What is the Difference Between Heir Apparent and Heir Presumptive?

In my latest WIP (Work in Progress), one of the important characters is the “heir presumptive” to his brother. What does that mean, and how does it differ from “heir apparent”? In my story, Horace Lovelace is the third son of the Earl of Sandahl. The oldest son has passed in a freak accident. The second brother has succeeded to the title, but he has not produced a male heir; therefore, Horace, the third son, is the second son’s heir presumptive.

An heir apparent or heiress apparent is a person who is first in line of succession and cannot be displaced from inheriting, except by death or a change in the rules of succession.

An heir presumptive or heiress presumptive, by contrast, is someone who is first in line to inherit a title but whose claim can be displaced at any time (in legal terms, is “subject to divestiture”) upon the occurrence of one or more events or sets of events for which the system of inheritance allows, such as the birth of a more eligible heir.

Today these terms most commonly describe heirs to hereditary titles, particularly monarchies. They are also used metaphorically to indicate an “anointed” successor to any position of power, e.g., a political or corporate leader.

The phrase is only occasionally found used as a title, where it usually is capitalized (“Heir Apparent”). Most monarchies give (or gave) the heir apparent the title of Crown Prince or a more specific title, such as Prince of Orange in the Netherlands, Prince of Asturias in Spain, or Prince of Wales in the United Kingdom.

This article primarily describes the term heir apparent in a hereditary system regulated by laws of primogeniture—as opposed to cases where a monarch has a say in naming the heir.

Heir Apparent versus Heir Presumptive

In a hereditary system governed by some form of primogeniture, an heir apparent is easily identifiable as the person whose position as first in the line of succession is secure, regardless of future births. An heir presumptive, by contrast, can always be “bumped down” in the succession by the birth of somebody more closely related in a legal sense (according to that form of primogeniture) to the current title-holder.

Primogeniture is the right, by law or custom, of the firstborn male child to inherit the family estate, in preference to siblings (compare to ultimogeniture). In the absence of children, inheritance passed to collateral relatives, usually males, in order of seniority of their lines of descent. The eligible descendants of deceased elder siblings take precedence over living younger siblings, such that inheritance is settled in the manner of a depth-first search.

The principle has applied in history to inheritance of real property (land) as well as inherited titles and offices, most notably monarchies, continuing until modified or abolished.

Variations on primogeniture modify the right of the firstborn son to the entirety of a family’s inheritance or, in the West since World War II with the wider promotion of feminism, eliminate the preference for males over females. Most monarchies in Europe have eliminated male preference in succession: Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden. The United Kingdom passed legislation to establish gender-blind succession in 2013, but delayed implementation until the 15 other countries which share the same monarch affect similar changes in their succession laws.

The clearest example occurs in the case of a title-holder with no children. If at any time he produce children, they (the offspring of the title-holder) rank ahead of whatever more “distant” relative (the title-holder’s sibling, perhaps, or a nephew or cousin) previously was heir presumptive.

Many legal systems assume childbirth is always possible regardless of age or health. In such circumstances a person may be, in a practical sense, the heir apparent but still, legally speaking, heir presumptive. Indeed, when Queen Victoria succeeded her uncle King William IV, the wording of the proclamation even gave as a caveat:

“…saving the rights of any issue of his late Majesty King William IV, which may be born of his late Majesty’s consort.”

queen-victoriaThis provided for the possibility that William’s wife, Adelaide of Saxe-Meiningen, was pregnant at the moment of his death—since such a (so-named posthumous) child, if born and regardless of the gender of the child, would have displaced Victoria from the throne. Adelaide was 44 at the time, so pregnancy was possible even if unlikely.

Daughters in Male-Preference Primogeniture
Daughters (and their lines) may inherit titles that descend according to male-preference primogeniture, but only in default of sons (and their heirs). That is, both female and male offspring have the right to a place somewhere in the order of succession, but when it comes to what that place is, a female will rank behind her brothers regardless of their ages or hers.

Thus, normally, even an only daughter will not be her father’s (or mother’s) heiress apparent, since at any time a brother might be born who, though younger, would be heir apparent. Hence, she is an heiress presumptive.

diamond-jubilee-weekend-queen-elizabeths-rare-pictures-releasedFor example, Queen Elizabeth II was heiress presumptive during the reign of her father, King George VI, because at any stage up to his death, George could have fathered a legitimate son.

Women as Heirs Apparent
In a system of absolute primogeniture that does not consider gender, female heirs apparent occur. Several European monarchies that have adopted such systems in the last few decades furnish practical examples. Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden, Princess Catharina-Amalia of the Netherlands, and Princess Elisabeth of Belgium are respectively the oldest children of Kings Carl XVI Gustaf, Willem-Alexander, and Philippe and are their heirs apparent.

Princess Ingrid Alexandra of Norway is heir apparent to her father (who is heir apparent to the Norwegian throne). Victoria was not heiress apparent from birth (in 1977), but gained the status in 1980 following a change in the Swedish Act of Succession. Her younger brother Carl Philip (born 1979) was thus heir apparent for a few months.

It was reported in October 2011 that discussions would take place between the heads of government of the Commonwealth realms aimed at changing the rules of succession to the 16 thrones of Elizabeth II to give equal rights to females. Following the CHOGM meeting, which took place in Perth, Australia, between 28–30 October 2011, it was announced that the rule change had the unanimous backing of all 16 member nations. However, the effects are not likely to be felt for many years; the first two heirs at the time of the agreement (Charles, Prince of Wales and his son Prince William, Duke of Cambridge) were already eldest born children, and in 2013, William’s first-born son Prince George of Cambridge became the next apparent successor.

But even in legal systems that apply male-preference primogeniture, female heirs apparent are by no means impossible: if a male heir apparent dies leaving no sons, but at least one daughter, then the eldest daughter would replace her father as heir apparent to whatever throne or title is concerned, but only when it has become clear that the widow of the deceased is not pregnant. Then, as the representative of her father’s line she would assume a place ahead of any more distant relatives. Such a situation has not to date occurred with the English or British throne; several times an heir apparent has died, but each example has either been childless or left a son or sons. However, there have been several female heirs apparent to British peerages (e.g. Frances Ward, 6th Baroness Dudley, and Henrietta Wentworth, 6th Baroness Wentworth).

In one special case, however, England and Scotland had a female heir apparent. The Revolution settlement that established William and Mary as joint monarchs in 1689 only gave the power to continue the succession through issue to Mary II, eldest daughter of the previous king, James II. William, by contrast, was to reign for life only, and his (hypothetical) children by a wife other than Mary would be placed in his original place (as Mary’s first cousin) in the line of succession – after Mary’s younger sister Anne. Thus, although after Mary’s death William continued to reign, he had no power to beget direct heirs, and Anne became the heir apparent for the remainder of William’s reign. She eventually succeeded him as Queen of England, Scotland and Ireland.

Displacement of Heirs Apparent
The position of an heir apparent is normally unshakable: it can be assumed they will inherit. Sometimes, however, extraordinary events—such as the death or the deposition of the parent—intervene.

People Who Lost Heir Apparent Status
Parliament deposed James Francis Edward Stuart, the infant son of King James II & VII (of England and Scotland respectively) whom James II was raising as a Catholic, as the King’s legal heir apparent—declaring that James had, de facto, abdicated— and offered the throne to James II’s oldest daughter, the young prince’s much older Protestant half-sister, Mary (along with her husband, Prince William of Orange). When the exiled King James died in 1701, his Jacobite supporters proclaimed the exiled Prince James Francis Edward as King James III of England and James VIII of Scotland; but neither he nor his descendents was ever successful in their bids for the throne.

220px-GustavSweden&VasaCrown Prince Gustav (later known as Gustav, Prince of Vasa), son of Gustav IV Adolf of Sweden, lost his place when his father was deposed and replaced by Gustav IV Adolf’s aged uncle, the Duke Carl, who became Charles XIII of Sweden in 1809. The aged King Charles XIII did not have surviving sons, and Prince Gustav was the only living male of the whole dynasty (besides his deposed father), but the prince was never regarded as heir of Charles XIII, although there were factions in the Riksdag and elsewhere in Sweden who desired to preserve him, and, in the subsequent constitutional elections, supported his election as his great-uncle’s successor. Instead, the government proceeded to have a new crown prince elected (which was the proper constitutional action, if no male heir was left in the dynasty), and the Riksdag elected first August, Prince of Augustenborg, and then, after his death, the Prince of Ponte Corvo (Marshal Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte).

Prince Carl Philip of Sweden, at his birth in 1979, was heir apparent to the throne of Sweden. A year later a change in that country’s succession laws instituted absolute primogeniture, and Carl Philip was supplanted as heir apparent by his elder sister Victoria.

Breaching Legal Qualification of Heirs Apparent
In some jurisdictions, an heir apparent can automatically lose that status by breaching certain constitutional rules. Today, for example:

**a British heir apparent would lose this status if he became a Catholic or married a Catholic. According to The Act of Settlement, the loss of any place in the succession would persist even if he later renounced Catholicism or if his Catholic spouse were to pre-decease him. This is the only religion-based restriction on the heir-apparent. However, as of October 2011, the governments of the 16 Commonwealth realms—of which Queen Elizabeth II is monarch—have agreed to remove the restriction on marriage to a Catholic.
**a Swedish Crown Prince or Crown Princess would lose heir apparent status, according to the Act of Succession, if they marry without approval of the monarch and the Government, abandoned the “pure Evangelical faith”, or accepted another throne without the approval of the Riksdag.
**a Dutch Prince or Princess of Orange would lose status as heir to the throne if he or she married without the approval of the States-General, or simply renounced the right.
**a Spanish Prince of Asturias would lose status if he married against the express prohibition of the monarch or the Cortes.
**a Belgian Crown Prince or Princess would lose heir apparent status if he or she married without the consent of the monarch, or became monarch of another country.
**a Danish Crown Prince or Princess would lose status if he or she married without the permission of the monarch. When the monarch grants permission for a dynast to enter marriage, he/she may set conditions that must be met for the dynast to gain/maintain a place in the line of succession; this also applies for Crown Princes/Princesses.

Posted in British history, customs and tradiitons, Great Britain, Living in the UK, political stance, real life tales | Tagged , | 2 Comments

The Hammersmith Ghost: Legal Precedent in the UK Regarding Self-Defence

220px-Hammersmith_GhostThe Hammersmith Ghost murder case of 1804 set a legal precedent in the UK regarding self-defence: whether someone could be held liable for their actions even if they were the consequence of a mistaken belief.

Near the end of 1803, a number of people claimed to have seen and even been attacked by a ghost in the Hammersmith area of London, a ghost believed by locals to be the spirit of a suicide victim. On 3 January 1804, a member of one of the armed patrols set up in the wake of the reports shot and killed a plasterer, Thomas Millwood, mistaking the white clothes of Millwood’s trade for a ghostly apparition. The culprit, a 29-year-old excise officer named Francis Smith, was found guilty of murder and sentenced to death, commuted to one year’s hard labour.

The issues surrounding the case were not settled for 180 years, until a Court of Appeal decision in 1984.

Death of Thomas Millwood
In late 1803 a number of people claimed to have seen, and some to have been attacked by, a ghost in the Hammersmith area. Local people said the ghost was of a man who had committed suicide the previous year, and had been buried in Hammersmith churchyard. The contemporary belief was that suicide victims should not be buried in consecrated ground, as their souls would not then be at rest.

On 3 January 1804 one of the armed citizens patrolling the area, 29-year-old excise officer Francis Smith, shot and killed a white figure in Black Lion Lane, plasterer Thomas Millwood, who was wearing the normal white clothing of his trade: “linen trowsers [sic] entirely white, washed very clean, a waistcoat of flannel, apparently new, very white, and an apron, which he wore round him.”

Trial of Francis Smith
Smith was tried for willful murder. One witness, a Mrs. Fulbrooke, stated she had warned the deceased to cover his white clothing with a greatcoat, as he had already been mistaken for the ghost on a previous occasion.

