 |
Hereditary monarchy
The hereditary monarchy is the most common form of monarchy. In this form of government, a ruler usually reigns for life and is often restricted by rules, for example by a constitution or agreements with princes and important persons in the nobility and the royal family. In contrast to an elective monarchy, succession to the throne in a hereditary monarchy is determined by inheritance.
Although succession may vary from country to country, it usually regulates very clearly who is next in line to the throne. As long as there is an heir, succession is determined by inheritance law. In cases where the line of succession was unclear, for example if the previous ruler had no children, there was a high probability of a war of succession for the throne.
In modern times, monarchies have mostly been replaced by democracies or dictatorships. In the past, however, hereditary monarchies were the predominant form of government.
The succession to the throne in a monarchy was usually observed without major conflict because it secured the rule of the rest of the nobility. The most powerful members of the nobility had an interest in ensuring that there was no war over the throne. This was because, if the position of the king was clearly defined, the rights and privileges of the lower nobility were not usually questioned, as the successor normally assumed all the rights and duties of his predecessor.
Succession
The most common form of succession was patrilineal succession, in which the inheritance was passed on to the son. A strict form, in which only sons could inherit and daughters were always excluded, resulted from the Salic Law. In its milder form, this succession could be extended so that if there was no son as heir, the inheritance passed to the daughters. Less common was matrilineal succession, in which the daughter or the daughter's spouse received the inheritance. Matrilineal succession existed, for example, in the oldest Chinese empire and among some Celtic tribes.
Another distinction in succession is the order within the children. If it was stipulated that the oldest living child would always succeed to the throne, this is referred to as primogeniture. This was the most common form of succession. If, on the other hand, the youngest child succeeded to the throne, this is called ultimogeniture.
Another form of succession to the throne can also be inheritance by the eldest member of a defined circle of the family. In this case, after the death of the ruler, the eldest brother or sister of the previous ruler usually inherited first. The advantage of this system was that very experienced successors usually took over the government and children as rulers with an accompanying guardian were avoided. On the other hand, the successors were usually already very old and died themselves quite soon, which made the reign quite unstable. Examples of such succession can be found in China with the kings of the Shang dynasty (17th century BC-11th century BC), in Ethiopia with the emperors of the Zagwe dynasty (930-1270), in Bohemia and Moravia (now part of the Czech Republic) (1055-1182) and today in Saudi Arabia in the House of Saud.
Advantages and disadvantages of hereditary monarchy
Hereditary monarchy provided clear rules of succession and, in most cases, prevented disputes over the throne if there was a successor in line to the throne. If succession was strictly limited, for example to sons or daughters, the likelihood of the monarch being killed was low because succession was restricted to a very small group of people. If the children inherited the throne, stable rule could be achieved over a long period of time. In addition, the heirs to the throne were prepared and trained for rule from an early age. These advantages meant that hereditary monarchies remained in place for a very long time.
However, hereditary monarchies also meant that children repeatedly succeeded to the throne and a guardian took over the government. In some cases, inexperienced young people, tyrants and unsuitable individuals took over the reign. The rulers were also able to benefit themselves and abuse their office because they were not accountable due to their right to rule.
