Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sherman Logan
In the economy of the times, not all could maintain their parent's status. So the younger sons all took a step down.

By law. Primogeniture law. Younger sons did not inherit, only the firstborn. This also drove many younger sons of minor nobility and merchants to the colonies. Many indentured themselves willingly. They had a word for doing this but can't recall it.

41 posted on 05/03/2014 3:17:34 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: RegulatorCountry

Unless I’m mistaken, primogeniture applied to landed estates, not other forms of property.

Of course, in the earlier days we’re talking about, that would have been a distinction without much difference, since there wasn’t much in the way of other types of property.

Interestingly, when Anglicans dominated Ireland, they enforced equal division between his sons of the inheritance of a Catholic. Unless one of them converted, in which case he got it all.


45 posted on 05/03/2014 3:36:26 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

To: RegulatorCountry

Younger sons of nobles and gentry often had a commission purchased for them in the Army or Navy, or went into the Church.

In Catholic countries that generally meant their genes disappeared. In Protestant countries the clergy was often quite prolific.

Gentry and merchants often bought younger sons an apprenticeship in some trade, in which they could become journeymen and eventually masters. An apprenticeship, at least in one of the more desirable guilds, was expensive, and was viewed as the rough equivalent today of sending a child to college.


46 posted on 05/03/2014 3:42:17 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson