16th Century Attitudes Towards Female Rulers (Edexcel A-Level History): Revision Notes
16th Century Attitudes Towards Female Rulers
Introduction
The 16th century presented unique challenges for female monarchs in England. When Mary Tudor became queen in 1553, it marked the first time in 400 years that a woman ruled England in her own right. Both Mary and her half-sister Elizabeth I faced significant obstacles rooted in contemporary attitudes about women and their capabilities. Understanding these attitudes is essential for grasping the particular difficulties both queens faced, especially regarding the crucial question of marriage.
The accession of Mary Tudor in 1553 was unprecedented in English history. For the first time in centuries, England would be ruled by a woman in her own right, not as a queen consort married to a king. This situation would test deeply held beliefs about gender, power, and governance.
Contemporary views on women and rulership
Religious and biblical arguments
In the 16th century, society widely viewed women as fundamentally inferior to men. This belief was deeply rooted in religious teachings and biblical interpretation. John Knox, a Protestant evangelical and opponent of Mary Tudor, articulated these views most forcefully in his work First Blast of the Trumpet against the Monstrous Regiment of Women (1558). Knox used the word regiment to mean 'rule' or 'government', and he described female rule as monstrous, meaning unnatural or against the natural order.
Knox's arguments drew heavily on biblical authority. He claimed women were inferior to men for two key reasons:
- Women had been created from man (the biblical story of Eve being made from Adam's rib)
- Eve's temptation of Adam in the Garden of Eden had caused humanity's fall from grace
Knox's View on Female Rule
Knox concluded that women could not be trusted with power, writing:
to promote a woman to bear rule, superiority, dominion or empire above any realm, nature or city is repugnant to nature, contumely to God, a thing most contrarious to his revealed will and approved ordinance, and finally it is the subversion of good order, of all equity and justice.
This quotation demonstrates the religious foundation of opposition to female monarchy. Knox argued that female rule was not merely unwise but actually contrary to God's will and the natural order of creation.
These views were not merely the opinions of Protestant extremists. They reflected widespread assumptions about gender that permeated 16th century society, affecting both Catholic and Protestant attitudes towards female monarchy.
Legal and historical precedents
While English law did not explicitly forbid a woman from becoming queen in her own right, there were virtually no strong precedents (previous examples) to guide how female rule should work. The historical examples that did exist were not encouraging.
Historical Precedent: Queen Matilda (1135)
The most significant precedent was Queen Matilda in 1135. When Matilda inherited the throne, her male cousin Stephen challenged her claim, resulting in 18 years of devastating civil war known as 'the Anarchy'.
Significantly, this conflict was only resolved when it was agreed that Matilda's son Henry would rule after Stephen's death, not Matilda herself. She was effectively excluded from power despite being the legitimate heir.
This example suggested that female rule would inevitably lead to instability and conflict.
In the 15th century, another revealing example occurred when Henry VII became king through his mother Margaret Beaufort, who had the hereditary claim to the throne but was still alive. Rather than Margaret ruling herself, her claim passed to her son. This demonstrated the assumption that even when a woman had the legal right to the throne, a male relative should exercise that power instead.
However, by 1553, circumstances had changed. There was no alternative male Tudor heir available. Even Edward VI and the Duke of Northumberland recognised this reality when they attempted to alter the succession in favour of Lady Jane Grey (another woman) rather than Mary. The absence of a male Tudor heir meant England would have to accept female rule, despite prevailing attitudes about women's capabilities.
Roles and expectations in personal monarchy
Traditional gender roles
In the age of personal monarchy (where the monarch actively governed), the king and queen had clearly defined and separate roles. Understanding these traditional roles helps explain the challenges faced by female rulers.
The king's role included:
- Ruling the country and making political decisions
- Dispensing justice
- Defending the realm by personally leading troops into battle
- Providing strong, decisive leadership
The queen consort's role (a queen married to a king) included:
- Being the king's wife and companion
- Interceding with the king for peace and mercy
- Providing the king with a male heir
- Offering a softer, more merciful counterbalance to the king's authority
The Gender Role Dilemma
These gendered expectations created immediate problems when Mary and Elizabeth came to the throne. As queens regnant (queens ruling in their own right), they were expected to fulfil the king's role, yet contemporary attitudes suggested women were incapable of such responsibilities.
The fundamental question was: How could a woman perform tasks like leading armies into battle or making complex political decisions when society believed these were beyond female capabilities?
Assumptions about female rulers
The Holy Roman Emperor Charles V articulated the widespread view that a female ruler would need male assistance. He instructed his ambassadors to tell Mary:
You will point out to her that it will be necessary, in order to be supported in the labour of governing and assisted in matters that are not of ladies' capacity, that she soon contract matrimony with the person who shall appear to her most fit from the above point of view.
