Inheritance

For other uses, see Inheritance (disambiguation) and Heir (disambiguation).

William Hogarth's plate 1 from A Rake's Progress, "The Young Heir Takes Possession Of The Miser's Effects" as his inheritance.

Inheritance is the practice of passing on property, titles, debts, rights and obligations upon the death of an individual. It has long played an important role in human societies. The rules of inheritance differ between societies and have changed over time.

The term is also used to refer to the passing of characteristics, for example, genetically or in computing.

Terminology

In law, an heir is a person who is entitled to receive a share of the decedent's (the person who died) property, subject to the rules of inheritance in the jurisdiction where the decedent died or owned property at the time of death. In politics, members of ruling noble houses may be heirs of a living person, called heirs apparent. In law, however, a person does not become an heir before the death of the decedent, since the exact identity of the persons entitled to inherit is determined only then. There is a further concept of joint inheritance, pending renunciation by all but one, which is called coparceny.

In modern law, the terms inheritance and heir refer exclusively to the succession of property from a deceased descendent intestate. Future recipients of property through a will are termed beneficiaries, devisees, or legatees.

History

Detailed anthropological and sociological studies have been made about customs of patrilineal inheritance, where only male children can inherit. Some cultures also employ matrilineal succession, where property can only pass along the female line, most commonly going to the sister's sons of the decedent; but also, in some societies, from the mother to her daughters. Some ancient societies and most modern states employ egalitarian inheritance, without discrimination based on gender and/or birth order.

Historically, there were also mixed systems:

