Talk:Cognatic succession

What have been Ashley Y's reasons to delete the contents of this artiocle, and redirect it to an article which definitely covers only a portion of the subject, and which redirect is easily giving a misleading picture to resders: an erroneous picture that primogeniture covers everything in succession, with regard to cognatic succession???? Ashley Y's edit here seems highly questionable. 62.78.105.140 15:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The text which Ashley Y deleted altigether, was the following. Everyone can compare whether the subject is totally covered by text in primogeniture, and whether primogeniture really is the only form of cognatic succession. 62.78.105.140 15:56, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Cognatic succession is the succession to the throne or other inheritance which allows both males and females to be heirs. Please note that cognatic only means that both genders are allowed, but the genders may be treated somewhat inequally (and historically have thus been: in cognatic successions of hereditary monarchies, there has existed a preference for males). ("Cognatic descent" refers to the mode of descent reckoning where all descendants of an apical ancestor/ancestress through any combination of male or female links are included. It is practically the same as "consanguineal". A cognate simply is a kinsman or kinswoman with whom one has at least one common ancestor.) Thus, "cognatic succession" refer to a number of alternative lines of succession, the only confition is that the successor and the predecessor are "blood relatives". Therefore, several alternative systems of succession can be classified as "cognatic".

Cognatic succession may take place using similar specific forms as any other succession: appointment or election, partition, seniority, primogeniture, etc. cognatic primogeniture nowadays refers to any form of primogeniture which allows females. Primogeniture is inheritance by the first-born of the entirety of a parent's wealth, estate or office, or in the absence of children, by collateral relatives in order of seniority of the collateral line. Primogeniture is often used as a mechanism of succession in hereditary monarchies.

Male-preference primogeniture is inheritance by the eldest surviving male child, but females may inherit provided the subject has no sons. The term agnatic-cognatic primogeniture is used in the same meaning. This is the usual feudal primogeniture in the Western European culture. Earlier, also the term cognatic primogeniture referred to this same meaning, but nowadays cognatic primogeniture has expanded to refer to any form of primogeniture which allows females.

The most common hereditary system in feudal Europe was based on a form of cognatic primogeniture, where a lord was succeeded by his eldest son, and failing sons, by either daughters or by sons of daughters. Great Britain and Spain, where also females are allowed to succeed, are today continuing this old model of succession law. 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 and most often also got title, iure uxoris.

Absolute, equal or lineal primogeniture is inheritance by the oldest surviving child without regard to gender. This system was virtually unknown in monarchies until the late 20th century - for centuries until its invention, females, if entitled to succeed at all, were at least surpassed by a consistent preference of males. Today, some writers misleadingly refer by "cognatic primogeniture" only to equal primogeniture, although its long use indicates that it earlier in practical situations always meant the same as male-preference primogeniture.

The first country to adopt fully equal primogeniture was Sweden in 1980. The beneficiary of this was Victoria of Sweden. Several other monarchies have since followed, such as Belgium, the Netherlands and Norway (with Princess Ingrid Alexandra of Norway as second in line to the throne after her father, Crown Prince Haakon). In Japan, there are currently debates over whether to adopt lineal or some form of cognatic primogeniture, as Princess Aiko is the firstborn of Crown Prince Naruhito.

No known monarchy applies uterine primogeniture (= matrilineal primogeniture) or any other form of hereditary succession to total exclusion of males. There have been some theoretical ideas of ancient Egypt having applied matrilineal succession, but it was at least not constant nor consistent. We may expect that some cult of high priestesses will be someday revealed to have applied fully uterine succession, even up to total exclusion of males even as transfers of succession rights.

The application of so-called Salic Law in hereditary succession dies not allow any sort of succession or inheritance by females. Agnatic succession is inheritance by the male line, with females excluded. Thus, it is the opposite of cognatic succession.

A case of agnatic primogeniture is exemplified in the French royal milieu, the Salic Law (attributed to the Salian Franks) forbade any inheritance of a crown through the female line. This accounts for the dispute over the legitimate successor of Charles IV of France (Edward III of England or Philip VI of France), the separation between Hanover (where Ernest I succeeded) and the United Kingdom upon the accession of Queen Victoria in 1837, the separation of the ducal house of Luxembourg from that of the Netherlands, and partially explains the role of Carlism in Spain.

From Middle Ages, we have one practical system of succession in cognatic male primogeniture, so-called Quasi-Salic inheritance: succession is allowed also through female line, just females themselves do not inherit, but the sons of females do. (For example, a grandfather, without sons, is succeeded by his grandson, a son of his daughter, when the daughter in question is yet alive. Or an uncle, without own children, is succeeded by his nephew, a son of his sister, when the sister in question is yet alive.) This actually fulfills the Salic condition of "no land comes to a woman, but the land comes to the male sex". Only males may succeed to the throne, but a female is accepted as transfer of succession rights.

Preference for males, existing in most systems of hereditary succession) comes mostly from the perceived nature of the tasks and role of the monarch: A monarch most usually was, firstly and foremostly, a military protector (war commander and warrior), and sometimes also a male priest. Later, when lands were strictly divided among noble families and tended to remain fixed, agnatic primogeniture (practically the same as Salic Law) became the most 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 through 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. (This sort of primogeniture was the rule that let Elizabeth II become Queen.)

In more complex medieval cases, the sometimes conflicting principles of proximity and primogeniture battled, and outcomes could have been idiosyncratic. Proximity meant that a heir closer in degrees of kinship to the lord in question was given precedence although that heir was not necessarily the primogenitural heir. However, primogeniture increasedly won legal cases over proximity in later centuries.
 * For example, the succession of Duchy of Burgundy in 1361 was resolved in favor of John, son of a younger daughter, on basis of proximity, because he was a closer cousin of the dead duke than Charles, the grandson of the elder daughter. Proximity sometimes favored younger lines (directly contrary to the outcome from applying primogeniture), since it was more probable that from a younger line, a member of "earlier" generation was yet alive than among the descendants of the eldest.
 * In dispute over the succession of the Kingdom of Scotland 1296, the Bruce family pleaded tanistry and proximity, whereas Balliol primogeniture. The arbiter, Edward I of England, decided in favor of primogeniture. But later, the Independence Wars reverted the situation in favor of the Bruce, however, not because of legal arguments, but because of positions in the war and capability and sheer luck.
 * The earldom of Gloucester 1310 went to full sisters of the dead earl, not to earl's half-sister(s) who was/were elder, having been born of father's first marriage, when the earl himself was from 2nd marriage (full siblings were regarded more close, higher in proximity, than half-siblings).