You've packed a tremendous number of errors into a very compact sentence.
You're implying that monogamy in the West as the legal standard of marriage began with specific religious teachings. This is manifestly not the case. Monogamy was Roman law before Romans had ever heard of Jews or of Christians.
It was also the law of Germanic pagans outside of the Roman world before they had ever heard of the Bible either.
Your post also implies that there was some kind of historical period in the West where monogamy was not the standard and that only an imposition by "the state" of new laws made monogamy the law of the land.
This also is manifestly not the case. Between the fall of the Roman Empire and the rise of the nation state in the 1600s monogamy was the basis of all family and inheritance law in the West - be it the common law of England, the Salic laws of France, the Werethings of Germanic jurisprudence or the revival of Roman codes in Italy and Spain. In most European jurisdictions there were legal systems in place before there were such things as "states" as we know them today. And all those legal systems rested on monogamy.
You also imply that monogamy was somehow introduced into the West at a late date in order to counteract royal inheritance schemes. Not only is this completely without foundation in reality, but is illogical as well. In your fantasy world in which kings were free to contract as many marriages as they wanted, the result would inevitably have been multiple warring claimants to the throne as each line claimed the inheritance. History shows that plenty of methods were used to disinherit royal claimants - usually by one rival killing another.
The Ottomans had polygamy and each time a Sultan died, his numerous sons would either kill or exile one another until a single heir was left standing. No Sultan could really predict who would succeed him, all he could was hope that his favorite would prevail after his death.
In historical reality, monogamy was an essential element of Western culture long before that culture became a Christian culture and monogamy is not a late, statist innovation any more than private property is.
Elizabeth II never married because she enjoyed power and did not want to allow a husband to seize power from her or even share power with her. The "Presbyters" had nothing to do with Elizabeth since they only had authority in Scotland and Elizabeth was not the Queen of Scotland - she was the Queen of England and the Head of the Church of England.
And the Romans really gave a damn about the rights of women?
Don’t attribute things to me I didn’t say...
Henry VIII deposed the Papists because of the usurpation by clergy to determine hereditary kingdoms.
Elizabeth I never married for the same reason, it was just the Presbyters she was at odds with.
King Solomon had how many wives?
Moses is the first philosopher who said our rights do not come from an earthly monarch.
Moses was the foundation of Western Civilization.
Everything is in Genesis, it encompasses all things...
I'll "piggy-back" on Wideawake's comment.
Read the word's of Jesus in Matthew 19 -
“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh?’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
The Lord made his intention very clear. Marriage is one man and one woman. Many prominent biblical figures failed in this matter. However, God did not sanction this sin; but he did work through their disobedience.