted her face, so the charade started and he/she would never have been able to
marry now, even though before the ilness there is evidence that she was close to marrying robert dudley, why was essex later on executed? was his failed attempt to seize london and revolt gainst the queen? after all she had pardoned him worse? or was it that he saw something on that moprning when he stormed into her chamber unannounced? history puts it down as thw queen being mortified of having a man she loved see her as an old woman as she really was by then, not hidden behind her paint and finery, or did he see what she really was, and needed to be executed. it would have been easy to pass as a woman in those days, the clothes gave ample space to hide anything, in regards to breast she was famous for being very thin, so that could not have caused much problems. Robert dudley was famous for being her favourite, yet the evidence suggests that he did not kow how to handle her moods one day she wnated him reeled him in and then abroptly he wa dropped and taken back, he never knew where he stood at times, she liked men about her court, but only ahd few female friends and servants she could trust, Mary dudley famously nursed her through her smallpox and fell ill with the ilnees herself, being so terribly disfigured she asked to leave court and retire. there is lots of eveidence and i could go on for a while, anyway hope this makes people think a little.
Hayley
Hi Hayley,
Thank you so much for your comment and welcome to the site. It is interesting what you say about how there’s another story that Elizabeth died of smallpox, that’s one I hadn’t heard. I love these conspiracy theories and I take your point that you can use historical evidence to back them up, but I cant see it myself. I think that Elizabeth was slightly disfigured by smallpox and that was the point at which she started wearing the thicker make-up in an effort to disguise the scars. I also think that, like her father, as she got older she became more conscious of how people saw her and needed to keep the image of youth and strength. That’s why she was so strict on how artists portrayed her in portraits. She may have been an old woman in reality but she made sure that the propaganda showed the nation that she was still strong, beautiful and the iconic queen they knew. I think her clothes, wigs and make-up were all part of this image, rather than being an effort to cover up the fact that she was a man or an imposter. I guess we’ll never know!
Claire — I had never heard this story before, although I’ve heard the tale of Elizabeth actually being a man (which never made sense to me because if she was born a male, Henry VIII”s dream, the King would have announced it to the world and it might have been “all’s well that ends well” with him and Anne). I always said the rumor likely came from the typical male of the time who would never believe that a “frail” female could be a ruler without the help of a husband! Her enemies, naturally, would look for anything to disparage her so any nonsense on their part about her being a man, or born with no female parts or whatever else they dreamt up was propaganda on their part (after all, we’re talking about the “bastard” daughter of the evil Concubine). But the Bisley Boy tale had me LMAO! I like “Dracula” just like you Clare, but Bram Stoker needed to stick with his vampire tales. Bu you have definitely made my day as far as over-the-top stories historic stories. Funny that these folks can’t just accept that you had an incredible female and leave it at that.
It is a great story isn’t it, Tina! Yes, perhaps people just couldn’t cope with Elizabeth being a strong woman in her own right and not needing a male consort to guide her. I just love these myths!