The Lioness Roared: The Problems of Female Rule in English History

Queenship and Power

by Charles Beem

How were English ruling queens able to assert and maintain their authority over male dominant, patriarchal political cultures? This study combines the methodologies of gender studies and political and constitutional history to provide a sweeping historical explanation for how these women pulled off such a feat. While ruling queens occupied the office of king, they still had to conform to contemporary expectations of womanhood that served as social and political roadblocks to the full exercise of regal power. Charles Beem has identified a specific yet panoramic set of problems facing female rulers throughout British history, from the twelfth century empress Matilda's imaginative efforts to become England's first regnant queen, to Queen Victoria's remarkable exercise of political power during the Bedchamber Crisis of 1839.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Tudor Period, British Literature

280 pages, Paperback

First published April 3, 2006

Reviews

[Megan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Introduction and for Chapter 1 - 'Making a Name for Herself: the Empress Matilda and the Construction of Female Lordship in Twelfth-Century England' - read for research for my Honours thesis; rating only applies to those chapters instead of the whole text.

And yes, I'm including this in my GR challenge :P

[Mindy aka serenity · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book focuses on English queens throughout history and describes the extra challenges that they endured in order to create themselves as a ruling monarch, brought on because of their gender and the conflicting gender norms of their time periods. Empress Matilda is the first to be examined, who was the daughter of Henry I in the 1100s, whose birthright was stolen by her uncle Stephen when her father died. She waged a civil war for the throne and nearly succeeded, but just when she was about to be crowned the city of London staged a revolt and threw her out. The author describes her issues as 1) she had an unpopular husband that the English didn't want near the throne, and 2) when in power she acted like her father would have done, that is as an uncompromising and authoritative leader. If a man acts this way he is considered strong and powerful, however, coming from a woman the people were repulsed, saying that it was behavior unbecoming a woman. She fell victim to the original double standard, that certain behavior is acceptable for a man, but if a woman does it she is demonized.
The other chapters focus on Mary I, daughter of Henry VIII and predecessor to Elizabeth I, whom Beem gives credit to for paving the way for acceptance of female kingship, which her sister took full advantage of. Next is Queen Anne, who ruled alone in the 1700s and whose husband set the precedent for the prince consort role, a man married to the queen but having no regal authority. The last chapter is about Victoria at the beginning of her reign, who through refusing to politicize her bedchamber set a precedent that only the queen regnant, or female king, was able to rise about the gender norms of her day. All others, including a queen's attendants, should be restricted by the Victorian ideal of separate and unequal spheres for men and women.
This was a very interesting book. It argues that a reigning queen was both a king and a queen at the same time, and not necessarily a paragon of feminism as we may prefer. A queen, or female king, was above the distinctions of gender, but could still use gendered expectations of behavior in interactions with the male government. Elizabeth and Mary used the ideology that they were wives to their country for example, as well as playing up their expected ignorance of "manly matters" of state to disarm and manipulate, making it a roundabout way to exert direct power but in the end most of the time achieving the desired result.

[Ben · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very solid piece of scholarship that explores how women throughout English history have dealt with the various issues arising from a person of their gender holding the office of monarch. Beem's main argument is that scholarship on 'queenship' should really be a subcategory of that of 'kingship,' because queens regnant were essentially conceived of as female kings. I mostly focused on the chapter on Mary Tudor, where he explores how Mary attempted to portray herself as a naive, obedient woman while behind the scenes she often exerted her authority. Quite fascinating, and I am particularly taken with his phrase 'gender blending,' which he used to describe how Mary mixed common attributes of women (obedience, chastity, etc.) with those of a male monarch (authority, etc.).