On Saturday evening, he and I were at home, for he lived with me; he said he had frightened two ladies and a gentleman who were coming along the terrace in a carriage, for that the man said, he dared to say there goes the ghost; that he said he was no more a ghost than he was, and asked him, using a bad word, did he want a punch of the head; I begged of him to change his dress; Thomas, says I, as there is a piece of work about the ghost, and your cloaths [sic] look white, pray do put on your great coat, that you may not run any danger;
—Mrs. Fulbrooke’s testimony at the Old Bailey trial

Millwood’s sister testified that although Smith had called on her brother to stop or he would shoot, Smith discharged the gun almost immediately. Despite a number of declarations of Smith’s good character, the chief judge, Lord Chief Baron Macdonald, advised the jury that malice was not required of murder, merely an intent to kill:

I should betray my duty, and injure the public security, if I did not persist in asserting that this is a clear case of murder, if the facts be proved to your satisfaction. All killing whatever amounts to murder, unless justified by the law, or in self-defence. In cases of some involuntary acts, or some sufficiently violent provocation, it becomes manslaughter. Not one of these circumstances occur here.
—Lord Chief Baron Macdonald

The accused had not been directly provoked, nor made any attempt to apprehend the supposed ghost, therefore Macdonald directed the jury to find the accused guilty of murder if they believed the facts presented by the witnesses. After considering for an hour, the jury returned a verdict of manslaughter. Macdonald informed the jury that “the Court could not receive such a verdict,” and that they must either find Smith guilty of murder, or acquit him: that Smith believed Millwood to be a ghost was irrelevant. The jury then returned with a verdict of guilty. After passing the customary sentence of death, Macdonald stated his intent to report the case to the king, who had the power to commute the sentence.

The initial sentence of hanging and dissection was commuted to a year’s hard labour. The huge publicity given to the case had meanwhile persuaded the true culprit to come forward—John Graham, an elderly shoemaker. He had been pretending to be a ghost by using a white sheet to frighten his apprentice, who had been scaring the Graham children with ghost stories.

Effect on UK Law
The question of whether acting on a mistaken belief was a sufficient defence to a criminal charge was debated for more than a century until it was clarified at the Court of Appeal in the case R. v Williams (Gladstone) (1984), concerning an appeal heard in November 1983. The appellant, Gladstone Williams, had seen a man dragging a younger man violently along the street whilst the latter shouted for help. Mistakenly believing an assault was taking place, he intervened and subsequently injured the purported assailant, who was actually attempting to apprehend a suspected thief. Williams was subsequently convicted of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. At the appeal, Lord Chief Justice Lane referred to the previous debate;

(the case) raised issues of law which have been the subject of debate for more years than one likes to think about and the subject of more learned academic articles than one would care to read in an evening.
—Lord Chief Justice Lane

Lane went on to clarify the problematic issue;

In a case of self-defence, where self-defence or the prevention of crime is concerned, if the jury came to the conclusion that the defendant believed, or may have believed, that he was being attacked or that a crime was being committed, and that force was necessary to protect himself or to prevent the crime, then the prosecution have not proved their case. If however the defendant’s alleged belief was mistaken and if the mistake was an unreasonable one, that may be a peaceful reason for coming to the conclusion that the belief was not honestly held and should be rejected. Even if the jury come to the conclusion that the mistake was an unreasonable one, if the defendant may genuinely have been labouring under it, he is entitled to rely upon it.
—Lord Chief Justice Lane

The appeal was allowed, and the conviction quashed. The decision was approved by the Privy Council in Beckford v The Queen (1988) and was later written into law in the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, Section 76.

Posted in British history, Great Britain, legends and myths, Living in the Regency, Living in the UK, mystery, real life tales, Regency era, Regency personalities | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Ultimogeniture (or) Borough Inheritance ~ The Youngest “Keeps the Hearth”

Yesterday, we looked at Primogeniture, a procedure where the first born (usually the first born male) inherits everything, but what do you know of Ultimogeniture?

Ultimogeniture, also known as postremogeniture or junior right, is the tradition of inheritance by the last-born of the entirety of, or a privileged position in, a parent’s wealth, estate or office. The tradition has been far rarer historically than primogeniture, inheritance by the first-born.

Advantages and Disadvantages
Ultimogeniture serves the circumstances where the youngest is “keeping the hearth,” taking care of the parents and continuing at home, whereas elder children have had time to succeed “out in the world” and provide for themselves—or having received their share of land and moveable property earlier, for example when marrying and founding their own family (in whose case we cannot speak of a true ultimogeniture pattern). The system has proved relatively impractical for impartible inheritance during more recent centuries. Ultimogeniture has been more suitable to officeholders and owners who have themselves been adults already for several decades (such as monarchs who happen to be elderly) and are leaving children who are more or less all mature adults.

Like other forms of hereditary succession, ultimogeniture has known its fair share of problems. Elder siblings deprived of property could potentially use their experience to coerce younger siblings into relinquishing some or all of their inheritance. In addition, fratricide, among other means, was often committed to eliminate potential challenges from younger siblings and their political supporters, as in the case of Alexander the Great’s succession to the Macedonian throne.159px-AlexanderTheGreat_Bust

Usage Examples
In medieval England, the principle of patrilineal ultimogeniture (i.e. inheritance by the youngest surviving male child) was known as Borough-English. In 1327, a court case found it to be the tradition in the borough of Nottingham, whereas in areas influenced by Anglo-Norman culture, primogeniture was prevalent. The tradition was also found across many rural areas of England where lands were held in tenure by socage. (The term soke (/ˈsoʊk/; in Old English: soc, connected ultimately with secan (to seek)), at the time of the Norman conquest of England generally denoted “jurisdiction”, but due to vague usage probably lacks a single precise definition. The law term, socage, used of this tenure, arose by adding the French suffix -age to soc.) It also occurred in copyhold manors in Surrey, Middlesex, Suffolk and Sussex.

In the German Duchy of Saxe-Altenburg, land-holdings traditionally passed to the youngest son, who might then employ his older brothers as farm workers. Patrilineal ultimogeniture was traditionally the predominant custom among German peasants.

