answersLogoWhite

0

Ideally, the queen could substitute for the king in every field of importance. She could rule as a king. She understood and could deal with laws. She could be a diplomat. She could control the court. She could manage an army. She could do these things because she had been taught to do them.

When a princess or other high born girl was born, there was always the hope that she would become a queen or great lady, and so she was educated to that end.

Queens were not merely trophies, and this can be understood by examining the nature of monarchy. Usually, a king had an heir. The heir knew he would become king on the death of the current king, and if he was impatient had a temptation to get rid of the current king. Kings could be usurped by people other than heirs, particularly if the heir was very young or too weak to rule. Kings could be attacked from inside the nation, by rebels, or outside, by foreigners. Most often, the one person, whose interests were most aligned with those of the king, was the queen. So most often, the queen was the one person the king could trust most.

Kings went away on crusades. Kings went away for wars. Kings got sick and could not work. And when these things happened, the best person to take the place of the king in all matters was the queen, if he could trust her.

That being the case, the most attractive woman for a king to marry was one who was prepared to rule in his place. A beautiful woman who was unprepared was a fool's mate.

History is full of stories of both bright and foolish kings, and both well prepared and ill prepared queens.

There are some links below to biographical articles on medieval queens who had recorded education and experience in government.

User Avatar

Wiki User

15y ago

What else can I help you with?