Editing Primogeniture (section)

==History==
In [[Christian Europe]], the [[Catholic Church]] originally had a monopoly on the authority to sanction marriage. Its teachings forbid polygamy and state divorce is an impossibility ''per se''. Consequently, in Europe, given morbidity and infertility, succession could not be assured solely by direct male descendants or even direct male or female progeny. In [[Islam]]ic and Asian cultures, religious officials and customs either sanctioned [[polygyny]], use of consorts, or both, or they had no authority of marriage; monarchs could consequently ensure sufficient numbers of male offspring to assure succession. In such cultures, female heads of state were rare.

===Biblical===
{{Main|Bechor}}
[[File:Figures Esau Sells His Birthright for Pottage of Lentils.jpg|thumb|alt=Engraving|''Esau Sells His Birthright for Pottage of Lentils'', a 1728 engraving by [[Gerard Hoet]]]]

The earliest account of primogeniture to be known widely in modern times is that of [[Isaac]]'s sons [[Esau]], who was born first,<ref>{{bibleverse||Genesis|25:25}}</ref> and [[Jacob]], who was born second.<ref>{{bibleverse||Genesis|25:26}}</ref> Esau was entitled to the "birthright" (''bekhorah'' בְּכוֹרָה), but he sold the right to Jacob for a [[mess of pottage]], i. e. a small amount of lentil stew.<ref>{{bibleverse||Genesis|25:31–34}}</ref> This passage demonstrates that primogeniture was known in the [[Middle East]] prior to the [[Roman Empire]].

A woman's right and obligation to inherit property in the absence of a male heir in the family was recorded in the case of the [[Daughters of Zelophehad]] in Numbers 27.

===Roman law===
During the [[Roman Empire]], [[Roman law]] governed much of Europe, and the laws pertaining to inheritance made no distinction between the oldest or youngest, male or female, if the decedent died [[Intestacy|intestate]].<ref name="www2.hn.psu.edu">[http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/adamsmith.htm HN.psu.edu] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100413191047/http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/adamsmith.htm |date=13 April 2010 }} Smith, Adam (1776), Penn State Electronic Classics edition, republished 2006, p. 312.</ref> Although admission to the two highest ''[[Roman Empire#ordines|ordines]]'' (orders), i.e. the [[Roman Senate|senators]] and [[equestrian order|equestrians]], potentially brought lifelong privileges that the next generation could inherit, the principle of inherited rank in general was little used.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Millar |first1=Fergus |author-link=Fergus Millar |year=1983 |title=Empire and City, Augustus to Julian: Obligations, Excuses and Status |journal=[[Journal of Roman Studies]] |volume=73 |pages=87–88 |doi=10.2307/300073|jstor=300073 |s2cid=159799017 }}</ref> Rather, Roman aristocracy was based on competition, and a Roman family could not maintain its position in the ''ordines'' merely by hereditary succession or title to land.<ref>Hopkins, Keith (2000). "The Political Economy of the Roman Empire". ''The Dynamics of Ancient Empires: State Power from Assyria to Byzantium''. [[Oxford University Press]]. p. 188.</ref> Although the eldest son typically carried [[Roman naming conventions|his father's name]] in some form, he was expected to construct his own [[cursus honorum|career]] based on competence as an [[legatus|administrator or general]] and on remaining in favor with the emperor and his council at court.<ref>Hopkins, ''The Political Economy of the Roman Empire'', p. 188.</ref> Other than meeting requirements for personal wealth, the qualifications for belonging to the senatorial or equestrian orders varied from generation to generation, and in the later Empire, the ''[[Dignitas (Roman concept)|dignitas]]'' ("esteem") that attended on senatorial or equestrian rank was refined further with additional titles, such as ''[[vir illustris]]'', that were not inherited.<ref>Millar. ''Empire and City''. p. 90, calls them "status-appellations".</ref>

Most [[Roman emperor]]s indicated their choice of successor, usually a close family member or [[Adoption in ancient Rome|adopted]] heir, and the presumption that the eldest or even a natural son would inherit was not enshrined. The death of an emperor led to a critical period of uncertainty and crisis. In theory, the Senate was entitled to choose the new emperor, but did so mindful of acclamation by the army or the [[Praetorian Guard]].<ref>Winterling, Aloys. ''Politics and Society in Imperial Rome''. (John Wiley & Sons, 2009, originally published 1988 in German.) p. 16.</ref> Thus, neither an emperor nor his heir had an inherent "right" to rule, and did so through military power and the Senate's symbolic consent.

