1

Modern day feminist media in movies and TV shows, like the movie "Bahubali", portrays "strong and independent" female characters ruling countries as queens without their husband (the king) being alive or present. This is done by the writers to promote feminism and to show that women ruling is normal and that they can rule independently.

Has any Hindu queen directly ruled without her husband according to scriptures?

  • The name of the movie is "Bahubali". Hence, the content of the question was corrected. By the way, in the movie, the queen's husband was very much alive but disabled person. As his younger brother, who was ruling, was dead, she takes over, duly crushing the coup attempt. Thus, it was portrayed partly from Mahabharata.:-) – srimannarayana k v Feb 29 at 2:33
  • 1
    I believe so. In Mahabharat, when Arjuna goes on Tirtha yatra, he marries a woman 'Chitrangada', whose father lays down the condition, that she, and their son would stay back in that kingdom instead of following Arjuna, because their lineage always had only 1 heir, and since it was not guaranteed to be a son, whoever it was, would rule that region. – ram Feb 29 at 4:02
2

Yes. One such regent queen was Chitrangada, wife of Arjuna. When Arjuna asked her father, King Chitravahana, for her hand in marriage this is what the latter said

There was in our race a king of the name of Prabhanjana, who was childless. To obtain a child, he underwent severe ascetic penances. By his severe asceticism, O Partha, he gratified that god of gods, Mahadeva, the husband of Uma, that supreme Lord holding (the mighty bow called) Pinaka. The illustrious Lord granted him the boon that each successive descendant of his race should have one child only. In consequence of that boon only one child is born unto every successive descendant of this race. All my ancestors (one after another) had each a male child. I, however, have only a daughter to perpetuate my race. But, O bull amongst men, I ever look upon this daughter of mine as my son. O bull of Bharata's race, I have duly made her a Putrika. Therefore, one amongst the sons that may be begotten upon her by thee, O Bharata, shall be the perpetuator of my race. That son is the dower for which I may give away my daughter. O son of Pandu, if them choosest, thou canst take her upon this understanding.'

As we know Arjuna didn't stick around to rule Manipur. He left after three years when his son Vabhruvahana was born.

However from this answer it can't be concluded that Queen regents was the norm. The exception here was because Chitravahana could not have another child. He would not have been able to procreate another child even if he married several times.

| improve this answer | |

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .