The Power of the Royal Matriarchs of France

In the first of two articles I chose to critique in the Proceedings of the Consortium on Revolutionary Europe, I selected the paper Revolution and the Royal Consort, written by Nancy Barker from the University of Texas. This article was one of three in the 1989 proceedings that focused on the role of women during the Revolutionary Period. This article compares three female monarchs of three different revolutions, and the vilification and abuse they endured during these turbulent revolutions. All three would face tragic fates, as two were executed and the other fleeing to exile. Despite the fact that three monarchs were separated by time period, all three shared similarities such as personality and nuptial experiences.

The three women in question, Henrietta Maria, Marie Antoinette, and Alexandra all were strikingly beautiful women. All birthed several children and had husbands who loved them by showing an unwavering faithfulness to their wives through many years of marriage. The three women also had character traits that demanded the respect of all, subordinate or equal. Finally, all three were bred from backgrounds where a prominent female ruler came to the forefront. These experiences produced an iron-like personality in all three of these women, resulting in the three being the stronger psychologically than their ruling husbands. In turn, the women treated their husbands like children, rather than their esteemed titles of rulers of their respective countries. The matriarchal figure was at times the driving force behind the recognized ruler.

With the focus on personality, all three women exuded was their nationality in respect to the country that they governed. All three were natives of foreign countries other than that of which their husbands ruled. This resulted in an ignorance at times of the country that they resided in, causing some to question why this foreigner was part of their monarchy and ultimately leading to their future demises. Despite not being native born, all three were active in matters involving the state. None of the three possessed any legal right to entertain dealings of the state, but were able to do so secretly behind the scenes and indirectly through their husbands. Because of these behind the scene dealings, stereotypical traits of females of the time period were cast upon them. Gender inequality was as much of an issue in the past as it is in the present day. Another commonality of the women was the unjust accusations of immorality placed against them. Despite the fact that all three led lives free of the corruption and chaos of previous monarchs, unfounded charges were still prevalent.

With all of their characteristics at hand, the fact that they were indeed foreigners would become their downfall. In times of revolution, the natives seek out those who are different from their revolting ways. This difference could be skin color, political allegiance, or being a foreigner to their homeland. The confident authoritative male ruler could eventually win acceptance from the people for his foreign spouse, assuming the male ruler possessed these vital traits. With all three women residing in societies loathing the rule of female monarchs, these supposedly corrupt and impure women stood little chance of capturing the support of the people. The people believed that being submissive to your wife would be the undoing of that monarch. With the male head of state out of the way of the will of the people, his female counterpart deserved to receive his same fate.

“Revolution and the Royal Consort,” written by Nancy Barker from the University of Texas appearing in “Proceedings of the Consortium on Revolutionary Europe.” (1989): 136-143.