===Reemergence in medieval and modern times===
The law of primogeniture in Europe has its origins in [[Medieval Europe]] where the [[feudal system]] necessitated that the [[Fiefdom|estates]] of land-owning feudal lords be kept as large and as united as possible to maintain social stability as well as the wealth, power and social standing of their families.<ref name="www2.hn.psu.edu" />

[[Adam Smith]], in his book ''[[The Wealth of Nations|An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations]]'', explains the origin of primogeniture in Europe in the following way:

{{blockquote|[W]hen land was considered as the means, not of subsistence merely, but of power and protection, it was thought better that it should descend undivided to one. In those disorderly times, every great landlord was a sort of petty prince. His tenants were his subjects. He was their judge, and in some respects their legislator in peace and their leader in war. He made war according to his own discretion, frequently against his neighbours, and sometimes against his sovereign. The security of a landed estate, therefore, the protection which its owner could afford to those who dwelt on it, depended upon its greatness. To divide it was to ruin it, and to expose every part of it to be oppressed and swallowed up by the incursions of its neighbours. The law of primogeniture, therefore, came to take place, not immediately indeed, but in process of time, in the succession of landed estates, for the same reason that it has generally taken place in that of monarchies, though not always at their first institution.<ref>[http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/adamsmith.htm HN.psu.edu] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100413191047/http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/adamsmith.htm |date=13 April 2010 }} Smith, Adam (1776), Penn State Electronic Classics edition, republished 2005, pp. 312–313.</ref>}}

===Salic law===
{{Main|Salic law}}
Also known as [[agnatic]] primogeniture, is a system that excludes any female from inheritance of a monarch's principal possessions. Generally known in western Europe as an application of the "[[Salic law]]". This rule developed among successions in France in the later Middle Ages. In 1316, [[Joan II of Navarre|Joan]], the only surviving child of [[Louis X of France]], was debarred from the throne in favor of her uncle, [[Philip V of France|Philip, Count of Poitiers]]. After this it was declared that women could not inherit the French throne. Then in 1328, after the death of [[Charles IV of France|Charles IV]], his paternal cousin, [[Philip VI of France|Philip, Count of Valois]], became king, notwithstanding the claims of [[Edward III of England]]. By [[proximity of blood]], Edward was closest related as eldest son of the sister of Charles, [[Isabella of France|Isabella]]. The assemblies of the French barons and prelates and the University of Paris resolved that males who derive their right to inheritance through their mother should be excluded. This ruling became a key point of contention in the subsequent [[Hundred Years War]]. Over the following century, French jurists adopted a clause from the 6th century ''[[Salic law|Pactus Legis Salicae]]'', which asserted that no female or her descendants could inherit the throne, as a governing rule for the French succession. Although Salic law excludes female lines, it also mandates [[partible inheritance]], rather than primogeniture. This rule developed among successions in France in the later Middle Ages. 

In the lands of [[Napoleon Bonaparte]]'s conquests, Salic law was adopted, including the [[First French Empire|French Empire]], the [[Kingdom of Westphalia]] and the [[Kingdom of Holland]]. Other states adopted Salic primogeniture as well, including Belgium, Sweden, Denmark ([[Frederick VII of Denmark#Succession crisis|in 1853]]) and all of the eastern European monarchies except Greece, i.e. [[Albanian Kingdom (1928–39)|Albania]], [[Kingdom of Bulgaria|Bulgaria]], [[Principality of Montenegro|Montenegro]], [[Kingdom of Romania|Romania]], and [[Kingdom of Serbia|Serbia]]. During this era, Spain (in the [[Carlist Wars|Carlist conflicts]]) fought a [[civil war]] which pitted the Salic and female-line heirs of the ruling dynasty against one another for possession of the crown.

====British titles of nobility====

Many English nobility descend by Salic, male primogeniture have a greater average rate of extinction. For many other titles, if the male line ceases to exist, the title automatically passes to the closest elder sister and her descendants. It could sometimes also pass through a line of descendants to the last holder, as abeyant holders, until they become parents or ancestors to a male descendant who is first born to 'settle the abeyance'. Some senior agnatic [[cadet (genealogy)|cadets]] are granted from the outset [[courtesy titles|courtesy]] or [[subsidiary title|subsidiary]] titles. Notable English exceptions are the [[Duchy of Lancaster]], which is merged with the [[British Crown]] which has included women in inheritance since the 16th century, and the [[Duke of Marlborough (title)|Dukedom of Marlborough]], which has done so since its establishment in 1702. 

However, in Scotland, Salic law has never been practised, and all the [[hereditary title]]s are inherited through male-preference primogeniture, where in the extinction of a male line, the eldest sister automatically receives the titles, and rules in her own right, not in the right of her son. A famous example of this is [[Marjorie, Countess of Carrick]], mother of [[Robert the Bruce]], who was the Countess of Carrick in her own right.

===Quasi-Salic law===
During the [[High Medieval]] period, there arose a trend where the extinction of agnatic lineages forced the consideration of women's claims; nevertheless, the desire for a male heir saw the women themselves excluded from the succession in favor of their sons, so that women could transmit claims but not inherit themselves. Such a system was called "quasi-Salic".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Ebtehaj |first1=Fatemeh |last2=Herring |first2=Jonathan |last3=Richards |first3=Martin |title=Birth Rites and Rights |date=29 July 2011 |publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing |isbn=978-1-84731-670-7 |page=206 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ax7cBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA206 |access-date=18 August 2020 |language=en}}</ref> In 1317, to illegitimize [[Joan II of Navarre]]'s claim on France, [[Philip V of France]] declared "women do not succeed to the throne of France". In 1328, Philip's successor, [[Charles IV of France]], also died sonless; Charles' sister, [[Isabella of France]], claimed the throne not for herself, but through her to her son, [[Edward III of England|Edward]]. However, [[Philip VI of France]] took the throne and added another rule to illegitimize Edward, that being {{lang|la|[[nemo dat quod non habet]]}} – one cannot transmit a right that one does not possess.

A variation of this form of primogeniture allowed the sons of female dynasts to inherit, but not women themselves, an example being the [[Francisco Franco|Francoist]] succession to the throne of Spain that was applied in 1947&ndash;1978.

===Historical examples===
{{Unreferenced section|date=July 2020}}

{{See also|List of female monarchs}}

A case of agnatic primogeniture is exemplified in the [[France|French]] royal ''milieu'', where the [[Salic Law]] (attributed to the [[Salian Franks]]) forbade any inheritance of a crown through the female line. This rule was adopted to solve the [[Salic law#The succession in 1316|dispute over the legitimate successor]] of [[John I of France]], the short-lived son of deceased [[Louis X of France]] in favour of [[Philip V of France]] (brother of Louis and uncle of John) over [[Joan II of Navarre]] (daughter of Louis and sister of John), the {{Interlanguage link multi|Estates-General of 1317|fr|3=États généraux de 1317}} ruling that "Women do not succeed the kingdom of France". In 1328 it was further elaborated to solve the [[Salic law#The succession in 1328|dispute over the legitimate successor]] of Philip V's brother, [[Charles IV of France]], in favour of [[Philip VI of France]] (the son of Charles' uncle Charles of Valois) over [[Edward III of England]] (the son of Charles' sister Isabella). While Edward had a stronger claim by [[proximity of blood]], the court ruled "Women cannot transmit a right which they do not possess", reinforcing agnatic primogeniture. This dispute was among the factors behind the [[Hundred Years' War]], which broke out in 1337.

Conflict between the Salic law and the male-preferred system was also the genesis of [[Carlism]] in Spain and [[Miguelist|Miguelism]] in Portugal.

The crowns of [[Hanover]] and Great Britain, which had been in [[personal union]] since 1714, were separated in 1837 upon the death of King [[William IV]]: his niece [[Victoria of the United Kingdom|Victoria]] inherited the British crown under male-preference primogeniture but, because of semi-Salic law, was not the heir to that of Hanover, which passed to William's eldest surviving brother, [[Ernest Augustus, King of Hanover]].

The divergence in the late 19th century of the thrones of Luxembourg and the Netherlands, both subject to semi-Salic law, resulted from the fact that the Luxembourg line of succession went back more generations than did the Dutch line. The Luxembourg succession was set by the [[Nassau Family Pact|Nassau House Treaty of 1783]], which declared each prince of the [[House of Nassau]] to be a potential heir to the territories of every branch of the dynasty. Insofar as the succession is concerned, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg is the successor state to the Principality of (Orange-)[[Nassau-Dietz]], which was given in exchange to [[William I of the Netherlands|William VI of Nassau, Prince of Orange]], in 1813. Succession to the new Kingdom of the Netherlands was recognised by the [[Congress of Vienna]] in 1815 as belonging exclusively to the descendants of Prince William VI, who became [[William I of the Netherlands|King William I of the Netherlands]]. In 1890, William I's agnatic line of male descendants died out, leaving the Netherlands to his female descendant [[Wilhelmina of the Netherlands|Queen Wilhelmina]], whereas Luxembourg still had an agnatic heir from a distant branch of the dynasty left to succeed; ex-[[Adolphe, Grand Duke of Luxembourg|Duke Adolf of Nassau]], who became reigning Grand Duke, thus ending the [[personal union]] of the Netherlands and Luxembourg.

