#queen consorts

[scotlandsladies]

♕ Queens Regnant and Queen Consorts who had twins

[novaursa]

Would love your thoughts on the women who could have potentially become Queen consorts during the dance and how well they would’ve done the job/what their rule might look like during a time of peace:

Helena Targaryen - Consort to Aegon II (firstborn son of King Viserys & Queen Alicent) (I know she’s actually a queen, not just hypothetical, but Blood & Cheese happened pretty quickly after her coronation so we didn’t see much from her besides being on the small council and advocating for a peaceful resolution)

Baela Targaryen - Consort to Jacaerys Targaryen (heir to Queen Rhaenyra)

Unnamed Manderly girl - Consort to Joffrey Velaryon (heir to Queen Rhaenyra)

Unnamed Baratheon daughter (although we know it wasn’t Cassandra or Maris) - Consort to Aemond Targaryen (heir to Aegon II after both his sons were killed)

Cassandra Baratheon - Consort to Aegon II (firstborn son of King Viserys & Queen Alicent)

Jaehaera Targaryen - Consort to Aegon III (heir to both Aegon II via being the last male Targaryen claim and Rhaenyra as her eldest - and to everyone’s knowledge- and only living descendant) (again, I know she’s queen but she died young before the regency was even up)

Hopefully this makes sense! I didn’t include some characters like Rhaena of Pentos since Luke was never considered heir to the Iron Throne, Alys Rivers since there was no mention whether or not Aemond meant to break his betrothal to the Baratheons, etc. If I missed someone please let me know and feel free to include them in your response

Totally makes sense anon, and I love this question because it forces people to think about what “a good queen consort” actually is in Westeros. It’s not just being pretty at feasts and birthing heirs. In peacetime, the best consorts are a blend of political instinct, public image, household management, charitable influence, and the ability to steady a king without trying to rule over him. Some women would’ve been brilliant at that. Some would’ve lit the Red Keep on fire out of boredom.

Helaena Targaryen (Aegon II)

Helaena is the definition of a gentle consort who could have been effective in peacetime, but not in the way people usually measure “power.” She’s not a political operator. She’s not a court predator. She’s soft-spoken, inward, and (in the book) her “small council presence” reads more like someone included out of duty than someone steering the ship. But in a stable realm, a queen like Helaena becomes a symbol: piety, motherhood, calm domestic authority, visible charity. The kind of queen the smallfolk cling to because she looks like safety.

If peace had held, I believe her rule would’ve looked like quiet patronage, charitable works, soothing public appearances, and a court that’s less vicious because she’s not feeding it. She would not have been a “policy queen.” She would’ve been a moral center. Blood & Cheese shatters that almost immediately, which is why we never get to see what her presence could’ve done long-term.

Baela Targaryen (Jacaerys)

Baela as queen consort would’ve been a force of nature. She’s bold, hot-blooded, dragonrider confidence, and she has that Daemon-made edge where she doesn’t shrink to make men comfortable. In peacetime, that can go two ways in my opinion:

Excellent: she becomes a public-facing, charismatic queen who rallies loyalty, sponsors martial culture, pushes reforms around training, fleet strength, and court discipline. The realm respects her because she looks like steel and doesn’t flinch.

Disastrous: she starts feuding with half the court because she refuses to play “smile and swallow it” politics, and she makes enemies without meaning to.

With Jace specifically, I think it leans more “excellent.” Jace reads more diplomatic and state-minded, and Baela would’ve been the aggressive counterbalance: the queen who scares your enemies and energizes your allies. In peace, her “rule” would look like patronage of knights, dragonkeeper culture, naval strength, and a court with less tolerated nonsense. She would not be a decorative consort. She would be a partner.

Manderly girl (Joffrey Velaryon)

This one is interesting because it’s purely political architecture.

We don’t know her personality, so I’m judging by what the marriage means. It would drag a Northern house deeper into Targaryen legitimacy, which is exactly what Rhaenyra’s faction needed in peace. As queen consort she’d likely resemble the “traditional” model: household competence, alliances, soft power through family networks, plus Northern cultural gravity that can actually stabilize a court if handled well.