This quotation reveals the assumption that certain aspects of government were simply beyond women's capabilities. Marriage was seen not just as personally desirable but as politically essential for a female monarch.
The expectation was that a husband would take on the traditional kingly functions, particularly military leadership and complex political decision-making, which contemporary society believed women could not perform.
Mary Tudor's approach to marriage
Why Mary chose to marry Philip of Spain
Mary took the conventional view that she needed a husband to help her govern effectively. Her decision to marry Philip of Spain was driven by a combination of dynastic considerations (concerns about the royal succession and family alliances) and religious factors.
Philip was, in many ways, the obvious choice for several reasons:
Political advantages:
- Marrying a foreign prince who was already a king meant Mary would be marrying her equal in rank, which was appropriate for her status
- It avoided the problem of marrying an English nobleman, which would have created dangerous jealousy and rivalry at court (especially with candidates like Edward Courtenay, a distant relative)
- Philip was heir to the Spanish throne, and Spain was England's natural ally in Europe
- Spanish power provided a useful counterbalance to French dominance
- Spain controlled the Netherlands, which was vital for England's cloth trade (the country's most important export)
Religious and personal factors:
- Philip was a devout Catholic who would support Mary's plans to restore Roman Catholicism to England
- Mary was half-Spanish herself (through her mother, Catherine of Aragon)
- Philip was her cousin, making this a family alliance
At 37 years old, Mary needed to marry quickly if she was to have any realistic chance of bearing a son and heir who could continue the Catholic reformation she was planning.
Opposition to the Spanish marriage
Despite Mary's determination to marry Philip, she faced significant opposition from multiple quarters. This opposition was directly related to concerns about her being a female ruler.
Opposition from the Council: Mary's own Privy Council expressed concerns, with Stephen Gardiner (Lord Chancellor) particularly favouring the alternative marriage to Edward Courtenay instead.
Opposition from Parliament: When Parliament met in 1553, the Speaker expressed serious concerns about the proposed marriage to Philip. This demonstrates the particular difficulties faced by Mary as a female ruler. The concerns raised were based on contemporary attitudes about women's roles and capabilities.
Parliament worried that:
- If Mary married a foreigner, her husband would automatically take control and rule England
- Philip might decide to take Mary abroad to live in Spain
- England would lose its independence and become subordinate to Spanish interests
The Double Standard in Royal Marriage
These fears would not have arisen if a male king had chosen to marry a foreign princess. A queen consort (a woman married to a king) was not expected to take over power or influence her husband's rule significantly. However, a king consort (a man married to a queen) was assumed to naturally dominate his wife and take control of government.
This reveals the fundamental problem: in a society where husbands were expected to have authority over their wives, how could a female monarch maintain her power after marriage?
The marriage treaty of 1554
Mary and her Council attempted to address these fears by negotiating a detailed marriage treaty in 1554 that protected Mary's power and English independence. The terms were carefully designed to limit Philip's authority:
Key Provisions of the Marriage Treaty:
- Philip would receive the title of king, but he would not actually rule. He would only be allowed to assist Mary in government
- If Mary died first, Philip would not be able to continue ruling England on his own
- Philip's son from an earlier marriage, Don Carlos, would have no claim to the English throne
- Any children born to Mary and Philip would inherit the English throne
- Philip was forbidden from appointing foreigners to positions in the English government
- England would not be drawn into wars between Spain and France
These treaty terms were unprecedented and existed entirely because Mary was a woman. A male king marrying a foreign princess would not have needed such restrictions, as his wife would not have been expected to challenge his authority.
The treaty reveals the deep anxiety about male power over female rulers and demonstrates how Mary's gender created unique political complications.
Consequences of being a female ruler
The marriage issue had serious political consequences. Popular fears about the Spanish marriage contributed to Wyatt's Rebellion in January 1554, led by Sir Thomas Wyatt. The concerns raised by Parliament, the Council, and the rebels all stemmed from the fact that Mary was a woman attempting to rule in a society that believed women should be subordinate to men.
The assumption was that marriage would inevitably mean Philip would dominate Mary and control England, regardless of what any treaty said. This suspicion of foreign influence would have existed for any monarch marrying a foreigner, but the specific fear that a foreign husband would take over power was unique to a female ruler.
Elizabeth I's approach to marriage
Pressure to marry
When Elizabeth succeeded Mary in 1558, aged 25, she faced similar expectations about marriage. She was young enough to bear children, and like Mary before her, it was universally expected that she would marry. The pressure on Elizabeth was particularly intense because she was the last of the Tudor dynasty. If she died without an heir, the Tudor line would end, potentially causing serious political instability.
