It started with a borrowed camera and a grudge. In 1917, two cousins, Elsie Wright and Frances Griffiths, headed down to a beck in Cottingley, England. They came back with a photographic plate that would eventually fool some of the smartest minds in the world, including the creator of Sherlock Holmes. If you look at the photos now, they look almost comical. The fairies are clearly 2D. They have bobbed hair that was trendy in the 1920s. Yet, the saga of Alice and the fairies—or rather, Frances and her fairies—remains one of the most successful hoaxes in history. It wasn't just about little girls playing a prank. It was about a world grieving after the Great War, desperate for any shred of proof that there was something more than mud and death.
Frances was just nine. Elsie was sixteen. They were tired of being teased by the adults for getting their shoes wet. When asked why they kept going to the stream, they said they went to see the fairies. Elsie’s father, Arthur Wright, was a keen amateur photographer with his own darkroom. He lent them his Midg camera. He expected them to fail. Instead, they returned with an image of Frances behind a group of four dancing, winged figures.
The Technical "Proof" That Fooled Experts
Arthur Wright didn't buy it. He found the photos "clever" but assumed they were fakes. He even searched the girls' bedroom and the banks of the stream for paper scraps. He found nothing. But his wife, Polly, was different. She was a member of the Theosophical Society, a group deeply invested in the occult and the "unseen world." She took the prints to a meeting in Bradford. That’s where the wildfire started.
Edward Gardner, a leading light in the Theosophical movement, saw the photos and thought they were a miracle. He sent the negatives to Harold Snelling, a photography expert. Snelling’s verdict was the gasoline on the fire. He stated that the negatives were "entirely genuine" and "unfaked." He didn't say the fairies were real, just that they hadn't been added in the darkroom. This nuance was lost on the public.
Then came Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
It's one of history's great ironies. The man who created the most logical, deductive character in literature, Sherlock Holmes, was the easiest mark for the Cottingley hoax. Doyle was a staunch Spiritualist. He wanted to believe. He saw Alice and the fairies (as the narrative was often framed in early psychic circles) as the ultimate "knock-out blow" to materialism. If fairies existed, spirits existed. If spirits existed, his son, who died in the war, wasn't truly gone.
💡 You might also like: Ashley My 600 Pound Life Now: What Really Happened to the Show’s Most Memorable Ashleys
Why the 1920s Loved the Hoax
The world was reeling. The Spanish Flu and World War I had wiped out millions. Science had given the world mustard gas and machine guns. People were exhausted by "rationality." When Doyle published his article in The Strand Magazine in 1920 featuring the photos, it sold out immediately.
Critics were harsh. Some pointed out that the fairies looked remarkably like "Price’s Night Lights" illustrations. They did. In fact, Elsie had literally traced them from Princess Mary’s Gift Book. She added wings and used hatpins to stick them into the ground. Simple. Effective.
But the girls stuck to their story. For decades.
The Confession Nobody Wanted to Hear
It wasn't until 1983—sixty-six years later—that the truth finally came out in an article for The Unexplained. The cousins, by then elderly women, admitted they had faked four of the five photos. Elsie admitted they were paper cutouts. She felt bad about it, mostly because she had embarrassed a man as famous as Conan Doyle.
"I never thought of it as being a fraud," Elsie said later. "It was just Elsie and I having a bit of fun."
📖 Related: Album Hopes and Fears: Why We Obsess Over Music That Doesn't Exist Yet
But here is the weird part. The part that keeps the Alice and the fairies legend alive in paranormal circles today.
Frances Griffiths, until the day she died in 1988, insisted that the fifth photo—The Fairy Sun Bath—was real. She claimed they were just sitting there, and she snapped the shutter on a group of fairies she actually saw. Skeptics point out that it looks like a double exposure of some cutouts. Frances, however, maintained her story. This "split confession" creates a layer of ambiguity that prevents the case from being truly closed in the minds of true believers.
The Psychology of the "Willful Blindness"
Why did people fall for it?
- Authority Bias: Because a "photography expert" and a famous author said they were real, the average person felt they didn't have the "expertise" to disagree.
- Technological Gap: Most people in 1917 didn't understand how easy it was to manipulate a frame.
- Emotional Need: The desire for a magical world was a powerful sedative for a traumatized generation.
Honestly, looking at the high-resolution scans now, you can see the hatpins. You can see the string. But at the time, the grainy newspaper prints hid the flaws. It’s a lesson in how we see what we want to see.
What This Teaches Us About Modern Disinformation
We like to think we're smarter now. We aren't. We have Deepfakes and AI-generated "unseen" footage. The Cottingley case is the blueprint for how a lie becomes a "fact" through social proof and emotional resonance.
👉 See also: The Name of This Band Is Talking Heads: Why This Live Album Still Beats the Studio Records
The story of Alice and the fairies isn't really a story about sprites in the garden. It's a story about the fragility of truth. Even Elsie Wright eventually admitted that she was amazed at how long the world stayed fooled. She thought people would laugh at the first photo and that would be the end of it. Instead, she became a footnote in the history of the occult.
Practical Lessons from the Cottingley Hoax
If you’re researching the history of the paranormal or just trying to navigate the "fake news" of the modern era, there are actual takeaways here.
- Check the source's bias: Conan Doyle didn't look at the photos objectively; he looked at them as a man who needed his faith validated.
- Physical evidence vs. Digital evidence: In the 1920s, the "negative" was the gold standard. Today, metadata is the equivalent. Always look for the raw file.
- The "Silent Majority" of the Hoax: Many people in Cottingley knew the girls were "kinda" mischievous. They didn't speak up because they didn't want to ruin the fun or the local fame.
If you want to see the original photos, they are now held in the National Science and Media Museum in Bradford. They are tiny. They are fragile. And they are a testament to how two bored girls changed the way we think about the "unseen" world.
To really understand the Cottingley incident, you have to look past the paper wings. You have to look at the people who wanted them to be real. That’s where the real mystery lives. It’s not in the beck; it’s in the human brain's refusal to accept a boring, grey reality.
Next Steps for Enthusiasts:
To dig deeper, start by reading Geoffrey Crawley’s 1982 series in the British Journal of Photography. He was the one who finally used modern (at the time) forensic analysis to prove the cutouts were 2D. You should also look into the Theosophical Society's archives if you want to understand the spiritual climate that allowed this to thrive. Finally, visit the village of Cottingley. The beck is still there. It’s much smaller than you’d imagine, which makes the whole "fairy kingdom" idea even more impressive as a feat of imagination.