Her “rule in peace” would look like quiet influence, marriage politics, rewarding loyal houses, probably a more sober court tone. Not flashy. Useful.

Unnamed Baratheon daughter (Aemond)

What kind of queen consort is she? Stormlander. Practical. Proud. Built for power-brokering. Aemond as king in peacetime is the problem, not the consort. He’s intense, controlling, and the kind of ruler who would “keep the peace” by making everyone terrified to breathe wrong. A Baratheon consort could either:

soften him socially and protect the realm from his worst impulses by being a stabilizing presence at court, or

amplify the hard-line culture and turn the crown into a militarized regime.

Given Storm’s End politics, she likely would’ve been politically competent in the “I understand loyalty and consequences” way. But her ability to shape Aemond depends on whether she has real emotional leverage over him, and he doesn’t read like a man who offers that easily.

In peace: she’s probably a strong court manager and alliance builder. In reality: she’d be spending her life trying to keep Aemond from turning every slight into a war.

Cassandra Baratheon (Aegon II)

Cassandra is the most “what could’ve been” in a grim way, because she’s explicitly lined up as Aegon’s next wife once he’s widowed and desperate for sons.

In peace, Cassandra would likely be a classic political consort. Fertile, respectable, backed by Stormlander muscle, and able to bring a fresh public narrative after the realm’s trauma. She’s not there to be loved. She’s there to restore continuity. If Aegon II had been a normal functioning king, she could’ve played the role of image repair, court unity, charitable works, and producing heirs to lock the line.

But the catch is Aegon. Cassandra could be perfectly capable and still end up trapped married to a king who is unstable, bitter, and self-destructive. Her “peace rule” depends on whether the king allows the court to actually become peaceful.

Jaehaera Targaryen (Aegon III)

Jaehaera is heartbreaking because she’s the ultimate symbol of “the war ate everyone,” and her potential gets crushed by the same machinery that used her as a political bandage. In peacetime, with time and safety and support, she might have become a quiet, dutiful consort, probably similar in function to Helaena: public piety, charity, household calm.

But even under peace, Aegon III is not an easy husband for “traditional consort influence.” He’s traumatized, withdrawn, and resistant to court life. A queen like Jaehaera would either become his shelter, or she’d disappear beside him like a ghost.

Her “rule in peace” would probably be minimal public ambition, high ceremonial value, and a court that runs around her rather than through her. And because she dies young, we’ll never know what she could’ve grown into.

(Also, yes, you were right not to include Rhaena of Pentos in the “queen consort” framing since Luke was never the Iron Throne heir in the relevant way, and Alys Rivers is a whole separate “king’s mistress / witch-queen rumor machine” category.)

[sofiaflorina2021]

Rest in Peace Queen Sirikit of Thailand

Rest in peace Her Majesty Queen Sirikit (12 August, 1932 - 24 October, 2025), the Queen Mother of Thailand. She was the Queen of Thailand from 28 April, 1950 to 13 October, 2016 as the wife of King Bhumibol Adulyadej (Rama IX) and the mother of the current King Vajiralongkorn (Rama X).

She was famous for being glamorous during her lifetime, especially in the 1960s where she, together with her husband, travelled to many countries, charming many leaders and the public for her elegance. She had been the number one choice on the International Best-Dressed List in 1960, 1961, 1964, and 1965.

For 66 years, she was the longest-serving queen consort in the world while married to King Bhumibol Adulyadej. The King himself, for 70 years of reigning (9 June, 1946 - 13 October, 2016), was the longest-reigning of any Thai monarch, the longest on record of any Asian monarch, and the third-longest on record of any sovereign state.

🇹🇭🇹🇭🇹🇭

[horizon-verizon]

Alicent provided House Targaryen with four healthy dragonriding Targaryens when the Targaryen bloodline was most vulnerable. In return, the least the Targaryens could do is allow her son to ascend the throne to allow House Hightower to have more power in exchange for them helping to create four healthy Targaryens. It’s really weird how Viserys referred to Aegon as Otto’s blood and Rhaenyra as his own blood when Aegon is also his child and therefore his blood.