• According to Islamic inheritance jurisprudence, sons inherit twice as much as daughters. The complete laws governing inheritance in Islam are complicated and take into account many kinship relations, but in principle males inherit twice as much as females with some exceptions. However, the Indonesian Minangkabau people (from western Sumatra), despite being Muslim, employ only complete matrilineal succession with property and land passing down from mother to daughter.
• Among ancient Israelites, the inheritance is patrilineal. It comes from the father, who bequeaths only to his male descendants (daughters don't inherit). The eldest son received twice as much as the other sons. The father gives his name to his children; for example: the sons of Israel are called Israelites, because the land belonged to the father, and every one of his twelve sons gave his name to his descendants. Example: the sons of Judah are called Yehudi (which is translated into Latin as Judaeus and into English as Jew.)
• In Galicia (Spain) it was typical that all children (both men and women) had a part of the inheritance, but one child (the one who inherited the house and a larger share of other property) inherited one-third of all the inheritance. This child was called the mellorado (literally, "improved upon"). In some villages the mellorado even received two-thirds of all the inheritance. This two-thirds would be all the family's lands, while other children received their part in money. In Galicia's coastal villages, the youngest daughter was often the privileged inheritor, while in Galicia's inner villages, the privileged inheritor was often the eldest son. Male primogeniture was also common among peasants in Asturias, Cantabria, Catalonia, Huesca and other minor zones of Aragon, and parts of the Balearic Islands and Valencia. Peasants in the rest of the country divided the inheritance between all children (the aristocracy employed patrilineal primogeniture -mayorazgo-).
• In Sweden, from the thirteenth century until the nineteenth century, sons inherited twice as much as daughters. This rule was introduced by the Regent Birger Jarl. Even after the introduction of these laws, however, the eldest son still usually inherited the land from his parents in exchange for taking care of them in their old age (predominance of patrilineal primogeniture). His siblings received only monetary compensation for giving up their claims on the family land.
• Among Polish peasants, male primogeniture became the most common practice after the 15th century, but there was high regional variation This diversity continued in later times, fostered by the influence of neighbouring countries with different family systems. The Polish pattern of male primogeniture held most strongly in the core, central parts of the country, as well as in Little Poland, but in peripheral areas different family forms prevailed. In the west Polish areas, namely Silesia and Greater Poland, male primogeniture didn't predominate among Polish peasants until their liberation from serfdom between 1808 and 1823. Previously, ultimogeniture had prevailed among them in these areas.
• In Lowland Laos, inheritance is often bilateral or matrilineal, but in Highland Laos, inheritance is patrilineal and the eldest son is often the main heir; his brothers receive only minor shares
• In Pre-colonial Myanmar, inheritance customs among the Bamar or Burmese, who inhabit the Irrawaddy valley, generally followed patrilineal primogeniture: the eldest son, having the special position known as oratha, often received the largest share of the property. However, the Kachin people, who inhabit the northern parts of the country, are famous in the Anthropological field for their complicated but highly structured social system that, if strictly followed, would result in patrilineal ultimogeniture in most cases.
• Pre-revolutionary France is an excellent example of a culture where inheritance customs can be very diverse. Although patrilineal primogeniture prevailed among the nobility, as in most other European countries, with respect to plebeian custom there were two general patterns: in the southern half of the country, where testamentary freedom was allowed, a system of "stem" families and patrilineal primogeniture emerged, while in the northern half, where inheritance processes were fixed by law, a system of "nuclear" families and relatively egalitarian inheritance emerged. However, within these two regional patterns there was high local variation, and historians and sociologists often disagree about the details of the different family forms. Focusing only on the Pyrenees, for example, in its western parts primogeniture regardless of sex prevailed in the French Basque Country, while in Bearn, male primogeniture predominated. In the Central Pyrenees, primogeniture regardless of sex predominated in Lavedan and Bareges, while in the Luchonnais, as well as the Baronnies and Bigorre, male primogeniture was the dominant practice. In Aude, male primogeniture also predominated. In other southern French regions (Dauphiné, Midi, Languedoc Aquitaine, Savoy and Provence) there was a more homogeneous pattern of male primogeniture, but in Western Cantal, a daughter was often preferred as inheritor and in some areas, most strongly in the Limousin, joint families coexisted (as a minority form) with stem families and male primogeniture. In the coastal (but not in the mountainous) areas of Provence, too, property was usually inherited by all sons and joint and nuclear families were numerous. In Brittany, a region in the northwest, local variation in peasant inheritance customs was also high: stem families with male primogeniture prevailed in Leon and inner Vannetais, while in Cornouaille no single inheritance custom prevailed, though stem families predominated. In the rest of the region nuclear families were prevalent, but inheritance was often inegalitarian and favored the eldest son, though in some parts (Tregor and some other areas) the youngest son was favored. Nuclear families with male primogeniture, as in the case of England, were also common in the neighbouring Loire provinces, as well as parts of the Northern coast (Caux, Ponthieu, Vimeu and the Boulonnais), suggesting a common historical origin for this family form (Normans and the Angevin dynasty, that also ruled England during a large period, had their origins in this part of France) Variation was extreme in Poitou-Charentes, where all family types (stem, nuclear and joint) could be found. The rest of the north, save for a few zones (mainly Alsace and Nord) was dominated by nuclear families and relatively egalitarian inheritance practices.
• In Vietnam, male primogeniture has been predominant since the time of the Lê dynasty as a result of Sinicization and Confucianization. However, in some places other customs, like male ultimogeniture or even female ultimogeniture, also exist.
• In Norway, male primogeniture traditionally predominated, probably even since the Viking Age. (see also Andreas Holmsen's theory). However, in the northernmost part of the country (northern Troms and Finnmark), where the Lapp (also called Sami) people lived, male primogeniture prevailed among Norwegian families, while male ultimogeniture prevailed among Sami families
