Leadership In The Middle Ages
Leadership can be defined in so many ways. Some say it is the power someone holds, others say it is the power people give to others. In the Middle Ages, leadership was under a wide umbrella of definition. According to Dictionary.com, a creditable online dictionary, leadership is defined as “the position or function of a leader, a person who guides or directs a group. While nothing about the position is addressed by gender, in the Middle Ages, gender had a lot to do with leadership. A quote from the Prince and the Law, 1200-1600: Sovereignty and Rights in the Western Legal Tradition written by Kenneth Pennington describes the relationship gender had with power. “The king does not have an equal in his own kingdom, since an equal cannot have power
…show more content…
over an equal. Much less then can he have a superior.” There was no place for an equal, no place for a woman. Fortunately women, even back in those days, became successful leaders worthy of praise because leadership is not dependent on gender, it should not be forced, but invited with open arms, and leadership should become a broader and more important term.
According to Tim Lambert’s scholarly article a History of Women’s Jobs, women in the Middle Ages spun wool cooked and cleaned. Women washed clothes, baked bread, milked cows, fed animals, brewed beer and collected firewood. They sometimes ran their own business, they were spinners, brewers, jewelers, parchment markers, and glovers. One job that was not listed in the “women’s resume” was “queen” or “military leader.” There is a reason for that. Women were not considered leadership potential. A direct quote from the article Femininity during Medieval Times describes what a women’s role was.
The principal role of women [in the Middle Ages] was to care for their children and husband and look after the home; their chores often included doing housework, cooking and looking after their children. The role of a wife was very important and women were expected to tend to their husband’s needs at all times; the man, in turn, usually went out to work in order to earn the money needed to support the family.
This was the only form of leadership women had: in front of children and sometimes in their husband’s business. There was not much in store for the average female. Luckily, there were some unaverage females who became successful leaders in their time.
One leader in the Middle Ages became a very impactful leader.
In agreement, the article Anne De Beaujeu describes who this regent was. “Anne [de Beaujeu’s] energy, strength of will, cunning, and political sense enabled her to overcome the difficulties threatening the kingdom, the most important of which was unrest among the magnates, who had suffered under Louis XI’s callous oppressions.” She was not elected like most politicians today nor was she forced, but she had been in the dominant party and when Pierre died in 1503, Anne remained administrator of his Bourbon lands, which also meant protect them from royal encroachment. She knew the kingdom needed help and she accepted the position with open arms. While in power, Anne of France was able to accomplish many tasks successfully. When the Beaujeus ignored that assembly’s demand to control taxation and hold regular meetings, the “Mad War” broke out between, on the one side, the crown and, on the other, the Duc d’Orléans and Francis II of Brittany, which ended in a royal victory. She was able to silence the rebellious nobles and subdued Brittany. She also arranged marriages to create a stronger kingdom. Even with all of the obstacles facing a leader, she also did it with the stigma that women could not do as well as a job as a man. Her dad told her that “’ [She was] the only leading woman in the whole kingdom.’ He was sure, however, that a woman could not rule a kingdom.” By his surprise, she was able to conquer a great deal regardless of her
gender.
Another leader that needs to be mentioned is Margaret of Austria who successfully governed her native land for over twenty years. She did not invite power with open arms, she was appointed by Maximillian in 1507 as regent of the Netherlands for the infant Charles, who was the successor to her brother Philip 1 the Handsome, who had died in 1506. A direct quote from the Rise of Female Kings in Europe, 1300- 1800, begins to explain why women would get opportunities to take the thrown temporarily in place of another. It was usually a monarch's closest female kin, most often mothers of underage kings or wives of absent kings, who commonly filled such temporary voids in sovereign authority; but the most important long-serving female regents in early modern Europe also include sisters, aunts, nieces, daughters, and even a grandmother of male sovereigns.
According to this author, many women took the role of regents (a temporary position of power) in Europe which begins to define the ideology that women were not fit to govern full-time, only men were. Margaret of Austria knew that statement too well. She understood that this role was not handed out to every female, it was a position she needed to handle with care, and with that she did. A couple of her long lasting rulings included her strong pro-English foreign policy and consolidating Habsburg dominion with her nephew Charles. She was able to do great work as regent, so well that the people were happy with the following leader in consonance with the scholarly article Margaret of Austria. Mary of Hungary, Margaret’s niece, governed this region for twenty-four years. According to Mary of Hungary (1505-1558), “She became Europe's first living female ruler since Cleopatra to commission a life-size statue of herself, and her exceptional capacities as ruler became the central feature of her state funeral.” She gained popularity with her people from her wise and thoughtful decisions, for example, promoting the welfare of her subjects. The Royals loved her because she left Charles V free to concern himself with the rest of his empire. The way she handled domestic affairs was so impressive that Charles asked if she would continue to regent the kingdom. She agreed and governed successfully for another three years, until her death at age 53. Her willingness to serve and passionate ruling really drew respect to her as well as the idea that women could be in charge, and lead well. Mary’s leadership was one that was different from most. She was able to successfully delegate power off to other individuals (Charles V), which might not have looked like she was a leader. The way she ran her kingdom was one that broadens the term leadership from power, to guidance. She guided people into making a system’s government that was able to function well. She was able to change the term leadership for good. Even today, the Queen of England is still loved by most. Although, she does not have as much power as a queen would in the Middle Ages, she still is a positive example of a woman in leadership. As stated by Arthur Bousfield and Gary Toffoli’s article Fifty Years the Queen: A tribute to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II on Her Golden Jubilee. “The Queen’s sense of duty her courage, warmth and her humor are known and appreciated by all Canadians. You have stood, Your Majesty, with Canadians and you have stood by them, and Canadians in turn regard you with loyalty d affection.” There are far more women who have lead successfully that have not been mentioned or made apparent in the culture. Why is that? There seems to be a heavy hand on male role models in today’s culture, which can sometimes delude to the fact that women can lead just as well because leadership is not dependent on the gender, it should not be forced, and should be a broader and more important term.
over an equal. Much less then can he have a superior.” There was no place for an equal, no place for a woman. Fortunately women, even back in those days, became successful leaders worthy of praise because leadership is not dependent on gender, it should not be forced, but invited with open arms, and leadership should become a broader and more important term.
According to Tim Lambert’s scholarly article a History of Women’s Jobs, women in the Middle Ages spun wool cooked and cleaned. Women washed clothes, baked bread, milked cows, fed animals, brewed beer and collected firewood. They sometimes ran their own business, they were spinners, brewers, jewelers, parchment markers, and glovers. One job that was not listed in the “women’s resume” was “queen” or “military leader.” There is a reason for that. Women were not considered leadership potential. A direct quote from the article Femininity during Medieval Times describes what a women’s role was.
The principal role of women [in the Middle Ages] was to care for their children and husband and look after the home; their chores often included doing housework, cooking and looking after their children. The role of a wife was very important and women were expected to tend to their husband’s needs at all times; the man, in turn, usually went out to work in order to earn the money needed to support the family.
This was the only form of leadership women had: in front of children and sometimes in their husband’s business. There was not much in store for the average female. Luckily, there were some unaverage females who became successful leaders in their time.
One leader in the Middle Ages became a very impactful leader.
In agreement, the article Anne De Beaujeu describes who this regent was. “Anne [de Beaujeu’s] energy, strength of will, cunning, and political sense enabled her to overcome the difficulties threatening the kingdom, the most important of which was unrest among the magnates, who had suffered under Louis XI’s callous oppressions.” She was not elected like most politicians today nor was she forced, but she had been in the dominant party and when Pierre died in 1503, Anne remained administrator of his Bourbon lands, which also meant protect them from royal encroachment. She knew the kingdom needed help and she accepted the position with open arms. While in power, Anne of France was able to accomplish many tasks successfully. When the Beaujeus ignored that assembly’s demand to control taxation and hold regular meetings, the “Mad War” broke out between, on the one side, the crown and, on the other, the Duc d’Orléans and Francis II of Brittany, which ended in a royal victory. She was able to silence the rebellious nobles and subdued Brittany. She also arranged marriages to create a stronger kingdom. Even with all of the obstacles facing a leader, she also did it with the stigma that women could not do as well as a job as a man. Her dad told her that “’ [She was] the only leading woman in the whole kingdom.’ He was sure, however, that a woman could not rule a kingdom.” By his surprise, she was able to conquer a great deal regardless of her
gender.
Another leader that needs to be mentioned is Margaret of Austria who successfully governed her native land for over twenty years. She did not invite power with open arms, she was appointed by Maximillian in 1507 as regent of the Netherlands for the infant Charles, who was the successor to her brother Philip 1 the Handsome, who had died in 1506. A direct quote from the Rise of Female Kings in Europe, 1300- 1800, begins to explain why women would get opportunities to take the thrown temporarily in place of another. It was usually a monarch's closest female kin, most often mothers of underage kings or wives of absent kings, who commonly filled such temporary voids in sovereign authority; but the most important long-serving female regents in early modern Europe also include sisters, aunts, nieces, daughters, and even a grandmother of male sovereigns.
According to this author, many women took the role of regents (a temporary position of power) in Europe which begins to define the ideology that women were not fit to govern full-time, only men were. Margaret of Austria knew that statement too well. She understood that this role was not handed out to every female, it was a position she needed to handle with care, and with that she did. A couple of her long lasting rulings included her strong pro-English foreign policy and consolidating Habsburg dominion with her nephew Charles. She was able to do great work as regent, so well that the people were happy with the following leader in consonance with the scholarly article Margaret of Austria. Mary of Hungary, Margaret’s niece, governed this region for twenty-four years. According to Mary of Hungary (1505-1558), “She became Europe's first living female ruler since Cleopatra to commission a life-size statue of herself, and her exceptional capacities as ruler became the central feature of her state funeral.” She gained popularity with her people from her wise and thoughtful decisions, for example, promoting the welfare of her subjects. The Royals loved her because she left Charles V free to concern himself with the rest of his empire. The way she handled domestic affairs was so impressive that Charles asked if she would continue to regent the kingdom. She agreed and governed successfully for another three years, until her death at age 53. Her willingness to serve and passionate ruling really drew respect to her as well as the idea that women could be in charge, and lead well. Mary’s leadership was one that was different from most. She was able to successfully delegate power off to other individuals (Charles V), which might not have looked like she was a leader. The way she ran her kingdom was one that broadens the term leadership from power, to guidance. She guided people into making a system’s government that was able to function well. She was able to change the term leadership for good. Even today, the Queen of England is still loved by most. Although, she does not have as much power as a queen would in the Middle Ages, she still is a positive example of a woman in leadership. As stated by Arthur Bousfield and Gary Toffoli’s article Fifty Years the Queen: A tribute to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II on Her Golden Jubilee. “The Queen’s sense of duty her courage, warmth and her humor are known and appreciated by all Canadians. You have stood, Your Majesty, with Canadians and you have stood by them, and Canadians in turn regard you with loyalty d affection.” There are far more women who have lead successfully that have not been mentioned or made apparent in the culture. Why is that? There seems to be a heavy hand on male role models in today’s culture, which can sometimes delude to the fact that women can lead just as well because leadership is not dependent on the gender, it should not be forced, and should be a broader and more important term.