The Hightowers behaved like any other family married into the royal family would, so I don’t get why they’re so hated. If Viserys didn’t want the Hightowers gaining more influence then he shouldn’t have married Alicent in the first place. It was stupid of him to expect one of the most powerful noble houses in Westeros to accept Targaryens of their blood just being spares instead of kings.

Disclaimer:

The parts about explaining feudalism is supposed to recontextualize how the hierarchy is not itself based on a good ethics system or fair/good morals, not to justify said hierarchy.

The system (unjustly) does not enforces nor expects the King to be equally sociopolitically or emotionally accountable to his Queen Consort.

................................................

A)

You make the mistake of thinking that in a feudal society/Westerosi/Andal culture, the King and his house are obligated to do anything for the Queen Consort except to:

not publicly humiliate her (and "humiliate" can look different according to the thing done) -- with Aegon IV, it was an exceptional situation since he targeted Naerys and Aemon simultaneously out of jealousy. As long as the King doesn't disinherit her children (if they are OLDER than his mistress' kids AND those mistress' kids ARE NOT legitimized) he is, by custom, not seen to be doing anything wrong

not deny her access to the appropriate clothing, shelter befitting her station, and food

take care of any child she brings forth

In feudal societies, the Queen Consort’s “job” is to provide heirs and like everyone else in the kingdom, she has to obey her husband’s orders. She is subject to him, she has no privileges or rights over him. 

The King/Monarch is always the legal/official/customary authority over literally everyone else. This is not a democracy nor an oligarchy. 

Therefore, it is actually Alicent who customarily should obey Viserys’ commands and declarations. That is her place in this hierarchy. *EDIT 12/16/24* The "law of the land" is not as solid over a monarch's head/word of law, and she knows that or no one would be pursuing kingship! *END OF EDIT*

You may think this is unfair (it obviously is), but:

Alicent was definitely a victim of her father & Viserys, but she blames the wrong person for it (Rhaenyra) bc the answer is to totally buy into the sexist and authoritarian ideals against female sexual and other sorts of autonomy--as Alicent fails into & chooses to perpetuate.

That is feudalism (the economic-socio-political system) AND absolute monarchy (the form of government). Again, she's fallen, then chooses, to sincerely buy into this system partially bc she has no choice but she also is much too inflexible to reflect on how she's essentially hurting herself and those around her or performing a sort of self fulfilling prophecy. That was the entire point! Alicen tis not unique, too, in how the patriarchal feudal system uses her up! Rhaenyra, Rhaenys, etc, too!

@rhaenyragendereuphoria states it quite simply HERE:

Feudalism is a system of servitude based on giving up your freedom in exchange of protection by a higher lord. It binds serfs to their lords, and lords to other lords all the way to the king. Yes, the whole “Protector of the Realm” is propaganda, but it’s what they believe the job of the king to be. They will give it to the strongest who can protect them from foreign invasions: and it’s hard to think of stronger than “family that literally owns dragons”. This fandom has feudal mentality completely upside down, thinking they loathe their subjugation because subjugation is an affront to freedom. Feudalism IS subjugation. What they loathe is to submit to a weakling. They despise (and hunt, and murder) the Free Folk, calling them “wildlings”, because they’d rather be free than be bound by feudal oaths of subjugation. Feudalism is the rule of “might makes right”. At its roots, it’s a military hierarchy of warlords who bind each others with feeble and fickle treaties until one of them decides to break them and attempt to conquer the others, and either wins or fails.

And in this POST:

However, no one is given rights in these societies, not even men - not the way we would define rights. Their idea of “right” is just as arbitrary as their idea of “freedom”. They are societies based on privileges, and privileges are always revocable, unlike rights.

Alicent has no independent “rights” apart from what I already listed above. At all. Especially since she isn't blood-related to Viserys. Rhaenyra has a birthright, but only once Viserys bestows it upon her. 

