Why no Queen's?

[Jasper The Builder]

I think its sexiest that in Medieval Total War we don't have Queens!

In England during the time of the game period we had Matilda as Queen of England, I think that the succession in MTW basically sucks. In Rome i loved the idea of choosing my successor, Maybe this is unrealistic as i know during those times they had basic laws so that a son or daughter took the throne, But why if my King only has a daughter can't see become Queen?

Blowing in the wind? Or fair point to enhance our gaming experience?

[Subedei]

Good point, but I guess it is b/c of the battlefield charkter animation....then on the other hand, I think we have Jeanne D'Arc in the game? Do we?

[diotavelli]

For a lot of factions, a reigning queen (as opposed to a queen consort) would not have been possible.

The French started it in Christendom with the so-called Salic Law (which debarred women from inheriting a throne) and the idea was picked up in one form or another by many of the other states of the time.

I'm pretty sure that Islam debars women from ruling men but whether that is Quranic or just tradition, I'm not sure. There'll be someone on these forums who could tell you, I guess.

Finally, there were some states with reigning queens but the example you gave shows the problems inherent in that. Matilda's rule was opposed by an enormous number of her subjects - hence her civil wars with Stephen. After Matilda, the English didn't have another reigning queen for what, four centuries?

I think CA probably realised that reigning queens were a bad idea. Some factions simply couldn't have them and those that could might well be faced with constant civil war until her majesty popped her clogs.

[Zarky]

And there has to be change to capture/kill enemy faction leader in the battlefield.

[Ulstan]

"In England during the time of the game period we had Matilda as Queen of England"

Empress Maude? The one that got disosseseed by Stephen of Blois and spent many years fighting back and forth with him and wound up losing? I think she ruled for all of one year, so her example, at least, tends to point to the contrary direction: a woman was unlikely to remain at the throne with so many ambitious nobles scattered about the landscapes.

[mrpants]

Matilda,
Jane
Mary 1
Elizabeth 1

But yes they were few and far between. Anyway until Mary 1st if the Queen married then the man became King and therefore...

[Parmenion]

Lots of good points here.
I don't think that Matilda is actually recognised as being on the monarch's list of England but I understand where you're coming from.
I think the best option would be to have the inheritance system changed so that if the only surviving family member is a princess, she immediately marries and her husband becomes the new monarch.
Do you think this would be easy to implement?

Whilst they do this, they could also add back in the option to choose your heir. It constantly bugs me that my 24 year-old King has a 28 year-old adopted heir because no-one is havng babies.

[The Outsider]

For a lot of factions, a reigning queen (as opposed to a queen consort) would not have been possible.

The French started it in Christendom with the so-called Salic Law (which debarred women from inheriting a throne) and the idea was picked up in one form or another by many of the other states of the time.

I'm pretty sure that Islam debars women from ruling men but whether that is Quranic or just tradition, I'm not sure. There'll be someone on these forums who could tell you, I guess.

Finally, there were some states with reigning queens but the example you gave shows the problems inherent in that. Matilda's rule was opposed by an enormous number of her subjects - hence her civil wars with Stephen. After Matilda, the English didn't have another reigning queen for what, four centuries?

I think CA probably realised that reigning queens were a bad idea. Some factions simply couldn't have them and those that could might well be faced with constant civil war until her majesty popped her clogs.

I can assure u that islam says that man and woman are equals and womans should be treated same as the man. It was (no offence) in the middle eastern culture that the man rules and for a long time it stayed in that wat. In pre- islamic turks woman was the equal of man and generally in the absence of the khan the queens ruled the empire. After the acceptence of islam by the turks the womans authority in government was no longer the case but many ottoman rulers were inflenced by their wifes and when the sultans were too young their mothers ruled behind the curtains.