In some southwestern areas of Japan, property was traditionally apportioned by a modified version of ultimogeniture known as masshi souzoku (末子相続). An estate was distributed equally among all sons or children, except that the youngest received a double share as a reward for caring for the elderly parents in their last years. Official surveys conducted during the early years of the Meiji era demonstrated that the most common family form throughout the country during the Edo period was characterized by stem structure, patrilineal descent, patrivirilocal residence and patrilineal primogeniture, but in some southwestern areas this combination of partible inheritance and ultimogeniture was sometimes employed.

In early Greek myths, kingship was conferred by marriage to a tribal nymph, who was selected by ultimogeniture or success in a race.

Many Biblical characters such as Isaac, Jacob, Ephraim, Moses, David, and Solomon are described as youngest sons or daughters — leading some scholars to infer a prehistoric ultimogeniture tradition in the Holy Land, although such theory is mostly speculative and contradicts explicit biblical evidence. (Deuteronomy 21) The preeminence of youngest siblings is common to most folkloric and theological traditions around the world and has received many different interpretations.

220px-Tolui_Khan Ultimogeniture of the ancestral seat was traditional in Mongolia. Genghis Khan passed the Mongolian homeland of the Mongol Empire to his fourth son, Tolui as the empire with its conquests was partitioned between his four sons. Among Mongols, each son received a part of the family herd as he married, with the elder son receiving more than the younger son, and the youngest son receiving the family tent in addition to his part of the family herd.
Likewise, each son inherited a part of the family’s camping lands and pastures, with the elder son receiving more than the younger son. The eldest son inherited the farthest camping lands and pastures, and each son in turn inherited camping lands and pastures closer to the family tent until the youngest son inherited the camping lands and pastures immediately surrounding the family tent. Family units would often remain near each other and in close cooperation, though extended families would inevitably break up after a few generations.

In areas of northern Myanmar and southwest China, where it is traditional among the Kachin for older sons to move away on reaching maturity and for only the youngest son to remain and inherit.

Posted in customs and tradiitons, real life tales, royalty | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Primogeniture? Collateral Relatives? The First Laws of Inheritance…

For those of us who read and write Regency romances or those who live in places such as the United Kingdom, the idea of “Primogeniture” is quite obvious, but to the majority of U.S. citizens, the concept is difficult to wrap one’s head around.

Primogeniture is the right, by law or custom, of the firstborn male child to inherit the family estate, in preference to siblings. In the absence of children, inheritance passed to collateral relatives, usually males, in order of seniority of their lines of descent. The eligible descendants of deceased elder siblings take precedence over living younger siblings, such that inheritance is settled in the manner of a depth-first search.

The principle has applied in history to inheritance of real property (land) as well as inherited titles and offices, most notably monarchies, continuing until modified or abolished.

Variations on primogeniture modify the right of the firstborn son to the entirety of a family’s inheritance or, in the West since World War II with the wider promotion of feminism, eliminate the preference for males over females. Most monarchies in Europe have eliminated male preference in succession: Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden. The United Kingdom passed legislation to establish gender-blind succession in 2013 but delayed implementation until the 15 other countries which share the same monarch effect similar changes in their succession laws.

Variations
Cognatic Primogeniture
Under cognatic primogeniture, kinship (of males and females) is determined by tracing through any ancestors to commonality: Those who share cognatic kinship are termed cognates.

Absolute Primogeniture
Absolute, equal, or lineal primogeniture is a form of cognatic primogeniture where no preference is paid to either gender for order of precedence. This form of primogeniture was not practiced by any modern monarchy before 1980.

However, according to Poumarede (1972), the Basques of the Kingdom of Navarre transmitted title and property to the firstborn, whatever the gender. This inheritance practice was adhered to by the higher nobility and free families alike in the early and high middle ages. The Navarrese monarchy, however, was inherited by dynasties from outside of Navarre which followed different succession laws (usually male preference primogeniture). Eventually only the Basque lower nobility and free families of the Basque country and other regions continued to follow this practice, which persisted as late as the 19th century.

An ancient and alternative way in which women managed to rise to power, especially without displacing the direct male line descendants of the first monarchs, is the historical consortium or coregency between husband and wife or other relatives. The most notable of these are the Egyptian cases of Hatshepsut and Thutmose III, as well as the Ptolemaic Dynasty’s kings and queens.

In 1980, Sweden amended its constitution to adopt royal succession by absolute primogeniture, displacing King Carl XVI Gustaf’s infant son, Carl Philip, in favor of his elder daughter, Victoria, in the process. Several other monarchies have since followed suit: the Netherlands in 1983, Norway in 1990, Belgium in 1991, Denmark in 2009, Luxembourg in 2011 and the United Kingdom in 2013.

Monaco, the Netherlands and Norway also deviated from primogeniture ad infinitum in the late 20th or early 21st century by restricting succession to the crown to relatives within a specified degree of kinship to the most recent monarch.

Recently, other monarchies have changed or considered changing to absolute primogeniture:

**With the birth of Infanta Leonor of Spain on 31 October 2005 to the Prince and Princess of Asturias, Spain’s Prime Minister Zapetero reaffirmed his then government’s intention to amend the Spanish constitution by introducing absolute primogeniture. Zapatero’s proposal was supported by the leader of the main opposition party, the conservative Partido Popular, making its passage likely. However, Zaptero’s administration ended before any amendment was drafted, and the succeeding government has not taken up the issue. Prince Felipe has counseled reformers that there is plenty of time before any constitutional amendment would need to be enacted as the expectation is to leave him next in line to succeed his father despite his elder sisters’ continued status as dynasts; equal primogeniture is expected to first apply to his children.

**In July 2006, the Nepalese government proposed adopting absolute primogeniture, but the monarchy was abolished 28 May 2008.
**In 2011 the governments of the United Kingdom and the other 15 Commonwealth realms whose head of state is also the British monarch announced the Perth Agreement, a plan to legislate changes to absolute primogeniture. This will be implemented in all 16 nations simultaneously once the necessary legislation has been passed in each country (in the U.K. this is the Succession to the Crown Act 2013).
**In Japan, debates have occurred over whether to adopt absolute primogeniture, as Princess Aiko is the only child of Crown Prince Naruhito. However, the birth of Prince Hisahito, a son of Prince Akishino (the younger brother of Crown Prince Naruhito, and next in line to the Chrysanthemum Throne following Naruhito) has sidelined the debate.

230px-Busto_de_Juan_Carlos_I_de_España_(2009)In 2006, King Juan Carlos I of Spain issued a decree reforming the succession to noble titles from male-preference primogeniture to absolute primogeniture.

The order of succession for all noble dignities is determined in accordance with the title of concession and, if there is none, with that traditionally applied in these cases. When the order of succession to the title is not specified in the nobility title creation charter, the following rules apply:

**Absolute preference is given to the direct descending line over the collateral and ascending line, and, within the same line, the closest degree takes precedence over the more remote and, within the same degree, the elder over the younger, combined with the principles of firstborn and representation.

**Men and women have an equal right of succession to grandeeship and to titles of nobility in Spain, and no person may be given preference in the normal order of succession for reasons of gender.

Male-preference Cognatic Primogeniture
Male-preference cognatic primogeniture allows a female member of a dynasty to succeed if she has no living brothers and no deceased brothers who left surviving legitimate descendants. A dynast’s sons and their lines all come before that dynast’s daughters and their lines. Older sons and their lines come before younger sons and their lines. Older daughters and their lines come before younger daughters and their lines.

This was the most common primogeniture practiced in Western European feudalism, such as the Castilian Siete Partidas.[citation needed] Male-preference primogeniture is currently practiced in succession to the thrones of Monaco, Spain, Thailand, and the sixteen Commonwealth realms. (This was recently changed by Queen Elizabeth II prior to the birth of Prince George of Cambridge.) It also was practiced in Portugal and the Empire of Brazil.

With respect to hereditary titles, it is usually the rule for Scotland and baronies by writ in the United Kingdom; although baronies by writ go into abeyance when the last male titleholder dies leaving more than one surviving sister or more than one descendant in the legitimate female line of the original titleholder.

Agnatic Primogeniture
Under agnatic primogeniture, or patrilineal primogeniture, kinship (of males and females) is determined by tracing through only male ancestors to commonality: Those who share agnatic kinship are termed agnates.

There were different types of succession based on agnatic primogeniture, all sharing the principle that inheritance is according to seniority of birth amongst the agnatic kin, firstly, among the sons of a monarch or head of family, with sons and their male-line issue inheriting before brothers and their issue.

When an agnatic primogeniture system altogether excludes females from inheritance of the family’s main possessions, it is known in Europe as application of the Salic law. By the beginning of the 19th century, only the royal houses of Bourbon and Savoy, among Europe’s historic national dynasties, continued to completely bar women from succession. Later, the new monarchies or dynasties of France (under the Bonapartes), Belgium, Denmark (beginning in 1853), Sweden (beginning in 1810), and the Balkan realms of Albania, Bulgaria, Montenegro, Romania, and Serbia introduced Salic law. During this era, Spain and Portugal fought civil wars which pitted the Salic and female-line heirs of their dynasties against one another for possession of the crown.

Most British and French titles of nobility descend to the senior male by primogeniture, to the exclusion of females, and agnatic cadets may bear courtesy titles. The Channel Isles have different rules.

A variation on Salic primogeniture allows the sons of women to inherit, but not women themselves, an example being the Francoist succession to the throne of Spain from 1947 to 1978. This is the law in Liechtenstein and in the former Archduchy of Austria.

Uterine Primogeniture
Under uterine primogeniture, kinship (of males and females) is determined by tracing through only female ancestors to commonality: A male may also inherit a right of succession through a female ancestor or spouse, to the exclusion of any female relative who might be older or of nearer proximity of blood (see above for Spain’s mid-twentieth century dynastic succession law). In such cases, inheritance depends on uterine kinship, so a king would typically be succeeded by his sister’s son. This particular system of inheritance applied to the thrones of the Picts of Northern Britain and the Etruscans of Italy. Some kingdoms and tribes in Africa follow the same practice. This usage may stem in part from the certainty of the relationship to the previous king and kings: sons and daughters of a sister are, even if they don’t have the same father, his relations (mater semper certa est).

Matrilineal Primogeniture
Matrilineal primogeniture, or female-preference uterine primogeniture, is a form of succession practised in some societies, in which the eldest female child inherits the throne, to the total exclusion of males. The order of succession to the position of the Rain Queen is an example in an African culture of matrilineal primogeniture: not only is dynastic descent reckoned through the female line, but only females are eligible to inherit.

Semi-Salic Law
Another variation on agnatic primogeniture is the so-called semi-Salic law, or “agnatic-cognatic primogeniture”, which allows women to succeed only at the extinction of all the male descendants in the male line. Such were the cases of Bourbon Spain until 1833 and the dominions of Austria-Hungary, as well as most realms within the former Holy Roman Empire, i.e. most German monarchies. This was also the law of Luxembourg until equal primogeniture was introduced on 20 June 2011.

There are various versions of semi-Salic law also, although in all forms women do not succeed by application of the same kind of primogeniture as was in effect among males in the family. Rather, the female who is nearest in kinship to the last male monarch of the family inherits, even if another female agnate of the dynasty is senior by primogeniture. Among sisters (and the lines of descendants issuing from them), the elder are preferred to the younger. In reckoning consanguinity or proximity of blood the dynasty’s house law defines who among female relatives is “nearest” to the last male.

Significance
In Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville argues that the abolition of the laws of primogeniture and entail in the law of inheritance of private property (as opposed to inheritance of a monarchy) result in the more rapid division of land and thus force landed people to seek wealth outside the family estate in order to maintain their previous standard of living, accelerating the death of the landed aristocracy and also quickening the shift to democracy.

Posted in British history, customs and tradiitons, Great Britain, Living in the UK, political stance | Tagged | Leave a comment

UK Real Estate: Rotherhithe

In my current Work in Progress (WIP) Rotherhithe plays a prominent role in the story’s setting. Rotherhithe is a residential district in southeast London, England, and part of the London Borough of Southwark. It is located on a peninsula on the south bank of the Thames, facing Wapping and the Isle of Dogs on the north bank, and is a part of the Docklands area. It borders Bermondsey to the west and Deptford to the south east.

Rotherhithe has a long history as a port, with many shipyards from Elizabethan times until the early 20th century and with working docks until the 1970s. In the 1980s the area along the river was redeveloped as upmarket housing, through a mix of warehouse conversions and new-build developments. Following the arrival of the Jubilee line in 1999 (giving quick connections to the West End and to Canary Wharf) and the London Overground in 2010 (providing a quick route to the City of London), the rest of Rotherhithe is now a rapidly gentrifying residential and commuter area, with current regeneration progressing well around Downtown Road/Rotherhithe Street area and most quickly around Canada Water, where a new town centre with restaurant and retail units as well as new residential developments is emerging around the existing freshwater lake and transport hub.

Etymology
The name “Rotherhithe” derives from the Anglo-Saxon Hrȳðer-hȳð meaning “landing-place for cattle.” The first recorded use of this name was in about 1105, as Rederheia. In the past Rotherhithe was also known as Redriff or Redriffe; however, until the early 19th century, this name was applied to the whole river front from St Saviour’s Dock to Bull Head Dock, this near the entrance to Surrey Water.

The docks were closed and largely filled in during the 1980s, and have now been replaced by modern housing and commercial facilities, but Rotherhithe retains much of its character and its maritime heritage. The largest surviving dock on the south bank, Greenland Dock, is the focal point for the southern part of the district, while there are many preserved wharves along the riverside at the north end of Rotherhithe. St. Mary’s Church is at the centre of the old Rotherhithe village, which contains various historic buildings including the Brunel Engine House at the south end of the Thames Tunnel.St Mary's Church St Mary’s Church

Canada Dock was the dock basin furthest away from the River Thames in the Surrey Docks complex, and it was linked to Albion Dock and Greenland Dock at its northern and south-eastern extremities via the Albion Canal. The dock has been remodelled, and its northwest half retained as an ornamental lake, renamed Canada Water. The canal has remained as a walkway and water feature within the redeveloped area.

Rotherhithe is the former home of the football team, Fisher F.C., who currently ground-share with Dulwich Hamlet. The most popular team in Rotherhithe is Millwall Football Club located nearby in the London Borough of Lewisham.

The sustainable transport charity Sustrans has proposed the construction of a bicycle and pedestrian swing bridge from Rotherhithe to Canary Wharf, and cost-benefit and feasibility studies were undertaken. In January 2009 the London Mayor Boris Johnson said he would not fund the bridge, citing budget cuts due to the credit crunch, with the result that the project is effectively on ice for the time being.

There are two Anglican churches in Rotherhithe St. Mary’s Church,and Trinity Church. There are two Roman Catholic churches: St Peter and the Guardian Angels, and Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception.

King’s Stairs Gardens
King’s Stairs Gardens is a small park on the river towards the Bermondsey boundary. In September 2011 Thames Water announced that they wanted to build an access shaft for the “super-sewer” Thames Tunnel. Due to local action by The Save King’s Stairs Gardens Campaign, which collected over 5000 signatures, it seems as of March 2011 that Thames Water will build the access shaft elsewhere, if the local community agrees.

Severn Islands Leisure Centre occupies the site of the old Rotherhithe Town Hall. The building ceased to be a town hall in 1905 when the former Rotherhithe Council merged with the old Bermondsey Borough Council and the new council used premises in Spa Road. The old Rotherhithe Town Hall became a library and a museum. It was razed to the ground by repeated bomb hits and near misses during the Second World War.

The ancient parish, dedicated to St Mary, was in the Diocese of Winchester until 1877, then the Diocese of Rochester until 1905, and then finally in the Diocese of Southwark. From 1840, as the population of Rotherhithe increased, a number of new parishes were formed:

Christ Church, Rotherhithe in 1840
All Saints, Rotherhithe in 1842
Holy Trinity, Rotherhithe in 1842
St Barnabas, Rotherhithe in 1873
In addition, as the population of neighbouring Deptford increased, parts of Rotherhithe parish were included in the new parish of:

Because much of the former Surrey Docks had strong trade links to Scandinavia and the Baltic region the area is still home to a thriving Scandinavian community. During World War II, in fact, it housed the Norwegian Government-in-Exile. Originally established as seafarers’ missions, Rotherhithe is home to a Norwegian, a Finnish and a Swedish church. The Finnish Church and the Norwegian Church are both located in Albion Street; they were built in 1958 and 1927 respectively (Rotherhithe Library is located between them). There are also a number of “community centres” for the Nordic community in London, including hostels, shops and cafés and even a sauna, mostly linked closely to the churches.

the angel rotherhitheSome of the redeveloped areas were built by Nordic architects, such as the Greenland Passage development by Danish Company Kjaer & Richter. This gives some areas a distinctly “Nordic” feel in terms of house and street design.

The relationship with Scandinavia and the Baltic is also reflected in the names of some of the buildings (such as the King Frederik IX Tower), the street names (e.g. Finland Street, Sweden Gate, Baltic Quay, Norway Gate, Helsinki Square) or other place names (e.g. Greenland Dock). Another major influence factor was trade with Russia and Canada (mainly timber), reflected in names such as Canada Water and the Russia Dock Woodland.

In July 1620, the Mayflower sailed from Rotherhithe for Southampton on the south coast of England, to begin loading food and supplies for the voyage to New England. At that time, the English Separatists, who later became known as the “Pilgrim Fathers,” were mostly still living in the city of Leiden, in the Netherlands. There they hired a ship called the Speedwell to take them from Delfthaven in the Netherlands to Southampton to meet up with the Mayflower.

The ship’s captain, Christopher Jones, died shortly after his return in 1621 and he is buried in an unmarked grave at St Mary’s Church. The Mayflower sailed from near a public house called the Shippe in Rotherhithe Street, which was substantially rebuilt in the 18th century and is now named the Mayflower.

