Hacker News Reader

Comment by ViktorRay | Hacker News Reader

Is is true that they believed women couldn’t rule? England was not the first European country to have a female monarch. By the time all this was going on there had been a female monarch elsewhere in Europe a few decades earlier.

Would be interesting if there were any texts at the time discussing this.

I’m asking out of genuine curiosity not to start an argument.

View on HN

Jadwiga of Poland - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jadwiga_of_Poland crowned as king

Anna Jagiellon - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Jagiellon

I do think it’s fair to point out that both of these postage Matilda by a few hundred years. I’m actually struggling to think of many Christian European kingdoms that would have at this point.

France only had kings at that point (in fact, Matilda’s son Henry II’s marriage to Eleanor of Acquitaine comes about because she didn’t give the king of France a son!)

Germany (HRE) selected their emperor so didn’t have succession problems in that sense.

Italy was a collection of city states, Naples was yet to form a kingdom.

Maybe Poland had an earlier queen? But then I don’t know if English nobles paid much attention to Poland, to be honest!

No idea, but from this handy page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_monarchs

it seems like the rest of the world (India, China, Thailand, Egypt, ...) had female monarchs of various sorts ('queen regnant' seems like a relevant terminology here, I'm not sure).

The closest ones to Europe (discounting ancient Egypt?) might be:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85sa_Haraldsdottir_of_Agde... (semi-legendary)

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinar_of_Hereti (11th C. Georgian)

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boudica (of course, also other less-well known Britons)

Actually, there are a fair few Greek and Spanish examples. One other possible might be:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petronilla_of_Aragon (12th C.)

So there were some texts later discussing the problems of Elizabeth I being Queen Regnant when all laws and customs referred to a “King.” We also see a lot of her father’s behaviour (Henry VIII) being driven by his need for a male heir. It’s why he tries to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon.

Further, there were specific reasons why Elizabeth I was treated differently to her father. For example, Henry VIII used to meet with counsellors when he woke up in the morning, still in bed. For obvious reasons, this was not done when his daughter reigned.

Not to mention the Privy Council, so named because they were trusted to speak to the King while he was on the toilet!

I don’t think the modern day Privy Council ever met with Elizabeth II in such a way!

I don't think that's why it's called a "Privy Council". Just because the only meaning for privy that you know, today, is a toilet, does not mean that the word in another context means toilet, any more than the fact you know the verb "do" in English can be slang for sexual intercourse means that when Marlo says "Do it or don't" in The Wire he means for his soldiers to have sex. He's indicating that he doesn't care whether they murder Bubbles.

"Privy" more generally means private or personal, which explains its use for a group which advises specifically the monarch alone.

I just checked and you’re right! I’m mixing it up with Groom of the Stool, which was a separate but also honourable position.

> According to the Oxford dictionary the definition of the word "privy" in Privy Council is an obsolete one meaning "Of or pertaining exclusively to a particular person or persons; one's own",[3] insofar as the council is personal to the sovereign.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privy_Council_of_England#Name

Yep, you’re right. I was mixing it up with Groom of the Stool.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com