#medieval queens

[medievalistsnet]

New Medieval Books: The Queens and Royal Women of Sweden, c. 970–1330: Their Lives, Power, and Legacy

[horizon-verizon]

hi, i love ur blog and i was really intrigued with this post

https://www.tumblr.com/horizon-verizon/738366411596054528/you-know-what-truly-annoys-me-in-asoiaf-that?source=share

and what you wrote under point C about "making Aerea Queen, then her having a daughter who'd become queen but then only rules for a few years until deposed, then we have a Jaehaerys I figure (I would have done it this way)" and how you would've done a ruling queen pre-rhaenyra?? ofc u don't have to answer i was just wondering coz i'd love if there was more ruling ladies in canon xx

In order to be as close to GRRM's "point"/arc? about the decay of the Targs through "dramatic misogyny", these queens would either be like Juana of Castile where some male figure (relatives, like husbands and fathers with their own armies/factions) do the actual ruling while they severely restrict the female rulers AND/OR these female rulers would have very short reigns bc of rebellions, illnesses, attempts at conquest failed (Daeron I kinda) assassinations, etc. (and it needn't include all those things at once). I prefer the first, which is almost already Rhaena the BB except Rhaena never ruled and Jaehaerys himself didn't plan a bulk of what happens to her (the Dragonstone argument was one out of several other things AND it certainly was a part of the mess that makes Rhaena sidelined) against her nor did most men did.

And either way, I'd have a lot of contemporaries AND historical writers try and mostly succeed in mischaracterizing these Queens as "selfish bitches" or "whores" even as others "praised" them/some of them as intelligent "as a man/this particular man", as they kept the realm together in absentia of a male. Because that's what was written for even the most praised Queen regents/consorts/regnants. (We have Margaret I of Denmark, Urraca de León, Irene of Athens to name a few.)

There would be no "successful" queens, bc what then would be the point in showing how Rhaenyra was slandered against AND that it was her brother/his mother who usurped her? There'd be less compulsion on the readers' parts (as many readers as possible) to blame misogyny (at least obviously) if there had been perfectly accepted queens before Rhaenyra. Queens who had ruled with equal social grace as kings get to, which was rare in real life anyway. I would have those queens put out specific good laws or make historic-level military and political acheievements, but they'd be culturally underestimated when such and such happened.

It's also have us question how much "worth" being a "queen" really is when it is so hampered like this, keeping that sense of "doom" many had with Rhaenyra. But hopeful with Dany, who grew up and came to power OUT of the Westerosi patriarcal paradigm. If I had to rewrite the succession, I'd probably only write in ONE (unsuccessful) queen regnant before Rhaenyra bc the brevity of the Targ line before Rhaenyra is to show how quickly the Targs get to the point of losing themselves and their dragons bc of misogyny.

So to amend that comment abt Aerea, I'd probs have Aerea be mother to a queen who only rules for a few years, whose father (Aerea's husband) AND prince consort take advantage but run the realm more into ruin. Before she dies, a male cousin or even her younger brother steps in to stabilize the realm (or really his backers do, like Rogar) and he "justifies" his reign/takes the throne from this queen's female heir through said arms and maleness. Perhaps the queen is forced to abdicate bc she is blamed for the ruination her father/brother caused. GC of 101 continues and all the canon stuff. Now with Rhaenyra, who before she can even become queen is usurped, the "point" is a little that much more "obvious".

[seethemflying]

How do ladies in waiting who sleep or are mistresses to the king get treated by their queen? Do they get insulted, punished or is the queen not allowed to show disproval at all? In reign mary confronted her lady in waiting. Anne boylen I think yanked the neckless off Jane Seymour

Hey anon!

I think the answer to that is "depends on the queen". Some queens were really defensive of their territory and were actively spiteful towards their husband's mistresses, some tolerated them, some even perhaps cultivated somewhat of a friendship. It is entirely dependent on the personality of the queen in question. This is because the idea of adultery in a royal marriage was somewhat complicated. Ideally, neither husband or wife should sleep with anyone outside their spouse, and further down the social scale this was more vigorously policed. Famously, William Shakespeare likely changed his will a few days before his death to favour his daughter Susannah because he had just discovered that Thomas Quiney, the husband of his other daughter Judith, had been hauled before the church courts for fathering an illegitimate child. In royal marriages though, it was basically an unwritten rule that the husband could have affairs and the wife could not, even though male adultery was publicly condemned by the church just as much as female adultery. This is why when Henry was divorcing Catherine of Aragon, he had to pretend he had no involvement with Anne Boleyn, otherwise the church courts could have just argued that he was seeking an annulment because he was committing adultery.

The shaky position of the royal mistress therefore meant that the royal wife could act in many different ways towards her. One of the reasons that Henry VIII probably fell out of love with Anne Boleyn was that she would. not. tolerate. him having mistresses, and used to have blazing rows with him about it. In contrast, Catherine of Aragon silently endured Henry's philandering. During her marriage, Catherine de Medici (wife of Henri II of France) seethed with hatred for Diane de Poitiers, Henri's long time mistress (and the great love of his life, who he first pursued when he was 15 and she 35). After Henri's sudden death in a jousting accident, Catherine seized control of the royal court and had Diane expelled from her presence, something she had probably wanted to do for years. On the other hand you have the wife of Edward III, Philippa of Hainault (d. 1369). She is a little earlier than the two Catherine's and Anne, so we don't really know much about her personality, but it has been argued that when she fell ill in her later years, she actively encouraged a relationship between her teenaged lady-in-waiting Alice Perrers and her fifty-something husband Edward.

[ladyniniane]

The female sovereign not only had rights, but duties too. She had to practice the ‘profession of queen’, which was not simply reduced to the acts of procreation and caring for the children of France. Far from being confined solely to the private sphere, she participated in the communication of power, and, as her husband’s corporeal double, she embodied the female equivalent of majesty. At once queen of ceremonies, queen of hearts and renowned patroness, she also contributed to the proper functioning of ‘court society’. Isabeau of Bavaria even played a broader political role due to her husband’s intermittent ‘absences’ (due to bouts of madness).

Queenship in medieval france 1300-1500, Murielle Gaude-Ferragu

[nikeofantipaxos]

Anne of Bohemia – illustration by Percy Anderson for 'Costume Fanciful, Historical and Theatrical', 1906

[ateliervandenvos]

“No matter which way I looked at it and no matter how much I turned the matter over in my mind, I could find no evidence from my own experience to bear out such a negative view of female nature and habits. Even so, given that I could scarcely find a moral work by any author which didn't devote some chapter or paragraph to attacking the female sex, I had to accept their unfavourable opinion of women since it was unlikely that so many learned men, who seemed to be endowed with such great intelligence and insight into all things, could possible have lied on so many different occasions”

CHRISTINE DE PISAN, The Book of the City of Ladies

[demolina]

On this day in history, 1st of July 1321, María de Molina died at Valladolid, Castile.

Although Queen María de Molina did not hold a formal title, like a queen-lieutenant, she ceirtainly was able to exercise inmense power and authority during her tenure as queen, first as King Sancho IV’s political and moral partner, and then in her role as regent, for her son and grandson. Through an examination of her life one sees her political acuity as a leader, a compromiser, a peacemaker, and a visionary. —  Paulette Lynn Pepin, María de Molina, Queen and Regent: Life and Rule in Castile-León, 1259-1321     

[henryfitzempress]

Favourite Plantagenets [𝟦/𝟣𝟢]: 𝑀𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑢𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑑𝑒 𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒, 𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑒𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐸𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑, 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑 𝑤𝑖𝑓𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝐾𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝐸𝑑𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝐼.