In Unfaithful Queens, Carmen Gallardo examines nearly eight centuries of history to dismantle myths, question black legends, and analyze how female power has been narrated—and punished—according to patriarchal parameters. A journalist and historical communicator, she vindicates these women as complex political figures, often discredited for their morality rather than their decisions. “The system always finds excuses to emerge unscathed,” she asserts.
Unfaithful Queens analyzes power from a historical and gender perspective. Why do you think it is still necessary to revisit how female power has been exercised and narrated today? Queens continue to be seen as mere bearers of magnificent tiaras or beautiful designs, overlooking the fact that in European constitutional or parliamentary monarchies, they are linked to the head of state. The figure of queens interests me because they were, for centuries, the only presence of women in power. Furthermore, today, despite legal advances, feminist claims remain necessary.
You come from journalism and historical communication. How has that professional perspective influenced the way you construct these biographies? Perhaps the most significant aspect is the need to verify data, a task to which I have dedicated many hours, as not all sources agree on facts or dates or even trajectories, and it is essential to square all the information. The book is the result of many readings and analyses.
Throughout your career, you have written about women, power, and monarchy. What led you, precisely now, to gather these twelve stories in a single book? At this time, the biographies of many women who have remained hidden in the history of literature, science, or culture in general are being recovered. Queens have also been hidden. Only some of them have made it into the pages of history. In many cases, alongside their names, a black legend has grown that has not always been proven. In Unfaithful Queens, I wanted to recover some of them, to bring them out of anonymity or to recover them under a different lens, because their biographies deserve it; the pain and humiliations endured should also be recounted. Queens are not just dolls dressed in taffeta.
The book spans almost eight centuries of history. What patterns of power did you find most persistent when comparing such different contexts? Two that stand out are patriarchal power and, derived from that, the moral disqualification of women independent of their royal rank. Urraca I died in the year 1126; Queen Paola is still alive. Both are victims of that pattern. Like the rest. The exception is Catherine the Great, a queen who does not exactly fit the rest. What distinguishes her? She acts like a man, conceiving power and her lovers as men have always done.
When reading Unfaithful Queens, it is hard not to think of women who today lead companies or institutions. Do you believe that many current businesswomen and politicians face, allowing for differences, similar pressures to those endured by these queens? I think not. Although we still hear stories of pressure and harassment, which seem to be a daily occurrence, today women have legal means of defense that were unthinkable in other times. That does not mean that sexist attitudes and conceptions do not continue to linger in today’s society.
“They attacked sexual morality. And that has been a greater sin than murder, conspiracy, or stealing a legitimate throne.”
Throughout the book, there are women with strong character, ambitious, strategic, and not very docile. To what extent was that character a tool for survival, and to what extent did it turn against them? Yes. The behavior of Isabella of France, Queen of England, was pure survival, as was that of Urraca I. History has not forgiven them; the clearest case, I insist, is that of Isabella of France, the “she-wolf,” whom literature has marked as a fatal and ruthless woman. If she was, it was the product of one of the bloodiest moments in history, but she has dragged the nickname of «she-wolf» through the centuries. Undoubtedly, arranged marriages created difficult situations: I think of Maria Luisa of Bourbon-Parma, eager to enjoy life and who was married off to a rather bland individual like Charles IV. Not to mention that they were young girls taken from their environment and had to adapt to worlds that were at odds with the one in which they had grown up.
In the book, strong character often appears as a reason for punishment or discredit. Do you think that those same characteristics, seen today as leadership in men, continue to be judged differently when embodied by a woman? Is it an effective tool for shifting responsibility from the system to individuals? The firmness of character defines some of the protagonists of the book, even though their strategies differ. The way in which men and women were judged and are judged was very different. And no one held the system accountable; the accusation has names and surnames, the system always finds excuses to emerge unscathed.
“Queens are not just dolls dressed in taffeta.”
The so-called “black legend” runs through several of these biographies. Why do you think it has been such an effective instrument for discrediting women in power? Because they attacked sexual morality. And that has been a greater sin than murder, conspiracy, or stealing a legitimate throne. It is curious that women’s morality mattered more than the fact that an older man could marry a girl who had barely reached puberty, from whom he depended in all areas of her life. That fragility has not been considered. The church, not to mention, punished consanguinity of spouses but did not address the weakness of those young women.
Isabel II is one of the harshest portraits in the book. What do you think we still don’t understand about her as a queen and as a woman?
How wonderful that you’re reading it! She continues to be a victim of her black legend: public opinion still thinks of her as a nymphomaniac queen without looking beyond that, without contextualizing the character, the protagonist of a reign with many shadows. It is still easy in Madrid to hear supposed tourist guides mocking her statue. There are many books and documents about the queen; I have reviewed many texts, but I am left with two perspectives that are undoubtedly the most objective and respectful of the queen. The biography of Isabel II by historian Isabel Burdiel, undoubtedly the best on the Elizabethan period, and the human perspective of Benito Pérez Galdós, the only one who interviewed her, a witness of the time who knew how to write from the humanism that permeates all of the author’s work.
Several protagonists stand out for their intellectual training and cultural curiosity. To what extent was education a space of freedom or resistance for them?
Yes, Marguerite de Valois was a cultured woman, but she was also the subject of black legend, and Dumas’ frivolous portrayal has permeated the character. Isabel de Borbón-Parma denounced in her writings her condemnation for being born a princess, the obligation to give birth without wanting to, and the fact that politicians married her off to someone she did not know. However, she did not rebel, she took refuge in grief and died very young. Paola, so many centuries later, also gave up. Leading a revolution alongside her beloved freed the young Danish queen Matilde for a couple of years. Others lost irretrievably, even with fate against them: this was the case of Queen Juana de Avís of Castile and her daughter, Princess Juana de Trastámara of Asturias, whom history has condemned to be contemptuously called “la Beltraneja.”
“THE SYSTEM ALWAYS FINDS EXCUSES TO GET AWAY SCOT-FREE.”
After writing this book, has your view of women who today occupy positions of power or public visibility changed?
No, I am aware of the price paid by women who choose leadership in politics or in the world of work. And perhaps, in order to defend themselves, there are too many cases in which that leadership is exercised from traditionally masculine values. My question is whether it is possible to exercise power in another way. The truth is that most have to make many sacrifices in their personal and family lives.
For young readers interested in history, journalism, or writing, what advice would you give them when it comes to looking at the past with a critical and independent eye?
Research. Respect your sources, seek out the most reliable ones, solid professionals, ask those who know, study, be patient with reading and reflection.
For young journalists who today want to analyze power and leadership with a critical eye, what professional advice would you give them when it comes to researching and telling these stories?
I would tell journalists to seek specialization in the subject that interests them. Not to be swayed by the siren song of journalistic populism. To observe people as human beings in their context. To avoid being dazzled by glitter. And, especially, to consult specialists in the field, who are usually humble and willing to teach.