Alysanne was a Queen Consort, not a Queen Regnant. Visenya & Rhaenys had more law-changing power than Alysanne did while being Consorts and not Regnant Queens, but Aegon’s word was final and he was the Monarch.

And all these women were the sisters of the then-Kings as well as their wives. You’d think that they would have more say, but no. They were (publicly) defer to their husband-kings' final words by Andal/feudal/monarchial custom and law.

There is no contract where it says that Viserys owes Alicent or the Hightowers -- all of them his subjects -- anything except military protection. This is feudalist absolute monarchy as GRRM sets it up and models after the common set up of real life feudal monarchies.

B)

You:

Alicent provided House Targaryen with four healthy dragonriding Targaryens when the Targaryen bloodline was most vulnerable.

Already addressed what a Consort’s repeated purpose is. 

a.

And when was this dynasty “most vulnerable”? By all accounts, Viserys’ court and reign was prosperous and peaceful (expect with the Stepstones and towards the end of his reign with Rhaenyra, Alicent, and their kids of course -- but the Stepstones war didn’t affect the actual subjects [peasant or nobles] of Westeros too much to make huge differences in and the stuff with his personal family happened insularly):

Many consider the reign of King Viserys I to represent the apex of Targaryen power in Westeros. Beyond a doubt, there were more lords and princes claiming the blood of the dragon than at any period before or since. Though the Targaryens had continued their traditional practice of marrying brother to sister, uncle to niece, and cousin to cousin wherever possible, there had also been important matches outside the royal family, the fruit of which would play important roles in the war to come. There were more dragons than ever before as well, and several of the she-dragons were regularly producing clutches of eggs.

[...]

The reign of the Young King, as the commons called him upon his ascent, was peaceful and prosperous. His Grace’s open-handedness was legendary, and the Red Keep became a place of song and splendor. King Viserys and Queen Aemma hosted many a feast and tourney, and lavished gold, offices, and honors on their favorites.

(“A Question of Succession”)

b.

If you mean Viserys having a girl as his only scion, I must remind you that:

the Targs had dragons (more dragons than ever and Aegon I/Visenya/Rhaenys, conquered Westeros with only 3)

there were no mentioned, burgeoning signs of rebellion against Rhaenyra until Alicent and Otto started to make waves (post by @theblackqveen)

While this is in the text:

Though Princess Rhaenyra had been proclaimed her father’s successor, there were many in the realm, at court and beyond it, who still hoped that Viserys might father a male heir, for the Young King was not yet thirty.

After Viserys makes it clear that he won’t change his mind, it gets more settled, and again, we hear absolutely no mention of any real attempt to prepare against Rhaenyra except from the greens, or Rhaenyra's brothers, Alicent, and Otto and whatever nameless lackeys at court they used.

I wrote a 2 posts on HotD Alicent and Book!Alicent’s foolishness and narcissism.

c.

THIS is what GRRM says about laws of succession:

There are no clear cut answers, either in Westeros or in real medieval history. Things were often decided on a case by case basis. A case might set a precedent for later cases… but as often as not, the precedents conflicted as much as the claims.

In fact, if you look at medieval history, conflicting claims were the cause of three quarters of the wars.

[...]

The medieval world was governed by men, not by laws. You could even make a case that the lords preferred the laws to be vague and contradictory, since that gave them more power. In a tangle like the Hornwood case, ultimately the lord would decide... and if some of the more powerful claimants did not like the decision, it might come down to force of arms. The bottom line, I suppose, is that inheritance was decided as much by politics as by laws. In Westeros and in medieval Europe both.

Still, if Alicent really is all about just following the rules and being “good” and sticks to her conservative background, then she would follow her husband’s order and not antagonize or contradict Rhaenyra. Because part of her Westerosi/Andal customs is that the King/Monarch is paramount and their word is law. *EDIT 12/16/24* But this is a critique of the argument of how Alicent tries to justify herself against Rhaenyra, and I do recognize her position as a woman who lived her entire life thinking that the woman who births boys "wins", that she'd feel affronted at being blocked from getting the one win women don't really get or one of the few granted to them....that's no excuse for child mutilation, "beefing" with another child, covering for rapist-sons, covering for kin-slaying sons, sending her disabled 8-19 yr old granddaughter out to kill another child, etc. Like, Rhaenyra is not an angel and she also def leverages her power as a queen against a child; while her losing several children is not an excuse for that plus she herself has never been as smallfolk-forward or politically radical, we do know that if she had ruled, there would not have been a war like the one we got nor any war most likely AND there would have been some good in her setting a political precedent for female rulers exisitng as worthier rulers. What happens w/Alicent bein Queen Consort and er son bein Kin? More of the exact same phenonmenon. So it's difficult to feel much sympathy on my end, esp when she didn't and wouldn't have lost much if Rhaenyra ruled but Rhaenyra more liekly would have had to fear moves from the greens bc the greens would be creating the enemies they'd have to kill off later as they were and always had been the usurping entities.*END OF EDIT*

She hypocritically doesn’t follow the law to such a particular "degree" or whatever that she ends up going against the authoritarian regime's ideals of King's rule and all that for her own stake...mostly unconciously.

So really, she’s really about power and misogyny at a unique level since she chooses to still make her rapist son King and reap the rewards from his ascendance (who’d follow along for her and her house’s interests more than Rhaenyra would). In the show, she goes after Rhaenyra for presumably sleeping with a man not her husband....while she gives up her feet to fulfill Larys' sexual titillation in exchange for information. So Rhaenyra's sleeping with another man in a consensual setting is wrong, but somehow Alicent allowing herself to be used (she is Queen Consort, she can definitely order Larys around) and silencing one of her son's victims is okay? Both of these things that support sexual abuse?

In the book, she turns against Rhaenyra when Rhaenyra is 10, and we can see the implication that they began to actually fight ever since then, so Alicent antagonizes a 10 year old. At the tourney where Daemon comes back in the book, there were Essosi people who witnessed the tension between the two.

And why does she do all that? Because she wants to empower herself, her son, and disempower Rhaenyra. At the same time, Alicent fosters an environment where this is justified.

This is why she is hated. Book!her tries to use Rhaenyra having extramarital sex as pretext for deposing her, yet she is the one going against the King’s word when it is obvious he doesn’t give three shits.

@theroguewyrm answers this ASK where the asker breaks down more of Alicent’s hypocrisy:

[...] Alicent as she has constantly held Rhaenyra accountable for having illegitimate relations with men but when it comes to her she can do it as she cloaks it under the hood of duty. The hypocrisy was also shown when Alicent tolerates every single sexual crime committed by her son in the premises of the Red Keep and outside. If it is benefitting her then she’ll permit them, she’ll stay quiet, but will simultaneously use Rhaenyra’s affair with Harwin to vilify her.

C)

You: 

It’s really weird how Viserys referred to Aegon as Otto’s blood and Rhaenyra as his own blood when Aegon is also his child and therefore his blood.

That’s because he distrusts Otto and knows Otto wants his grandkids/these green boys to inherit the throne. Otto went so far as to continue to demand/suggest Viserys change the order of succession several times until Viserys dismissed him:

The amity between Her Grace and her stepdaughter had proved short- lived, for both Rhaenyra and Alicent aspired to be the first lady of the realm...and though the queen had given the king not one but two male heirs, Viserys had done nothing to change the order of succession. The Princess of Dragonstone remained his acknowledged heir, with half the lords of Westeros sworn to defend her rights.

[...]

The matter had been decided, so far as King Viserys was concerned; it was not an issue His Grace cared to revisit. Still, questions persisted, not the least from Queen Alicent herself. Loudest amongst her supporters was her father, Ser Otto Hightower, Hand of the King. Pushed too far on the matter, in 109 AC Viserys stripped Ser Otto of his chain of office and named in his place the taciturn Lord of Harrenhal, Lyonel Strong. “This Hand will not hector me,” His Grace proclaimed.