Since the Middle Ages, the quasi-Salic principle was prevalent for the inheritance of feudal land in the Holy Roman Empire: inheritance was allowed through females when the male line expired. Females themselves did not inherit, but their male issue could. For example, a grandfather without sons was succeeded by his grandson, the son of his daughter, although the daughter still lived. Likewise, an uncle without sons of his own was succeeded by his nephew, a son of his sister, even if the sister still lived.

Common in feudal Europe outside of Germany was land inheritance based on male-preference primogeniture: A [[lord]] was succeeded by his eldest son but, failing sons, either by daughters or sons of daughters.{{citation needed|date=November 2015}} In most medieval Western European feudal fiefs, females (such as daughters and sisters) were allowed to succeed, brothers failing. But usually the husband of the heiress became the real lord, ruling in right of his wife (''[[jure uxoris]]''), though on her death the title would not remain with him but pass to her heir.

In more complex medieval cases, the sometimes conflicting principles of [[proximity of blood]] and primogeniture competed, and outcomes were at times unpredictable. Proximity meant that an heir closer in degree of kinship to the lord in question was given precedence although that heir was not necessarily the heir by primogeniture.
* The [[Philip I of Burgundy|Burgundian succession]] in 1361 was resolved in favor of [[John II of France|King John II]], son of a younger daughter, on basis of blood proximity, being a nearer cousin of the dead duke than [[Charles II of Navarre]], grandson of the elder daughter and son of [[Joan II of Navarre|Jeanne]]. John was only one generation of consanguinity removed from the late duke instead of two for Charles.
* In dispute over the [[Competitors for the Crown of Scotland|Scottish succession]], 1290–1292, the [[Bruce]] family pleaded [[tanistry]] and [[proximity of blood]], whereas [[John of Scotland|Balliol]] argued his claim based on primogeniture. The arbiter, [[Edward I of England]], decided in favor of primogeniture. But later, the [[Wars of Scottish Independence|Independence Wars]] reverted the situation in favor of the Bruce, due to political exigency.
* The [[Earl of Gloucester|Earldom of Gloucester]] (in the beginning of 14th century) went to full sisters of [[Gilbert de Clare, 8th Earl of Gloucester|the dead earl]], not to his half-sisters, though they were elder, having been born of the father's first marriage, while the earl himself was from second marriage. Full siblings were considered higher in proximity than half-siblings.

However, primogeniture increasingly won legal cases over proximity in later centuries.

Later, when lands were strictly divided among noble families and tended to remain fixed, ''agnatic primogeniture'' (the same as [[Salic Law]]) became usual: succession going to the eldest son of the monarch; if the monarch had no sons, the throne would pass to the nearest male relative in the male line.

Some countries, however, accepted female rulers early on, so that if the monarch had no sons, the throne would pass to the eldest daughter, or in a few cases, the next closest female relative. Examples of queens in antiquity include [[Hatshepsut]] and [[Cleopatra]], pharaohs of Egypt, [[Zenobia]], Empress of [[Palmyrene Empire|Palmyra]], [[Shammuramat]] of the [[Neo-Assyrian Empire|Assyrian empire]], as well as [[Boudica]], queen of [[Iceni]], and [[Cartimandua]], queen of [[Brigantes]], both tribes in Britain. A few prominent examples in medieval times include the following queens by country - 