This concern became urgent in 1562 when Elizabeth fell dangerously ill with smallpox. Her councillors were terrified about what would happen if she died without naming a successor, as this could trigger civil war between rival claimants. The illness highlighted the vulnerability of having an unmarried, childless monarch.
In 1566, Elizabeth angrily confronted a parliamentary delegation who had requested that she marry and produce an heir, showing her frustration with constant pressure on this issue.
Elizabeth's suitors
Elizabeth had numerous marriage prospects, both English and foreign:
English suitors:
- Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester (son of the executed Duke of Northumberland) was probably Elizabeth's favourite, but marrying an English nobleman would have created dangerous tensions at court, as other nobles would resent his elevation
Foreign suitors:
- Philip II of Spain (Elizabeth's former brother-in-law through his marriage to Mary) proposed marriage, offering both an alliance with Spain and the prospect of a powerful Catholic husband
- Archduke Charles of Austria from the Holy Roman Empire, which would have created a valuable alliance with the Habsburgs
- Henry, Duke of Anjou, a French prince, was given serious consideration as late as 1581
The Anjou marriage negotiations continued even when Elizabeth was in her late forties and too old to bear children safely. This suggests the negotiations were more about diplomatic advantage than producing an heir. Like all the previous marriage discussions, the Anjou match came to nothing.
Elizabeth's decision to remain single
Unlike Mary, Elizabeth was deeply wary of marriage because of the problems it presented to a female ruler. She recognised that marrying would create the same difficulties Mary had faced: how to prevent a husband from taking over power.
Elizabeth was not prepared to marry, but she used the prospect of marriage as a valuable tool in diplomatic negotiations. By keeping multiple foreign suitors interested, she could maintain alliances and diplomatic relationships without committing to any particular alliance through marriage.
Turning gender into advantage
Instead of seeing her gender purely as a disadvantage, Elizabeth cleverly used it to her political advantage. She encouraged the development of the Virgin Queen image from the late 1570s onwards. This imagery drew on Catholic veneration of the Virgin Mary and presented Elizabeth as a pure, untouchable figure married to England itself rather than to any individual man.
Elizabeth also promoted the culture of courtly love at her court. This was a medieval tradition where knights would perform deeds to win a lady's favour. Ambitious young courtiers could attract Elizabeth's attention and advance their careers through personal attraction, charm, and elaborate displays of devotion. These male favourites included:
- Robert Dudley
- Sir Christopher Hatton
- Sir Walter Raleigh
Elizabeth's Strategic Use of Gender
However, Elizabeth managed these relationships carefully to maintain control. By remaining the unattainable Virgin Queen, she ensured that no single man could claim to have power over her. The favourites competed for her attention, which gave her leverage over them and prevented any one courtier from becoming too powerful.
This strategy allowed Elizabeth to benefit from male courtiers' talents and ambition while avoiding the subordination that marriage would have entailed. As a virgin queen, she maintained her independence and authority in ways that a married queen could not.
Exam focus
For essay questions on female rulers:
- Always link attitudes to gender with specific political consequences (e.g. marriage treaties, succession anxieties)
- Compare and contrast Mary's and Elizabeth's different strategies for dealing with being female monarchs
- Consider both continuity (both faced similar prejudices) and change (Elizabeth learned from Mary's experience)
- Use specific evidence like the Knox quotation and marriage treaty terms to support analytical points
Common mistakes to avoid:
- Don't assume 16th century attitudes were monolithic – there was debate and discussion
- Don't present Mary and Elizabeth's situations as identical – their different personalities and circumstances led to different choices
- Don't ignore religion – Protestant vs Catholic attitudes added complexity to views on female rule
Key Argument to Develop:
While both Mary and Elizabeth faced prejudice based on their gender, they responded differently. Mary accepted contemporary assumptions and sought a husband to help her govern, leading to political complications. Elizabeth rejected marriage and turned her gender into a political asset through the Virgin Queen image, ultimately proving more successful in maintaining her authority.
Remember!
Key Points to Remember:
- 16th century society viewed women as inferior to men, based on biblical teachings and lack of historical precedents for successful female rule
- Marriage created unique problems for female monarchs because husbands were expected to dominate their wives and take control of government
- Mary Tudor's marriage to Philip of Spain required an unprecedented treaty to protect her power, demonstrating anxieties about female rule
- Elizabeth I remained single and used her gender to political advantage through the Virgin Queen image and courtly love culture
- Both queens faced similar prejudices but responded with different strategies, with Elizabeth's approach proving more successful in maintaining her independence and authority