Did you perhaps conveniently forget Herod's attempt to kill Jesus "immediately after he was born" by slaughtering every male child born in that time frame, and the flight of Mary and Joseph to Egypt (upon being warned by Heaven). It sounds pretty darned historical to me.
No, but they took Jesus with them, her husband went with her, they didn’t flee into the desert, she didn’t sprout wings, and there was no flood which was swallowed up by the earth.
My point is that there is an entire narrative. In any narrative, there will be things that match some real-world event. Sometimes those real-world events are the basis for the imagery in the narrative. But you should not take a narrative and use it to assert new physical realities, simply because some parts of the narrative are similar to real-world events.
The original poster suggested that because the woman was Mary, she must be a Queen because she was wearing a crown.
To make that claim, you have to be able to show how the crown is a physical reality, and not just imagery, while allowing other parts of the story, even in the same sentence, to be simply imagery, and not meant as reality.
BTW, Herod was not waiting for Jesus at the moment of birth either. Which is why he killed all children under the age of 2.
Israel’s protracted birth post Christ’s earthly walk . . . into the Nation of Promise as God committed himself to . . .
is scheduled to have the dragon attempt to abort that ‘child.’
In any case, there’s a list of reasons that the woman in Rev is NOT Mary, Christ’s mother.
I realize systemic biases prevent some from apprehending that truth.