* [[Byzantine Empire]] - [[Irene of Athens]] was the Byzantine Empress regnant from 797 till 802 CE. Later, [[Zoe Porphyrogenita|Empress Zoe]] and [[Theodora Porphyrogenita|Empress Theodora]] were co-monarchs of the Byzantine empire from 1042 CE.
* [[History of Kashmir#Early history|Kingdom of Kashmir]] (India) - [[Didda|Queen Didda]] succeeded to the throne of Kashmir in 980 CE until her death in 1003 CE. She had previously ruled as regent from 958 to 980 for her son and grandsons.
* Combined Kingdoms of [[Kingdom of León|León]], [[Kingdom of Castile|Castile]] and [[Kingdom of Galicia|Galicia]] (Spain) - [[Urraca of León and Castile|Queen Urraca]] succeeded to the combined thrones of León, Castile and Galicia in 1109 after the death of her father [[Alfonso VI of León and Castile|Alfonso VI]]. 
* [[Kingdom of Jerusalem]] - [[Melisende, Queen of Jerusalem]] succeeded to the throne of Jerusalem in 1131 after the death of her father.
* [[Kingdom of Aragon]] (Spain) - [[Petronilla of Aragon]] succeeded to the throne of the Kingdom of Aragon in 1137 after the abdication of her father [[Ramiro II of Aragon]].
* [[Kingdom of Navarre]] - [[Joan I of Navarre]] succeeded to the throne of Navarre in 1274 CE.
* [[Kingdom of Scotland]] - [[Margaret, Maid of Norway]] inherited Scotland on the death of her grandfather King [[Alexander III of Scotland]] in 1286. Later, [[Mary, Queen of Scots]] succeeded to Scotland in 1542 after the death of her father [[James V of Scotland]].
* [[Kalmar Union]] (Denmark, Norway and Sweden) - [[Margaret I of Denmark]] succeeded to the combined thrones of Denmark, Norway and Sweden in 1387. [[Christina, Queen of Sweden]], later succeeded to the sole [[Sweden|Swedish]] throne in 1632 after the death of her father, King [[Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden|Gustav II Adolf]].
* [[Kingdom of England]] - [[Mary I of England]] succeeded to the Kingdom of England after her brother [[Edward VI]]'s death in 1553, who in turn was herself succeeded by her sister [[Elizabeth I]] in 1558.

In England all land passed to any widow strictly for life, then by primogeniture. Until the [[Statute of Wills]] was passed in 1540, a will could control only personal property. Real estate (land) passed to the eldest male descendant [[by operation of law]]. The statute gave power to landowners to "devise" land by the use of a new device, part of any will, including heading "testament". The default setting of such primogeniture applying absent express written words in England was not changed until the [[Administration of Estates Act 1925]].
In law, primogeniture is the rule of inheritance whereby land descends to the oldest son. Under the feudal system of medieval Europe, primogeniture generally governed the inheritance of land held in military tenure (see [[knight]]). The effect of this rule was to keep the father's land for the support of the son who rendered the required military service. When feudalism declined and the payment of a tax was substituted for military service, the need for primogeniture disappeared. In England the 1540 Act permitted the oldest son to be entirely cut off from inheriting, and in the 17th century military tenure was abolished; primogeniture is, nevertheless, a fading custom of the gentry and farm owners in England and Wales.

An ancient and alternative way in which women succeeded to power, especially without displacing the direct male line descendants of the first monarchs, was consortium or [[coregency]] between husband and wife or other relatives. The most notable are the Egyptian cases of [[Hatshepsut]] and [[Thutmose III]], and the monarchs of the [[Ptolemaic Dynasty]].

====United States and Canada====
In [[British North America]], the colonies followed English primogeniture laws. Carole Shammas argues that issues of primogeniture, dower, curtesy, strict family settlements in equity, collateral kin, and unilateral division of real and personal property were fully developed in the colonial courts. The Americans differed little from English policies regarding the status of widow, widower, and lineal descendants.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Shammas |first1=Carole |year=1987 |title=English inheritance law and its transfer to the colonies |journal=American Journal of Legal History |volume=31 |issue= 2|pages=145–163 |doi=10.2307/845880|jstor=845880 }}</ref> The primogeniture laws were repealed at the time of the [[American Revolution]]. Thomas Jefferson took the lead in repealing the law in Virginia, where nearly three-fourths of Tidewater land and perhaps a majority of western lands were entailed.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Brewer |first1=Holly |year=1997 |title=Entailing Aristocracy in Colonial Virginia: 'Ancient Feudal Restraints' and Revolutionary Reform |journal=William and Mary Quarterly |volume=54 |issue=2 |pages=307–346 |jstor=2953276|doi=10.2307/2953276 }}</ref> Canada had the same law but repealed it in 1851.<ref>Gerald Hallowell, ed., ''The Oxford Companion to Canadian History'' (2004), p 502.</ref>

When [[Winston Churchill]] and [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] met at Placentia Bay in August 1941, Roosevelt said he could not understand the British aristocracy's concept of primogeniture, and he intended to divide his estate equally between his five children; Churchill explained that an equal distribution was nicknamed the ''Spanish Curse'' by the British upper classes: "We give everything to the eldest and the others strive to duplicate it and found empires. While the oldest, having it all, marries for beauty. Which accounts, Mr President, for my good looks". But as Churchill's father was a younger son, there may have been more modesty than mock-vanity than Roosevelt realised.<ref>{{cite book | last = Roberts | first = Andrew | author-link = Andrew Roberts (historian) | title = Masters and Commanders: The Military Geniuses who Led the West to Victory in World War II | publisher = Penguin | date = 2009 | location = London | page = 53 | isbn = 978-0-141-02926-9 }}</ref>