Charity school RotherhitheOn Lower Road, about half way between Surrey Quays and Canada Water stations, is a public house called the China Hall; at one time it was the entrance to a riparian playhouse visited by Samuel Pepys and mentioned in his diary. It is not known how long the theatre remained on the site, but it was reinvigorated in 1777 and during 1778 George Frederick Cooke acted there, but in the winter of 1779 it was destroyed in fire. The site of the theatre became a well known tea-gardens, with the “usual arbours and ‘boxes'” during the Victorian period, but by the 1920s most of the gardens had been absorbed into the Surrey Commercial Docks as part of a timber yard.

Like the rest of the London Docks, the Surrey Commercial Docks were targeted by the Luftwaffe. On 7 September 1940, on the first day of the London Blitz, the deal yards of Surrey Docks were set ablaze. The raid ignited over a million tonnes of timber in Quebec Yard, causing the most intense single fire ever seen in Britain.

Rotherhithe_Tunnel_(northern_entrance)_-_Geograph_-_1214798The bombing of the old Rotherhithe Town Hall during the Second World War gives an indication of how heavy the bombing in Rotherhithe was. The first damage to the building occurred when Luftwaffe bombs landed nearby in April 1941, and there was more bomb damage in February and June 1944. Later the same month (June 1944) the Town Hall was very severely damaged by a direct hit by a V1 doodlebug. In November 1944 it was further damaged by near misses, and it was finally destroyed by one of the last V1s to land on London during the Second World War.

King Haakon VII made many of his famous radio broadcasts to occupied Norway from Saint Olav’s Norwegian Church in Rotherhithe, where the Norwegian Royal Family were regular worshippers during their exile in London.

NOTABLES:
**Marc Isambard Brunel (1769–1849) and his son Isambard Kingdom Brunel built the Thames Tunnel connecting Rotherhithe and Wapping.
**Max Bygraves, entertainer, was born in Rotherhithe.
**Michael Caine, actor, was born Maurice Joseph Micklewhite in Rotherhithe.
**Thomas Coram (1668–1751) a philanthropic sea captain, retired to Rotherhithe where he campaigned for establishment of the Foundling Hospital.
**Eliza Fay (1755 or 1756–1816), author of Original Letters from India (1817), was born in Rotherhithe.
**Malcolm Hardee lived on a houseboat in Greenland Dock, Rotherhithe, owned and ran the Wibbley Wobbley pub-boat on the same dock, and was drowned there in 2005.
**Alfred Hitchcock filmed scenes for his first film as director, Number 13 (1922), in Rotherhithe before it was pulled from production.
**Myleene Klass lived in Rotherhithe in the early 2000s.
**Aaron Manby assembled and launched the world’s first seagoing iron-hulled ship at Rotherhithe in 1822.
**Princess Margaret met her future husband, photographer Tony Armstrong-Jones, in a house in Rotherhithe.
**Billy Mehmet, professional footballer, attended Bacon’s College in Rotherhithe in the 1990s.
**King Mutesa II of Buganda died in exile in his flat in Rotherhithe in 1969 following an interview with journalist John Simpson.
**James Walker worked on the design and construction of Greenland Dock, where a memorial bust of him stands.

Cultural References
**In the popular television drama series Upstairs, Downstairs the character James Bellamy stands as a Conservative Party candidate for the constituency of Rotherhithe East.
**The James Bond film Tomorrow Never Dies used Harmsworth Quays Printing as the scene for Carver’s print works.
**Redriff was the fictional birthplace of Jonathan Swift’s character Lemuel Gulliver, of Gulliver’s Travels fame, and where his family waited for him.
**Rotherhithe is alluded to in the British Sea Power song Carrion and the Elvis Costello song New Amsterdam.
**Adam Carter from Spooks supposedly lives in Canada Wharf on Rotherhithe Street, and much of the series is filmed on locations around Rotherhithe and the Docklands.
**The final chapter of Charles Dickens’s Oliver Twist (1839) provides a lively depiction of a Rotherhithe slum-district of the mid-19th century.
**The famous Gujarati poem, ‘Rajashahi Ghodi,” talks about a bicycle, allegorically a royal steed as it passes by the narrow by-lanes of Rotherhithe every morning, describing landmarks and monuments like the Mayflower Pub, the Picture Library and Southwark Park, along its way.
**A song from the musical Cats, “Growltiger’s Last Stand,” mentions the cottagers of Rotherhithe.
**”The man from Rotherhithe” is an unnamed, recurring character in the long poem In Parenthesis by David Jones.
**A period costumier, picture library and minor film producer Sands Films is located at Rotherhithe Street, close to the Mayflower pub.
**Long-running ITV series London’s Burning was based at local fire station Dockhead for the first few series, with most scenes filmed in Bermondsey and Rotherhithe. For example, leading character ‘Vaseline’ was filmed drowning in Greenland Dock, and another leading character, Bert, campaigned to save the local city farm, filmed at Surrey Docks Farm in Rotherhithe.
**The 2004-2005 ITV drama series The Brief often filmed in Rotherhithe, with internal scenes filmed at the Mayflower pub. Lead character Henry Farmer, played by Alan Davies, lived a few doors away.
**2007 film “The Riddle”, starring Vinnie Jones and Derek Jacobi, was largely filmed on location in Rotherhithe. It features the interior and exterior of the genuine Blacksmiths Arms, Rotherhithe, although the rear of the pub in the film was a temporary set built adjacent to the Downtown nightclub, close to the Surrey Docks Farm.
**In “The Adventure of The Dying Detective,” Sherlock Holmes pretends to Dr. Watson that he has contracted a contagious disease in Rotherhithe, while working on a case.
**The first and last episode of Dempsey & Makepeace was filmed at the Mayflower public house and in the area.

Posted in Living in the Regency, real life tales | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Locating Jane Austen: The Author’s Influence Upon the English Tourism Business

Recently, I partook of a short 4-day bus tour of the home of American Presidents in Virginia. Living in neighboring state of North Carolina, the trip was not exhausting, and so on the first day (before we settled in our hotel for the evening) we visited the home of the 5th President, James Monroe. Ash Lawn-Highland is billed as a “place of comfort and hospitality.” On the succeeding days we traveled to George Washington’s Mount Vernon, James Madison’s Montpelier, Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello, and Woodrow Wilson’s Library and Museum. At each there were the typical tour guides, brochures, souvenirs, and period pieces, some reconstructed and some simply spoken of.

Like any serious writer, I carried my trusty laptop and spiral notebooks with me. Those who know me well know I am likely to carry my notebook to the physician’s office and write while I wait, so naturally, the tendency to write during countless hours upon the road was too much to pass by. As I walked through history, especially that of Thomas Jefferson, who is dangling from my family tree, I was thinking about the many tours of Austen’s England.

Although there are places in England which boast actual connections to Jane Austen, much of what we Austenites enjoy are the moments we share of the fiction Austen wrote rather than actual places she lived or visited. For example, if one travels to Bath, he can view the assembly hall and imagine Anne Elliot and Captain Wentworth from Persuasion having enjoyed their moments together there. A visitor can walk along Milson Street, as did Isabella Thorpe in Northanger Abbey. We can enjoy the fiction and forget how Austen’s spoken dislike of Bath.

We can conjure up images of Pemberley, but which image was the one Austen had? Was it Chatsworth or Cottesbrooke Hall or Lyme Park? Perhaps it was none of those, but we Austenites do not care. We walk into Chatsworth’s foyer and imagine Elizabeth Bennet from the 2005 film or into Wilton House for the Pemberley interior scenes from the same film. We can visit Burghley House in Lincolnshire and think ourselves sitting in Lady Catherine’s drawing room at Rosings Park in Kent. There is also the interior scenes from the 1995 adaptation, which were set in Sudbury Hall in Derbyshire. We can relive the moments at Netherfield Park by visiting Edgcote Hall in Banbury, Oxfordshire.

Those of us who love Austen know there are hundreds of places in England, which claim a connection to the writer. At Steventon, for example, only a pump remains of the rectory where the Austen family lived, but that fact does not stop hundreds of Janeites from making a trek to see that exact spot and to take a multiple pictures to commemorate the moment where they come close to knowing a bit more of Austen.

We crave any connection to our dearest Jane, from the plaque which denotes where the Austen’s former residence once stood in Castle Square in Southampton to the likes of Austen’s writing box, displayed at the British Library. With Austen, the fiction and reality easily combine for her fans. In many ways, I think Austen would find it quite amusing so many of us trudge along lanes and parklands for a glimpse of the fictitious landscapes she described in her six novels. It is a most satisfying experience: we are more than sightseers. We are participants in creating “memories,” we will cherish forever.

Sudbury Hall

Sudbury Hall

Lyme Park

Lyme Park

Posted in British history, buildings and structures, film, Great Britain, Jane Austen, Living in the UK | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Queen Elizabeth I and the Sea Beggars, a Guest Post from Author Barbara Kyle

Today, it is with great pleasure that I welcome a colleague, who specializes in the time of Queen Elizabeth I. I know you will find Barbara Kyle’s story of deception and courage very interesting.

The Elizabethan period is considered a golden age. We picture England bursting with confidence and vigor, her queen triumphant and proud. But, in fact, at the beginning of Elizabeth’s reign in 1559 England was a small, weak country, standing alone. Philip II of Spain, the most powerful monarch in Europe, whose empire spanned half the globe, itched to conquer the island nation. By the second year of the young Queen Elizabeth’s reign, Philip set out to destroy her. Within a few years, she was fighting for her life.

The-Queens-Exiles-Final My new novel, The Queen’s Exiles, is set in 1572 when Spain’s armies were feared and triumphant throughout Europe. Nowhere were they more feared than in the Netherlands, which was suffering under Spain’s brutal occupation. To strike at England, Philip’s troops would sail from there, less than a hundred miles off Elizabeth’s shores.

With no standing army and a small and underfunded navy, Elizabeth’s only weapons against her powerful Spanish adversary were her cleverness and courage. Taking a gamble, she extended safe conduct to a motley little fleet of Dutch privateers, who had fled Spain’s occupation. These rebels called themselves the Sea Beggars and carried out raids on Spanish shipping. They play a major role in The Queen’s Exiles when my heroine, Fenella Doorn, joins their fight.

For several years Elizabeth allowed the Sea Beggars to make Dover and the creeks and bays along England’s south coast their home as they continued to harry Spanish vessels. This infuriated Philip. When his fury grew dangerous, Elizabeth ordered the Sea Beggars to quit her realm. It was assumed she expelled them to placate Philip, but it turned out she had struck a powerful blow at Spain: by forcing out these fierce privateers she unleashed their latent power.

For a month, the Sea Beggars wandered the Channel, homeless and hungry. Then, in April 1572, on the verge of starvation, they made a desperate attack on the Spanish-held Dutch port city of Brielle. They astounded everyone, even themselves, by capturing the city. The Sea Beggars’ victory provided the opposition’s first foothold on land and launched a revolution: the Dutch War of Independence against Spain. It took many more years, but the brave Dutch people finally gained their independence.

The rebel Sea Beggars’ fight is the backdrop of The Queen’s Exiles. I hope you enjoy the adventure.

Bio
Mikhail Petgrave Barbara Kyle is the author of the acclaimed Thornleigh Saga novels The Queen’s Exiles, Blood Between Queens, The Queen’s Gamble, The Queen’s Captive, The King’s Daughter and The Queen’s Lady which follow an English middle-class family’s rise through three tumultuous Tudor reigns. She is also the author of the contemporary thrillers Entrapped and The Experiment. Over 450,000 copies of her books have been sold in seven countries.
Barbara has taught writers at the University of Toronto School of Continuing Studies and is known for her dynamic workshops for many writers’ organizations and conferences. Her Fiction Writers Boot Camp and her Master Classes have launched many of her students’ novels to publishing success.
Before becoming an author, Barbara enjoyed a twenty-year acting career in television, film, and stage productions in Canada and the U.S. Visit Barbara Here.

Posted in British history, Elizabethan drama, Great Britain, Living in the UK, political stance, real life tales, Uncategorized, writing | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment