Why is the most powerful, versatile and indispensable chess piece a woman?

I am speculating that at the time chess was being developed in India there may have been a matriarchy in control.  What do you think?

i a gree

No wonder Queens became the most powerful piece on the board.

It would only make sense if Kings were the most powerful piece, so that deploying your most powerful unit would become a risky move, adding to the funs of chess. :D

Thanks tkbunny could you just briefly outline what wiki has to say in a few words, have they come up with the answer?

"At various times, the ability of pawns to be queened was restricted while the original queen was still on the board, so as not to cause scandal by providing the king with more than one queen. An early twelfth-century Latin poem refers to a queened pawn as aferzia, as opposed to the original queen or regina, to account for this."

Haha lol. "So as not to cause scandal" ]

I've seen Chinese dramas where all the Queens and Princesses just do nothing and cry over romance. And manipulate the king.

What! Is the king able to be manipulated, or is he asleep, or drunk ...

That's why we have PRESIDENTS who are VOTED IN now. If we stick to having leaders from the same family, some day a lousy king will take the throne and cause the downfall of the whole kingdom. Statistically, there are more useless kings than benevolent kings in the history of this world. 

Ellie47 wrote:

What! Is the king able to be manipulated, or is he asleep, or drunk ...

All of above! With their hand on the remote. :-)

Obviously, as everyone should know~The Lion doesn't do the hunting, his Lioness does. The way of the world back then. Heh.

I guess it also doesn't make sense for there to be female pawns on the field as infantry units those days were male. I'm not be sexist here. It's the facts. So unless the pawn had a sex change or something, he can't possibly transform into a Queen.

Someone said the king was the most powerful piece, yes, but wouldn't a couple of queens equal a drunk king!?

As all of you surely know, "queen chess" was born in Spain. There are people who say the piece was, at least in part, a sort of tribute to Isabel de Castilla, although it sounds a bit weird to me.

Just 'cause you're a Queen, doesn't mean you are a lady.

The Queen represents the power of an influential woman. Macbeth by Shakespeare is a good example. That's why the queen is the most powerful.

Since the "Queen" was actually a male piece called the Vizier in India, and could only move 2 squares diagonally, and the piece did not become a queen until around 1000AD, I guess I would have to say:

No.

Any more trolling topics?  By the way, your Facebook account seems to be disabled ;)...

Who was that last comment directed at, the comment before you or me?  And... if it was directed at me, why are you here if you think such topics are "trolling"?

I am here in hopes of nipping a long misleading thread in the bud by helping debunk the premise at the get-go ;)...

Facebook account ... please explain?  This is a forum on the power of the queen not a venue for attacking other members!

It is merely a question, given your recent threads...I don't see how it constitutes an "attack", unless of course you are trolling ;)...in which case I can see that it could potentially curtail success and be considered harmful.