Introduction

Margaret of Austria,
Regent of the Netherlands, 1507-30
A deceptively demure portrait of
Margaret as a widow
Royal Museum of Fine Arts, Brussels

In the early-modern period, power was dynastic. It centred round the king and therefore inevitably around his family. This meant that at least some women within his family would exercise political power. Through dynastic accident or political circumstances, the sixteenth century in particular saw an unusual number of female rulers. But the seventeenth century also had its share of women rulers – two regents in France, a reigning queen in Sweden, two reigning queens in Britain. The most extreme example of a woman holding political power is found in Russia in the eighteenth century. Because the monarchy was the personal possession of the tsar, he could bestow it on female relatives. As a result, Russia had four reigning empresses.

Regents

The mother of a monarch might be regent while he (or, more rarely she) was young (Mary of Guise, Catherine de Medici, Marie de Medici, Anne of Austria) or absent (Louise of Savoy). 

Louise of Savoy
Public domain

His wife might be a temporary regent while he was absent (Two of Henry VIII's wives, Catherine of Aragon and Katherine Parr, acted as regents when he was in France). When James IV of Scotland was killed at the battle of Flodden, his wife, Margaret, became regent for her infant son, James V.

His sister might also be a regent. Anne de Beaujeu, popularly known as ‘Madame la Grande’, was regent during the minority of her brother Charles VIII of France from 1483-91. From 1682-89 Sophia Aleckseyevna was regent for her brother and half-brother, Ivan and Peter. (This did not turn out well for her!)

A ruler's female relative might be a permanent regent if his domains were too large for him to govern by himself. The Netherlands was governed by three women in succession: Margaret of Austria, the aunt of Charles V; Mary of Hungary, his sister; Margaret of Parma the half-sister of Philip II. 

The other Margaret:
Margaret of Parma,
Governor of the Netherlands
for Philip II
Public Domain

As regents women could sign peace treaties, the most famous of these being the Treaty of Cambrai of 1529, known as the  ‘Ladies’ Peace', between Margaret of Austria and Louise of Savoy.

Daughters

A ruler’s daughters were invaluable because of their marriage alliances. Isabella of Castile’s councillor of state, Hernando de Pulgar, told Isabella: 

If your Highness gives us two or three more daughters, in twenty years’ time you will  have the pleasure of seeing your children and grandchildren on all the thrones of Europe. 

The Habsburg Empire was built up on these alliances. When Ferdinand and Isabella’s only son, Don Juan, died, their daughters became especially important. Juana became her mother’s heir, and her marriage to Philip the Handsome, Duke of Burgundy led to the unification of Spain and the Netherlands. When their younger daughter,  Catalina, married Arthur, Prince of Wales in 1501 it provided invaluable recognition for the Tudor dynasty.

In 1572 Catherine de Medici secured the marriage of her daughter, Margot, to Henry of Navarre in an unsuccessful attempt to bring about peace between Catholics and Huguenots. 

Queens regnant

In countries or territories that allowed female succession (Castile, England, Scotland, Sweden, Brittany, Navarre) women could be rulers in their own right. However, this was regarded as anomalous, contrary to biblical and classical tradition. Because it was taken for granted that the queen would only be able to rule with the help of her husband, the choice (or not) of a marriage partner could make or break her. Isabella of Castile’s choice was a huge success, but the two choices of Mary Queen of Scots proved disastrous. Mary's grandmother, Margaret Tudor, widowed Queen of Scots, also ruined her chances of political power through the unwise choice of a second husband. It is therefore understandable that Elizabeth I never married, though this created a potential succession problem.

Producers of heirs (or not)

A queen’s greatest achievement was to produce a male heir. Isabella of Castile enormously strengthened her position in her succession war with her rival when she gave birth to a son in 1478. Her daughter, Catherine, failed to achieve this. Her granddaughter, Mary, produced no children at all. On the other hand, after years of humiliation, Catherine de Medici’s status was enormously enhanced when she gave birth to her first son, the future François II, in 1544.

Controversy

Women rulers were often associated with very controversial, even bloodthirsty, actions. Isabella set up the Spanish Inquisition, Mary I initiated the burnings of Protestants, Elizabeth I presided over the persecution of Catholics, Mary Queen of Scots was seen as her husband’s murderess, and Catherine de Medici was regarded as responsible for the Massacre of St Bartholomew’s Day. Anne of Austria was the target of scurrilous sexual pamphleteers.

The ideological problem

The existence of women rulers posed ideological problems as both the biblical and classical traditions were clear that women were inferior physically, morally and, intellectually, and therefore not meant to exert authority over men. Yet a woman ruler was required to possess masculine virtues. In his Discourse about Feminine Virtue (1582) the Italian poet Torquato Tasso argued that the first duty of a princess was to her royal status, and that by birth she was a man. This meant that she should be judged by masculine standards.


But in the republican tradition, exemplified by Machiavelli, one of the weaknesses of the monarchical system was that it was prone to female influence. One of Machiavelli’s key words was virtù – a quality associated with masculinity. Women could not lead armies into battle and they were believed to be especially prone to intrigue. 

A second edition of John Knox's
'First Blast'
A combination of
misogyny and proto-democracy

This misogynistic tradition gained new virulence in the sixteenth century because of the prevalence of female rulers and the misdeeds often associated with them. The radical Protestants, John Knox and François Hotman, argued that women were not merely forbidden by scripture to rule, but that they were so weak morally and intellectually that they were intrinsically unfit for government and they called on their subjects to depose them. See here for the full text of Knox's First Blast of the Trumpet against the Monstrous Regiment [Rule] of Women.

Conclusion

1. In an age of dynastic politics it was not uncommon for women to exercise political power, sometimes in their own right, but more often because of male relatives. The sixteenth century, in particular, was remarkable for the number of women rulers.
2. But these women were regarded as anomalies and were often the targets of misogyny. There was no overall change in the perception of women, and the existence of female rulers made no difference to the status of women in general.