Going down one of my rabbit holes, one thing that struck me while watching documentaries about both Tudor England and ancient Egypt was how often powerful women rulers had to reshape themselves to survive inside systems built for men.

When Edward VI, the sickly son of Henry VIII, died in 1553 without an heir, England faced a dangerous succession crisis. In the end, the only serious claimants considered suitable to inherit the Tudor monarchy were all women: Lady Jane Grey, Mary I of England, and later Elizabeth I. Ironically, Henry VIII had spent much of his reign obsessed with securing a male heir, yet after the deaths of his sons, the Tudor dynasty ultimately survived through the rule of these three very different women, each of whom had to navigate power in a society deeply uncomfortable with female sovereignty.

Three Tudor Responses to Female Rule

When I started thinking about Lady Jane Grey, Mary I of England, and Elizabeth I, I realized they almost represent three different responses to female power in a deeply patriarchal society. Jane Grey was tragic — highly intelligent but essentially maneuvered into becoming a political pawn before quickly being destroyed by the very system using her. Mary tried to rule legitimately and forcefully, but her marriage to Philip II of Spain became politically and emotionally disastrous. She never fully surrendered power, but the expectations placed on her as a woman ruler — marry, produce an heir, secure the dynasty — shaped nearly every aspect of her reign.

Elizabeth’s Political Reinvention

Then there was Elizabeth I, who seemed to learn from all of it. Rather than allow marriage to dilute her authority, she transformed herself into something almost symbolic: the Virgin Queen, married to England itself. She understood that a husband in that period could become a rival power center. By refusing marriage, she preserved not only her independence, but the mythology of her rule.

An Unexpected Parallel from Ancient Egypt

What fascinated me was realizing this dynamic wasn’t unique to Tudor England. Watching an Egypt documentary, I suddenly saw the parallel with the Pharaoh Hatshepsut.

Hatshepsut and the Language of Kingship

Hatshepsut was one of the most successful and unusual rulers of ancient Egypt. Although Egyptian kingship was traditionally viewed as male, Hatshepsut gradually adopted the symbols and imagery of a pharaoh, including royal headdresses, male titles, and even the ceremonial false beard used in statues and carvings. Rather than ruling quietly as a queen or regent, she presented herself as a legitimate king in order to strengthen her authority. Her reign brought stability, monumental building projects, and expanded trade, showing that political power in the ancient world often depended as much on symbolism and public image as military force.

Two Women, Two Strategies

Like Elizabeth, Hatshepsut inherited a political structure where ultimate authority was culturally coded male. And like Elizabeth, she adapted rather than submitting to the expected role.

But while Elizabeth emphasized her exceptional femininity, Hatshepsut almost moved in the opposite direction symbolically. She adopted the visual language of kingship itself:

• male royal titles,
• the ceremonial false beard,
• masculine royal imagery,
• pharaonic regalia.

She wasn’t necessarily trying to “become a man” in a modern sense. Instead, she seemed to understand that if she was going to rule successfully, she had to embody the established symbolism of power. Elizabeth manipulated the mythology of queenship. Hatshepsut manipulated the mythology of kingship.

Rewriting the Image of Authority

What fascinates me is how both women, separated by more than a thousand years and completely different civilizations, arrived at similar political conclusions:

female rulers could not simply participate in existing power structures passively. They had to redefine the image of authority itself.

And in both cases, image mattered almost as much as policy:

• portraits,
• ceremonies,
• public presentation,
• symbolism,
• architecture,
• carefully crafted identity.

The Power of Legitimacy

History often presents power as armies and laws, but these women understood something more psychological: people obey systems partly because they believe in the image of legitimacy. Elizabeth and Hatshepsut each built that legitimacy in radically creative ways.