• In Nigeria, an extensive survey across 18 diverse states conducted by the Women’s Rights Project of the Civil Liberties Organization between 1995-1997 revealed that 37 percent of the people practiced patrilineal primogeniture (inheritance by the eldest son), while 51 percent divided the inheritance between all sons or children.
• Inheritance customs can also differ greatly by social class. In Pre-industrial England, the nobility and the gentry were characterized by their strict adherence to male primogeniture; among peasants, however, inheritance practices were very "flexible", though they generally favored the eldest son, too. In Wales, after the union with England, some argue that male primogeniture prevailed among freeholders and the gentry, who were most of the population in the Welsh upland areas, where stem families predominated, while male ultimogeniture was predominant among copyholders, who were most of the population in the lowland anglicized areas, where absolute nuclear families predominated. In Cornwall, conventionary and free holdings descended to the eldest son, so male primogeniture was the most common practice among both aristocrats and peasants; however, a few, very poor holdings called "nativi de stipite" descended to the youngest son (male ultimogeniture). Not even among the aristocracy inheritance practices have been uniform across the world, though; among austronesian peoples, for example, Malay and Malagasy aristocrats practiced male primogeniture, while male ultimogeniture was the custom among Bugi and Massakarese nobles.
• Inheritance customs can also change greatly over time. Among Bohemian peasants, for example, male ultimogeniture prevailed during the 18th century, but during the 19th century, male primogeniture was predominant In fact, choosing a son as single-heir didn't become predominant among peasants in this region until the 18th century
• In Germany, male primogeniture was the general practice- Although male ultimogeniture was more common in regional intestacy laws prior to the 19th century, male primogeniture was practiced before the 19th century in many regions without a legal basis for it, such as the Sauerland and Kreis Soest, in southern and central Westphalia, respectively. In northern Westphalia, male primogeniture prevailed in Münster, while male ultimogeniture prevailed in Tecklenburg. In eastern Westphalia, male ultimogeniture prevailed, with some exceptions -Amt Boke, Berge, Ohr-, while male primogeniture was predominant in western Westphalia. In Lippe, male primogeniture was also the general practice. Overall, male primogeniture was historically most common in Westphalia, as current laws of farm inheritance recognize; only in the eastern and north-eastern parts of the region, excluding Lippe and some other areas, did male ultimogeniture historically prevail. Impartible inheritance was a deeply rooted tradition among german peasants. Male primogeniture and ultimogeniture were also common in many other states, like Hannover, Silesia, Brandenburg, and Saxony. In all these states both male primogeniture and ultimogeniture were widely practiced (in Hannover, for example, male ultimogeniture was practiced in Osten, Diepholz, East Frisia and most of Osnabrück, as well as Lingen, while male primogeniture predominated in Lüneburg, Hoya and Bentheim, as well as small zones of Osnabrück, most of Bremen-Verden and other areas, being the most common practice. In Saxony, male primogeniture prevailed in Schonfels and Vogtland, while male ultimogeniture prevailed in Erzgebirge and Meissen. In Silesia and Brandenburg, customs of ultimogeniture are generally assumed to have been historically important, but if that was really the case, by the late 19th century they must have given way completely to male primogeniture, for surveys revealed that primogeniture was most common precisely in Northeastern Germany, and intestacy laws throughout all these states only recognized this right). In Bavaria (including not only Upper Bavaria and Lower Bavaria, but also Franconia, Upper Swabia and Upper Palatinate), Schleswig-Holstein, Niederrhein, Oldenburg, Mecklenburg, East Prussia, and Hesse, male primogeniture was clearly prevalent and customs of ultimogeniture were uncommon or non-existent (albeit in the case of Oldenburg, customs of ultimogeniture in the Wesermarch and the Delmenhorster Geest, though unique in the region, have been particularly strong and resilient in the overall German context, persisting even to our days). Only in Rhineland-Palatinate and parts of Baden and Württemberg was inheritance egalitarian. In those parts of Baden where inheritance was impartible (the Black Forest region), male ultimogeniture prevailed, while in those parts of Württemberg where inheritance was impartible (mainly the Swabian uplands), male primogeniture was the general practice. In Austria, male primogeniture must have been the general practice since before 1787, for during that year the Emperor issued a decree formally establishing it as the law of succession to peasant estates. Male primogeniture (called Altestenerbrecht) traditionally prevailed in Salzburg, Styria, Carinthia, Voralberg, Tyrol and western Upper Austria, while male ultimogeniture has traditionally prevailed in central and eastern Upper Austria and most of Lower Austria. In Burgenland and parts of Lower Austria, equal male inheritance has traditionally prevailed. Customs of male primogeniture and ultimogeniture are also common in most of Switzerland; surveys reveal that there is no overall preference for one practice over the other. Even many Germans who migrated to the United States, Russia, Transylvania, Bessarabia, Slovakia, Hungary, the territories that would later become Yugoslavia, the Banat (Germans from Hungary, the Banat and what would later become Yugoslavia were collectively known as Danube swabians) and Brazil practiced impartible inheritance.
• Scholars may often disagree about traditional inheritance patterns. In the case of Ireland, for example, some argue that the heir could be any son, as in the famous study of County Clare done by Arensberg and Kimball (1940) Others, however, argue that the election of an heir wasn't random and that the eldest son was the heir in most cases Some have adopted an intermediate view, arguing that primogeniture was the dominant practice, but it wasn't rigidly in force Although neither gender, nor birth order were decisive factors in the election of an inheritor among Spanish Basques, in some areas male primogeniture was usually followed
• In Belgium, inheritance among peasants was patrilineal: daughters could inherit only in the absence of sons. However, in some regions all sons inherited, while in others (Principality of Liege, Duchy of Limburg, county of Loon), male primogeniture prevailed, and in others (Brabant, Fauquemont) male ultimogeniture prevailed. Male primogeniture also prevailed in Luxembourg, and in the department of Nord (France), customs of ultimogeniture and primogeniture were also common. In the Netherlands, inheritance was as a rule inegalitarian, but while Dutch elites strictly followed patrilineal primogeniture, official surveys showed that among peasants, during the industrial period, the inheritor was either the eldest son or the last marrying child, often the youngest During the pre-industrial era, however, male primogeniture was most probably a stronger rule among peasants.

Rosenblatt (1974), studying 39 non-Western societies around the world, finds consistent correlations between the gender and birth order of a child and his or her outcome in life, and these include differences in the degree of property control: the first son, in comparison to other sons, has more control of property.

The Ethnographic Atlas (1998), gives the following figures regarding land distribution: primogeniture predominates in 247 societies, while ultimogeniture prevails in 16. In 19 societies land is exclusively or predominantly given to the one adjudged best qualified, while equality predominates in 301 societies.

Regarding land inheritance rules, in 340 societies sons inherit, in 90 other patrilineal heirs (such as brothers), in 31 sister's sons, in 60 other matrilineal heirs (such as daughters or brothers), and in 98 all children. In 43 of these latter societies, however, daughters receive less.

It is also noteworthy that in 472 societies distribution of inherited land follows no clear rules or information is missing, while in 436 societies inheritance rules for real property do not exist or data is missing; there are many societies where there is little or no land to inherit (such as in hunter gatherer societies, pastoral societies or forager societies).

Patrilineal primogeniture, also called male primogeniture (eldest son inherits), was customary among Japanese, Korean, Hebrew, Aztec, Tibetan, Innu, Lakher (or Mara), Kukis, Khumi, Mog, Paite, Pawi, Gangte, Tripuri, Simte, Wancho, Deccanese, Mikir or Karbi, Munda, Rajput, Kharwars, Nambudiri Brahmin, Khond, Scottish, Catalan, Cornish, Kashubian, Moravian, Estonian, Balt, Croatian, Danish, Ossetian, Xibe, Timorese, Rukai, Lampung, Tausug, Tongan, Sumban, Batak, Nias, Buru, Florinese, Bali Highlands, West Papuan, Torajan, Mauritian, Bilen (also called Bogos), Fon, Igbo (also called Ibo), Ibibio, Luhya, Edo, Shilluk, Kikuyu, Masa (also called Massa or Masana), Black South African (Xhosa, Venda, Zulu, Basotho, Swazi, etc.), Ndebele, Upper or Eastern Congo, Ugandan (Teso -formerly called Bateso-, Acholi, Langi, Bagisu, Alur, etc.), Dogon, Nandi, Oromo, Konso, and Kaffa peasants, for example, while patrilineal ultimogeniture, also called male ultimogeniture (youngest son inherits), was customary among Fur, Sami (also called Lapp), Achang, Ayi, Atayal, Sherpa, Kachin, Biate, Khyeng, Hmar, Mro, Kom, and Lushei or Lushai (sometimes mistakenly taken for the whole Mizo people, especially in the past) peasants. Spanish Basques gave their land to the one considered best qualified, though they had a preference for sons, while Javanese, Turk (from Turkey, not Turkic peoples from Central Asia, whom obviously didn't cultivate any land), Kurd, Armenian, Lolo or Yi, Santal, Abkhaz, Lepcha, Lisu, Kota, Nu, Tanala, Georgian, Qiang, Bhutia, Gaddi, Nepalese, Vedda, Bai, Koya, Hakka, Meithei, Rotinese, Hani, Havasupai, Tikopian, Miao, Papago, Riffian, Jat, Trukese, Mapuche, Aymara, Quiche, Popoluca, Kimam, Kwoma, Naxi, Omaha, Pumi, Romanian, Hungarian, Russian, Bulgarian, Slovak, Badaga, Han Chinese, Gheg Albanian, Southern Albanian, Gondi, Hausa, Nuba, Banen, Nubian, Mwaghavul and Lowland Bali peasants, for example, gave more or less equal shares of land to sons, but excluded daughters (and, needless to say, could leave the house or parental dwelling to only one child in most cases). Roman, Malay, Bugi, Massakarese, Andalusian, Castilian, Iban, Greek, Shan, Khmer, Madurese and Siamese (or Thai) peasants gave relatively equal shares to both sons and daughters, while Gilbertese gave less land to daughters, and the same system prevails in contemporary Egypt (and most Arab groups -see Sharia-. Most non-Arab muslims, with some exceptions -Caucasians, Iranians-, historically followed their own inheritance customs, not those of the Sharia. In Ancient Egypt, the eldest son inherited twice more than the other sons). There have been other, rarer customs of inheritance, like bilateral primogeniture (eldest son inherits from the father, eldest daughter inherits from the mother), such as among the Classic Mayas, who transmitted the family's household furnishings from mother to eldest daughter, and the family's land, houses and agricultural tools from father to eldest son, and in the Greek island of Karpathos, where the family's house was transmitted from mother to eldest daughter, while the family's land was transmitted from father to eldest son Among the Igorot, the father's land is inherited by his eldest son and the mother's land is inherited by her eldest daughter. Land inheritance customs, thus, greatly vary across cultures. However, inheritance customs are sometimes considered a culturally distinctive aspect of a society; for example, the customs of primogeniture predominant among many North-eastern Indian tribes have been considered as possible proof of the possible remote Jewish or Semitic origin of some of them Although it is many times said that Mizos employ ultimogeniture, where the youngest son inherits all, this is because the customs of Lushais or Lusheis are confused with those of all Mizos; indeed, Mizo and Lushai have been sometimes used as interchangeable terms. Among most non-Lushai Mizos, primogeniture predominates, just as among Kukis In general there is great confusion about the ethnic identity of the many North-eastern Indian tribes. Some regard the generic term Zomi as most appropriate.