(“A Question of Succession”)

Viserys was being a bad dad here, I agre (unless this is about Aegon deserving to be named King, in which case, no, this is exactly how Viserys should act). Otto was also stupid as fuck for this. Both him and Alicent. And when it comes to feudalism --and most political systems tbh--the personal and the political are one and the same often. Viserys never learned, I think, to separate himself from kingship because the position and society doesn’t allow for this metaphysical existence, or for it to be practiced seriously and without consequences.

And these are the details of Rhaenyra’s naming-as-heir:

Disregarding the precedents set by King Jaehaerys in 92 and the Great Council in 101, Viserys declared his daughter, Rhaenyra, to be his rightful heir, and named her Princess of Dragonstone. In a lavish ceremony at King’s Landing, hundreds of lords did obeisance to the Realm’s Delight as she sat at her father’s feet at the base of the Iron Throne, swearing to honor and defend her right of succession.

(“A Question of Succession”)

Now from a more "pragmatic" standpoint, these lords already gave their oaths to Rhaenyra. To go back on it, while maybe welcome to some lords and others have canonically doen so in canon, would also diminish Viserys’ monarchial word’s value because of how huge the chnages are, and how he seems (publicly) to value oaths in general. 

While Tyland Lannister says that he never took oaths, oaths are still very seriously taken and regarded generally in this society (or like to think of themselves as doing so).

Viserys was not the best dad all the time to all his kids. Doesn't make what Alicent did excusable.

D)

a.

You:

The Hightowers behaved like any other family married into the royal family would, so I don’t get why they’re so hated.

We’re talking about the greens, here, not the Hightowers. Two, though related, separate entities for now.

The greens (Alicent, Otto, Aegon, Aemond, Daeron [Helaena is not a real active player], and any court people who sided with Alicent even if they didn't participate or couldn't during the war) are hated because they are misogynists turned up 11, with an over-inflated sense of their own male privilege. It causes them to maim, rape, cause genocide, attempt assassination against Rhaenyra, even disregard and turn against each other. And at last, make a 10 year old watch as his mother is eaten alive by a dragon. 

*EDIT 12/16/24* Incorrect Statement *END OF EDIT*

BTW, you slipped. Aegon, Aemond, Helaena, and Daeron and the kids from Aegon/Helaena are all Targs. Not Hightowers.

b.

You:

If Viserys didn’t want the Hightowers gaining more influence then he shouldn’t have married Alicent in the first place. It was stupid of him to expect one of the most powerful noble houses in Westeros to accept Targaryens of their blood just being spares instead of kings.  

Here’s the text:

Though Princess Rhaenyra had been proclaimed her father’s successor, there were many in the realm, at court and beyond it, who still hoped that Viserys might father a male heir, for the Young King was not yet thirty. Grand Maester Runciter was the first to urge His Grace to remarry, even suggesting a suitable choice: the Lady Laena Velaryon, who had just turned twelve.

(“A Question of Succession”)

We understand through this and through real life feudal politics that a king/Monarch was expected to have as many kids as possible so that in the event one or some die, the others could take their place.

The moment that Otto allowed Alicent to marry Viserys after Rhaenyra had been heir for 2 years, all of Alicent’s kids would have been “spares”. This would be true if Rhaenyra was male. 

Alicent and Otto both signed up for this, or really they pretended bc they depended on misogyny (them, tradition) toeventually send them to the top. So, I, in better conscience, can never stan if they depend on misogyny to send them forward, similar to when Rhaenyra uses classim and misogynoir against Nettles way later.

However, Rhaenyra is female, so Otto got greedy. It is only the thought that Viserys would automatically change heirs that Otto even contemplated it would be an easy thing to have Alicent’s kids as Viserys’ heirs because he thought Viserys would pass her over.

Take a look at the sociopolitical patterns. This is always the deal/sociopolitical expectation for second wives/Queen Consorts. If the monarch had kids from a first marriage , those kids are always before the ones in the second because they came first/are older.

Viserys makes Rhaenyra continue to be his heir and kinda treats her like he would his male heir in that her siblings remain the “spares” they would be if she were male. Thereby putting into practice equal primogentiure.

Otto has been with Viserys as his hand for years.....why did he not anticipate something like this?

[minervacasterly]

The role of a Queen Consort + she has to embody

"A queen had to be the embodiment of piety, beyond reproach morally, the guardian of the royal bloodline, a gentle and moderate mediator in the conflicts of men and a helpmeet to her husband. Her virtue was exemplified by her chastity and humility, her charity and her acts of mercy. People looked to her as “a kind mother, from whom no one goes away empty-handed.”1 A queen had to negotiate the political institution that was the court, which might mean subsuming her private loyalties to her duty to the King her husband. She was a fount of patronage to the Church and to scholars and artists. It was her duty to love her husband, and to play a subordinate role to him. She had to forge good relations with his relatives, his ministers and his household officers. Sometimes she had to be a regent, an administrator, a lawgiver and an intercessor."

- Queens of the Conquest (Chapter 12) by Alison Weir

For these and many other reasons Tudor history buffs are familiar with, Elizabeth of York was widely celebrated to the point of gaining cult status after her death. In her respective biographical works of EOY and her youngest son, Henry VIII's wives and mistresses, historian Amy Licence, emphasizes heavily on this by pointing out the similarities between Henry's calligraphy with that of her mother. Additionally, being the younger son, he and his sisters got to spend more time with the Queen. Carefully observing her behavior and the strong union between his parents, Henry came to idolize his mother. It was through these lens from which he judged most - if not all - of his wives.

The other Queen Consorts triumphed in some areas but missed in others. In Catherine of Aragon's case, it was the simple fact she couldn't give her husband a healthy male heir that could outlive his father. Jane probably wouldn't have excelled at the regency in the same calibre as Catherine and her mother, but with a healthy living son, this would have been overlooked in favor of the other virtues. Henry certainly didn't waste any time looking for a new wife, less than three years after her death. Despite quickly marrying and divorcing Anne of Cleves and then marrying Katherine Howard in less than a span of a year for the urgency of a second son, the urgency for a Consort to enhance the King's image became greater.

Catherine of Aragon's mother, Isabella I, was sovereign in Castilla but a Consort of Aragon due to the salic law and her husband being a King there. She embodied all the feminine virtues that Alison Weir informs the readers that people expected of royal consorts, in Aragon. She was seen as a strong and complimentary to Ferdinand's kingship.

The woman Henry VIII chose as his sixth and final consort was the twice widowed Catherine Parr. Named after Saint Catherine of Alexandria and Catherine of Aragon, Catherine Parr was as both her namesakes, a paragon of feminine virtue and religious matron. Albeit, Protestant, like Henry's Spanish Princess, Catherine Parr was a strong advocate of female education and the only other Consort besides Catherine of Aragon to serve as regent in her husband's absence. Given than she didn't belong to any foreign royal house, it was easy for her to cultivate a good relationship between her family and the Tudors. Since her second marriage, she had served as a motherly figure to younger women who are in need of good role models. Similarly, she became one for her youngest stepdaughter, Lady Elizabeth, a good surrogate mother for Prince Edward and a trusted friend to her oldest stepdaughter, Lady Mary.

The role of a Queen sovereign differed from that of a Consort. Given the powers a sovereign could wield, the role of a Queen Consort is often seen as less important or is altogether dismissed but as seen from these examples, this has never been the case.

[catherinesvalois]

Isabella d’Angoulême and King John of England

“Contemporaries were at a loss to explain John’s action in offending the Lusignan family, important lords in lower Poitou. They attributed his marriage to “a mad infatuation with a beautiful princess,” already the prize of another. A strange passion it was, since she was all of twelve years old. While some modern writers continue to accept this romantic version of the marriage, other see it as “calculated and passionless.”

- King John: England’s Evil King? Ralph V Turner

[portrayed by  Léa Seydoux and Oscar Isaac in Robin Hood (2010)]

[heavyarethecrowns]

[reginanobilis]

Sister Queens (5/7)

Marguerite of Provence (1221-1295), Eleanor of Provence (1223-1291), Sanchia of Provence (1228-1261), and Beatrice of Provence (1229-1267)