Home > History Group > Discussion Board

I am fasinated by Queen Elizabeth. I think she was an extraordinary women and especially since she ruled a whole kingdom by herself! She didn't need to marry a man or have children (even though people pestered her about it) in order to be such a great ruler!

I do not see the connection between being an extraordinary woman or being a great ruler, and marrying a man or having a children. If you are saying that for a woman to be successful without the a man to help her, is in itself a great achievement, I would say that that is an insult to capabilities of women in general.

Some historian believe that one of the reasons for Queen Elizabeth I not marrying was political - she behaved as if she is inclined towards bot Protestant and Catholic suitors, but she did not marry anyone. Thus she managed to retain some degree of support form both these religious factions.

She ruled England for 45 years fro 1558 to 1603. This period is often called Golden Age because during this period England achieved peace and prosperity.

I was giving my opinion in what I thought about her.  And I don't see how it would be an insult at all. 

And yes the reasons for her marrying was political and for that reason is probably why she didn't marry at all. She didn't even marry Robert Dudley, he was the only serious personal love interest of the Queen's life. Politically, however, marrying him would have been a disaster.  He was unpopular as he was the son of the traitor Northumberland, and was loathed even more after his wife was found dead in mysterious circumstances. It was thought he had murdered her so he would be free to marry Elizabeth.

I believe in order to be a ruler there has to be compassion which I believe Elizabeth had much of and thats why she was well loved. Unlike Henry VII, where there was so much turmoil.  It was called the Golden Age because of Queen Elizabeth I.

I love this topic! Re #2, it appears from your avatar that you are a male; I don't think that men can possibly grasp the significance that a ruler like Elizabeth I holds for contemporary women. The idea that a woman could reject the conventional wisdom and live her life on her own terms, and at the same time retain control of an entire government, is mind-boggling in the context of the 16th century. I have read several biographies of Elizabeth I and admire her greatly for her ability to manipulate society's expectations, leading her advisors and suitors to think that she would eventually marry, and all the while retaining her independence and her power. She is an amazing icon of feminine power.

Please ladies, I am a firm believer that women are no less than men, and this is what I am tryin to say in my post #2.

I understand, and I didn't take offense at your post #2. I'm just offering an explanation for why females might have such strong opinions on Elizabeth I. Although you believe that women are no less than men, as do I, the fact remains that it is much more difficult for female leaders to reach the pinnacles of authority the way that Elizabeth I was able to do. She is a true role model for the ages.

The reign of Elizabeth I was the 'English Renaissnace'. Well, I think she was a great ruler to lead the golden age of England. She looks greater because she proved her leadership as a queen in the patriarchal society of the past.

The most significant achievement, in my opinion, that Elizabeth cooperated peace with the English parliament. Many rulers of England and other nations in Europe had conflict with parliaments, and the age of conflicts between kings and parliaments was a national chaos. Elizabeth was smart for which she cooperated with parliament and brought stability and prosperity to England.

The reign of Queen Elizabeth I is considered among historians' as England's 'Golden Age', the question is why? Queen Elizabeth faced a tremendous amount of adversity when she became Queen. Her father King Henry VIII plunged England into religious turmoil, and it was only after the death of her half brother, and catholic half sister that she gained the throne. There is no denying the girl faced obstacles. Elizabeth grew into her position and I have great respect for her ability to do so. Anyone with less resolve would have failed. I think Queen Elizabeth's presense and rallying speech tapped into every English soldier who heard her. In that moment she demonstrated such a high level of leadership qualities, the soldiers didn't see a woman...they saw a leader, one they all aspired to. England defeated The Spanish Armada in 1588 at the time when Spain was undeniably the foremost power on the face of the earth. Her accomplishments proved that a woman had as much capability, dedication, and strength as a King. In the end however Queen Elizabeth paid a price for her strength, at a time when women were not supposed to possess such strength. Her love for a man of lesser status could never be legitimate, she never married, and as a result never bore children. In some ways she was an unconventional woman for her time, but her strength and resolve excused the 'Queen' who acted as a KING. In other ways she was just a woman who happened to be THE QUEEN.  I have great respect for her on many different levels.

dbello posted:

In the end however Queen Elizabeth paid a price for her strength, at a time when women were not supposed to possess such strength. Her love for a man of lesser status could never be legitimate, she never married, and as a result never bore children.

This is the great irony of Elizabeth's success; in order to achieve her greatness, she had to forfeit the family life that most women treasure. Even today, women are still paying that price; if they do choose family life, they have to wait for career success until their children get older, or they have to juggle a million balls in order to achieve that success while their children are still young. Accomplished women are still largely viewed as somehow not deserving of the same support that accomplished men take for granted from their spouses.