The same disparity is seen regarding inheritance of movable property. Most nomadic peoples from Asia, like for example the Khalka Mongols, give a more or less equal share of the herd to each son as he marries, typically letting the youngest remain behind caring for the parents and inheriting his father's tent after their death in addition to his own share of the herd (there is no agriculture in steppe environments such as that of most of Central Asia); but others, such as the Yukaghir and the Yakut, leave most of the herd to one son (in the above examples the youngest and the eldest, respectively). And some pastoral peoples from other geographical areas also practice unequal wealth transfers, although customs of equal male inheritance are more common among them than among agriculturalists. Tswana people, for example, the dominant ethnic group of Botswana, whose main source of wealth was cattle, practiced patrilineal primogeniture, and so did the neighbouring Khoi people (of whom only the Nama remain), the Pedi people, among whom cattle was formerly more important than land, and the Tsonga people. By contrast, Chukchi people practiced male ultimogeniture. And it has been usually stated that the rest of Siberian peoples, such as Voguls, Samoyeds or Ostiaks, practiced patrilineal primogeniture, though there isn't much reliable information about the traditional customs of Siberian peoples. It is said that Gilyaks divided their cattle equally between all sons. Patrilineal primogeniture was also traditionally prevalent among pastoral peoples from Australia, like the Aranda, as well as among Himalayan pastoralists like the Changpa.

Inheritance Rules for Movable Property are as follows: in 381 there isn't enough information, in 132 there are no individual property rights or rules, in 45 sister's sons inherit, in 73 other matrilineal heirs, in 67 all children, but daughters receive less, in 89 all children inherit equally, in 393 only sons inherit, and in 87 other patrilineal heirs.

Inheritance Distribution for Movable Property are as follows: in 382 there isn't enough information or there are no rules, in 435 equality prevails and in 18 movable property is exclusively or predominantly adjudged to the one best qualified, while in 14 societies ultimogeniture predominates and in 244 primogeniture predominates.

Among many peoples who divide their land and movable property equally among all sons or children, the youngest son, daughter or child inherits the house or parental dwelling after caring for his/her parents until their death, since each of the sons or children will receive his/her share of land and movable property as he/she marries. The gavelkind practice of Kent is the most known example of this, but such custom is characteristic of many other peoples who also practice equal or relatively equal inheritance of land and movable property, such as for example many ethnic minorities in Southwest China. Ultimogeniture with regards to house inheritance and equal inheritance of land and movable property by all sons is also characteristic of many indigenous Andean and Mesoamerican rural communities. The fact that the youngest only receives the house and not any productive means, such as land or livestock, as a reward for caring for the parents sometimes diminishes his or her marriage opportunities and reproductive chances, but some authors argue that at least it increases the bond between him/her and his/her parents. There are also cases, however, as among some Naga tribes in India, the Luo of Kenya and many Latin American communities, where the youngest is even disadvantaged with regards to land and/or livestock inheritance in spite of his/her responsibility for caring for the parents, though in the case of the Luo of Kenya it is normal, as the Luo of Kenya attach great importante to seniority among sons. Thus among them the eldest son receives the largest share and each succeeding son receives a smaller share than any of his seniors. In Kenya, the eldest son is often the privileged heir. Ultimogeniture with regards to house inheritance and equal inheritance of land and other property is also characteristic of Thailand, but in this case the child who inherits the house (generally the youngest daughter) sees his or her share of other property proportionally reduced

Inheritance customs do not follow clear ethnic, linguistic or geographical patterns. Equality between all sons and a subordinate position of women (with the exclusion of daughters from inheriting) are prominent aspects of Hungarian, Romanian, and most Slavic or Latin American cultures, for example, while many studies show the privileged position that the eldest son traditionally enjoyed in Slovene Finnish or Tibetan culture, for example. The Minangkabau, the Garo and the Khasi, on the other hand, traditionally privileged the youngest daughter. Some peoples, like the Dinka, the Arakanese, the Chins of Myanmar, the Maasai or the Karen, frequently show a compromise between primogeniture and ultimogeniture in their inheritance patterns (although among the Maasai and many Chins of Myanmar, the advantage that the eldest and the youngest son have over other sons is really small, so it is not correct to speak of a true pattern of mixed primogeniture and ultimogeniture. The advantage of the eldest and the youngest son is somewhat more ample among the Dinka and the Arakanese), and this is also to some degree the pattern among the Sherpa and the Kachin. A combination of patrilineal primogeniture and ultimogeniture is also reported for many Guinean villages today, though it seems that in past times the eldest son was the sole heir A mixture of primogeniture and ultimogeniture is also practiced by the Chagga people., as well as in many villages in northern Cameroon (among the Bamileke of western Cameroon, by contrast, a restrictive form of male primogeniture traditionally prevailed, and so among the Masa people).

Sometimes inheritance customs do not entirely reflect social traditions. Romans valued sons more than daughters and Thais and Shan showed the reverse pattern, though all practiced equal land inheritance between all children. In fact, Shan people, who live mostly in Northern Thailand and northeastern Myanmar, are markedly matrilocal. In Han Chinese tradition, the eldest son was of special importance. He received the family headship in cases where the family held together as a single unit, and the largest share in cases of family division, since he also inherited the cult to family ancestors, though Chinese peasants have practiced partible inheritance since the time of the Han Dynasty. In some cases, the eldest son of the eldest son, rather than the eldest son, was favored. Ritual primogeniture was emphasized in the Lineage organizations of North China During the time of the Zhou dynasty, patrilineal primogeniture predominated Confucius says that the elder brother must be in a higher position than the younger brother, and texts such as the the LÎ KÎ (The Book of Rites) express this idea. It has been usually stated that among Mongols, on the other hand, the youngest son had an special position because he cared for his parents in their old age and on their death inherited the parental tent, which was connected with the religious cult in Mongol traditions, though all sons received more or less equal shares of livestock as they married. In contrast to this popularly held notion, however, more rigorous and substantiated anthropological studies about kinship and family in Central Asian peoples strongly indicate that elder sons and their lines of descent had higher status than younger sons and their lines of descent in these societies. In Central Asia, all members of a lineage were terminologically distinguished by generation and age, with senior superior to junior. The lineage structure of Central Asia had three different modes. It was organized on the basis of genealogical distance, or the proximity of individuals to one another on a graph of kinship; generational distance, or the rank of generation in relation to a common ancestor, and birth order, the rank of brothers in relation to each another. The paternal descent lines were colaterally ranked according to the birth of their founders, and were thus considered senior and junior to each other. Of the various collateral patrilines, the senior in order of descent from the founding ancestor, the line of eldest sons, was the most noble. In the steppe, no one had his exact equal; everyone found his place in a system of collaterally ranked lines of descent from a common ancestor. It was according to this idiom of superiority and inferiority of lineages derived from birth order that legal claims to superior rank were couched. Furthermore, at least among Mongols, the elder son inherited more than the younger son, and this is mandated by law codes such as the Yassa, created by Gengis Khan. Probably the fact that the youngest son inherited the parental tent among Mongols has lead to the widespread but mistaken conception that they practiced ultimogeniture.

Arabic kinship, in contrast to its Central Asian counterpart, has been considered by some as reflective of the egalitarian nature of brothers' relationships in Arab, Turk (from Turkey, not Turkic peoples), Caucasian and Iranian culture. It is sometimes argued that the expansion of Islam brought an end to the sharp distinction between the firstborn and other sons so characteristic of ancient Semitic peoples and erased the cultural notions of precedence of the first-born son over other sons in the family that previously existed among them (though many peoples who have partially or completely embraced Islam, have also established inequality between sons, like the Oromo, who even had patrilineal primogeniture in inheritance, in spite of the fact that some of them were Muslim. Other Muslim peoples, like the Minangkabau, the Turks, the Javanese or the Fur, also have inheritance practices that contradict their Islamic beliefs. Of course, most non-Arab muslims historically followed their own inheritance customs, not those of the Sharia). In India, inheritance customs were (and still are) very diverse. Patrilineal primogeniture predominated in ancient times, but since the Middle Ages, patrilineal equal inheritance has prevailed in perhaps a majority of groups, although the eldest son often received an extra share Under this system, the estate would be shared between all sons, but these would often remain together with their respective families under the headship of the karta or family head, who was usually the eldest son of the previous family head. In some cultures, such as that of Khmers and non-aristocratic Malays, Bugis and Massakarese, equality between all children, both male and female, is stressed.

In the above cited Han Chinese example, first sons married earlier, had lower rates of definitive celibacy and had more children than their younger brothers. Historical differences in marriage and/or reproductive success according to sex and parity due to unequal social practices have also been demonstrated in Sweden, Quebec, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Alsace, Ireland, Wallonia, the Arsi Oromo, the Turkana, the Datoga, Germany, Austria, England, Ancient Rome, Italian peasants, Italian elites, Tibet, India, Catalonia, Japan, the Northern United States (more exactly the regions that today constitute the Midwest and the Northeast as defined by the United States Census Bureau), the Gabra, the Rendille, Kipsigis, the Orkney Islands, Scotland, and medieval and early-modern Portuguese elites. In all these studies, with the partial exception of some from Germany, having elder brothers significantly reduced the access to marriage and reproduction of a male. The anthropologist Ruth Mace writes in her contribution to the Open Comment of an study about Polyandry in Tibet that she found that the practice of widow inheritance by younger brothers in many parts of Africa and the Asian steppe, as well as some small zones of South Asia, whereby younger brothers are forced to marry older women "somewhat against their will", also reduces the reproductive success of these men, thereby diminishing population growth. On the other hand, Eastern European cultures, especially Russia, have been considered as prime examples of societies characterized by early, universal and equal access to marriage and reproduction, due to their systems of equal inheritance of land and movable property by all sons (although research on pre-industrial Russian Karelia suggests that younger brothers frequently remained unmarried)

However, a strong relationship between fertility and inheritance exists in "Malthusian" contexts of resource scarcity; in contexts where resources are plentiful, the relationship between inheritance and social outcomes can be different. In the Northern United States (more exactly the Midwest and the Northeast), an analysis of the outcomes of sons according to their fraternal birth order (the analysis didn't extend to daughters) revealed that being the first son had a positive correlation with wealth and fertility during 1775-1875, as in other Western cultures, but unlike in some European societies where resources were scarce, this had a complex relationship with migration, inheritance and other phenomena, since in the United States resources were plentiful. In the Northern United States during 1775-1875, in large families, the first-born son travelled farthest, and he also had the most children. This is what one would expect from his early migration to a new area, and indeed, he married at a younger age; it was cheaper to set up a family in farming closer to the frontier. These differences by birth order for fertility and distances travelled also hold for wealth: the First, who went farthest during his lifetime, was wealthiest, Middle next, with Last the poorest. Instead of being able to benefit from staying behind and perhaps inheriting the family farm, the Last seems to have been disadvantaged by not being able to move to cheaper land as early in life as his brothers had done before him. In small families, on the other hand, the overall pattern is decidedly more 'Malthusian'. In these families the distribution of wealth was not related to migration. The First had a strong advantage over the other siblings. Although the Last was nearly as likely to have left his birthplace, he had two-thirds the wealth of the First. The Middles, who were most apt to have left their birthplaces, were as poor as the Onlies, who travelled least of all. So even though these families were smaller, there seems to have been less to go around. Scarce resources went to the Firsts, who became the wealthiest as a result. The much greater wealth of the Firsts in small families is consistent with the ideas of Sundstrom and David: Firsts stayed closer to home and became wealthier than the siblings who left. But parents in older areas were not abandoned even if their children did leave farming. Many stayed in the local area even though they worked as artisans or in commerce. These materials show that there was a disadvantage to staying home and caring for aged parents, but, contrary to their hypothesis, this happened in the large farm families close to the frontier, rather than in the older areas, where opportunities outside farming were located (and fertility of these families on those farms closer to the frontier was not reduced as Sundstrom and David predicted). Even so, the Last stayed near home despite the costs to him and without any 'bribe' to do so. The family migration pattern described in the large families seems to be designed to provide old age care since the family did not scatter until the father died. No bribe was required but the last-born truly suffered.

Kathleen A. Gillogly discusses how inheritance practices, as well as the importance of inheritance itself, have varied over time among the Lisu, mostly in response to changes in poppy cultivation. She explains that seniority of lineage was of great importance to the Lisu and how this has affected inheritance practices over time according to changes in resource availability and poppy cultivation.

Interestingly, in some European societies males outreproduced females among the higher class, while females outreproduced males among the lower classes. According to the Trivers-Willard hypothesis, high status parents should favor sons while low-status parents should favor daughters. The Mukogodo and the Ifaluk have provided confirmatory evidence for this theory, but research on the United States has failed to confirm this hypothesis In the United States, daughters currently inherit on average slightly more than sons. In past times, however, the eldest son was frequently favoured in matters of land inheritance in the United States. During the Colonial Period, the eldest son inherited twice more than the other sons in the Northern Colonies (these inheritance laws were modelled on Mosaic Law), and in the Southern colonies there was even a rule of male primogeniture in cases of intestacy. A recent study in Northern Ghana, a region where male primogeniture predominates, also found that in rich households sons are favoured over daughters.

An study about the Ju/’hoansi (!Kung), a tribal group who were traditionally foragers, has shown that, in this society, elder brothers increased the fertility of a male. The authors of this study contrasted this finding with those of pastoral and agricultural societies of East Africa (some of which are cited above in this article), where elder brothers strongly reduce the fertility of a male, to show that in extremely simple and egalitarian societies having elder brothers may actually be beneficial. However, all other studies about forager societies have shown no correlations at all between birth order and fertility.

Obviously, there is little to inherit in hunter-gatherer societies. Although even unequal inheritance customs have been described in these societies (e.g. "male primogeniture" among Greenlanders or Modoc or "male ultimogeniture" among some Eskimos from the Bering Strait), such "inheritance" (a tent, a boat, hunting tools) is of little value. Some forager societies, however, in particular Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast (e.g. the Nootka), an also to some degree some Amazonian Indians, as well as some South Cone Indians (e.g. the Mapuches) developed slightly more complex and stratified social systems. In these societies elder sons and their lines of descent were ranked above younger sons and their lines of descent. Jomon-era Japan is also considered a more stratified and complex foraging society than most others societies of its kind.

Nowadays in the western world, parents commonly show favoritism towards daughters and later-born children, but this isn't reflected in inheritance practices, which have lost much of their past importance and are now generally egalitarian, and familial practices in general do not reflect significant sex or birth order biases. Familial or social feelings against firstborn sons have been explained as a consequence of the idea that the eldest son, being the foremost representative of the following generation, is also the one who symbolically "kills" the older generation (see magical thinking). Indeed, customs of ultimogeniture have been explained as a consequence of the farmers' desire to postpone a few years their age of retirement due to feelings of being "early dethroned" if they chose their eldest sons as successors. This line of superstitious thinking has been linked to the preeminence of lastborn siblings in popular myth and folklore around the world. Thus in some cultures that practice male primogeniture there are ambiguous, contradictory feelings towards lastborns. (see for example Walter H. Sangree's investigations about the Tiriki tribe in Kenya). Yet in all societies that practice infanticide, it is the youngest of the infants of the same sex who is invariably killed. (the true objective of infanticide seems to be always population control). Research has also shown that in Anglo-speaking countries, but not in Japan, there is a tendency for the older sibling to be the victim and the younger sibling to be the killer in cases in which victim and killer are of the same sex. There are also many more Siblicide cases in Anglo-speaking countries than in Japan.

Peculiar rites of celebration and avoidance of the firstborn are seen among the Fulbe (also called Fulani). Nancy Scheper-Hughes notes the favoritism towards the first-born son traditionally prevalent in Irish culture and attributes it to the Irish superstition that the first of every thing, action or being is the best, while the last is the worst. Ancient Semites also had the idea that the male first-born of every offspring, human or animal, was sacred and belonged to God (see pidyon haben). According to Jewish tradition, prior to the sin of the Golden Calf, the eldest son in each family was a kohen. God chose the Levites in their place after the sin of the Golden Calf, so a first-born son must be redeemed from his birth-state that would obligue him to be a kohen. Traditional patterns of favoritism can even influence people's political or personal attitudes according to their birth order. In Japan, for example, where the eldest son was traditionally in a better position that his siblings, research has demonstrated that first sons have a lower preference for income redistribution and other traits typical of better-off people, a finding that the researchers attributed to the Japanese tradition of favoring the eldest son.

According to Das Gupta's hypothesis, the patrilineal joint-family systems of India and China tend to control the size and composition of the sibling set, so that the survival and well-being of higher parity (later-born) same-sex children are sharply reduced, especially in the case of girls. However, there would be no sharp differences in marriage and reproduction due to birth order, since inheritance is more or less equal for all sons. On the other hand, in the stem-family systems of Northwest Europe, there are no great efforts to control the size and composition of the sibling set, so that the survival and well-being of children aren't influenced to a great degree by sex and parity; however, access to marriage and reproduction wouldn't be equal for all sons, since only one of them would inherit most or all of the land. Indeed, there is overwhelming evidence for both India and China (including her own research) of the fact that the survival and well-being of children are positively influenced by the number of older siblings of the opposite sex and negatively influenced by the number of older siblings of the same sex (see for India, for China). However, it is a well-known fact that definitive celibacy was historically relatively uncommon in India and China, but relatively common in many European societies where inheritance was impartible.

Mary K. