Is there any historical record of Elizabeth the First's reaction to John Knox's tract on 'the monstruous regimen'? In his tract The First Blast of the Trumpet against the Monstruous Regimen of Women (see note below about the wording) John Knox appears to be extending Paul's proscription - regarding the place of women in the ecclesia, the church - to the rule of the English monarchy over England.


  γυναικι δε διδασκειν ουκ επιτρεπω ουδε αυθεντειν ανδρος αλλ ειναι εν ησυχια


[I Timothy 2:12. Received Text - Beza, Stephens, Elzevir and Scrivener are all identical.] 


  But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.


[KJV translation]

Laying aside the question of whether, or not, it was appropriate to address the matter in quite the way in which John Knox did so, I am more interested in the reaction of Elizabeth who, although a Queen in favour of the Protestant cause at the time, apparently took offence (not personally, but) at the implications to monarchy contained in John Knox's article.

Wikipedia records that Elizabeth opposed Knox but does not go into detail, nor is there a reference or a footnote to follow on the subject.


Did Elizabeth state her own position on the subject of female monarchy (particularly regarding the examples of Esther and Deborah whose 'rule' was at least in conjunction with, if not in subordination to, male rulers) ?
Did Elizabeth hinder John Knox in his Christian ministry ?




Note on wording :

The article's title employs certain words in spellings and senses that are now archaic. "Monstruous" (from Latin mōnstruōsus) means "unnatural"; "regiment" (Late Latin regimentum or regimen) means "rule" or "government".

Thus I have, here, used 'regimen' (cf 'regime') not 'regiment' (the military application).

My understanding of the concept is '... the unnatural rule ...'.
While in Geneva, John Knox’s work ‘The First Blast of the Trumpet against the Monstrous Regiment of Women’ was published (anonymously) in 1558.  It appears that his book was written against the female sovereigns of his day, particularly Mary of Guise, Dowager and Queen Regent of Scotland, her daughter Mary (Stuart), who became Queen of Scotland, and Queen Mary (Tudor) of England.  It was published a few months before Elizabeth (Tudor) became Queen of England in 1558.
That is significant because his stance against female rulers backfired when Elizabeth Tudor succeeded her half-sister Mary (Tudor) as Queen of England.  Knox wanted to return to Scotland but Elizabeth denied him permission for passage through England on the way back from Geneva to Scotland.  He was obliged to take the more dangerous route to Leith.

In 1558, Mary Tudor’s half-sister, the Protestant-leaning Elizabeth Tudor, succeeded to the throne of England. Though not the intended target of Knox’s First Blast, Queen Elizabeth took great offense at the publication, and in 1559, repeatedly refused Knox passage to Scotland through England. Knox attempted to apologize to the queen, writing a series of letters to her chief advisor, Sir William Cecil, but again managed as much criticism as praise. Like Mary of Guise before her, Elizabeth Tudor became more agitated with the reformer.
Even Calvin became a guilty party in the eyes of Queen Elizabeth, who rejected his homage, made to her in a republication of his Commentaries on Isaiah, owing to a perceived connection with The First Blast. In truth, Calvin did not approve of Knox’s views and had even advised him against publishing them. In his own letter to William Cecil, Calvin expressed his extreme displeasure with Knox: “By reason of the thoughtless arrogance of one individual, the wretched crowd of exiles would have been driven away, not only from this city [of Geneva] but even from almost the whole world.”
Having endured the controversy of The First Blast, Knox went on to play a key role in Scotland’s opposition to the Catholic monarchy, solidifying Scotland as a Protestant, and Presbyterian, nation for centuries to come. As for his second and third blasts, it would seem that the &quot;Trumpet of the Scottish Reformation&quot; learned an important lesson. Neither was ever sounded.
Source: https://www.history.pcusa.org/blog/2014/10/john-knox-and-monstrous-regiment-women

When Knox heard that Mary (Stuart) Queen of Scotland was looking for scholars to refute his anathema against women rulers he attempted to counter this by writing to Elizabeth, suggesting Mary was aiming at the English throne.  Source: http://tudortimes.co.uk/people/john-knox-life-story/knox-mary-queen-of-scots
20th July 1559 - John Knox’s Declaration to Queen Elizabeth - https://biblehub.com/library/knox/the_first_blast_of_the_trumpet/20_july_1559_john_knoxs.htm
5th August 1561 - John Knox’s Second Defence to Queen Elizabeth - https://biblehub.com/library/knox/the_first_blast_of_the_trumpet/5_aug_1561_john_knoxs.htm
Although various articles suggest that Queen Elizabeth took offence at Knox’s words about female sovereigns and never forgave him, no evidence is provided to support that claim.  None of the articles I found gave any clues as to what Queen Elizabeth might have written to John Knox, either in response to his “First Trumpet Blast” or to both of his subsequent letters.  Although Queen Elizabeth supported the Protestant cause, her refusal to allow Knox passage through England to return to Scotland became an obstacle to Knox’s direct involvement with the Protestant cause in England.  That is possibly the only evidence of what Queen Elizabeth though of John Knox’s views of female rulers.  Nonetheless, both the fiery preaching of John Knox and Queen Elizabeth’s political and religious ambitions eventually resulted in a Protestant King (James VI of Scotland and I of England) being established on the united throne of Scotland and England.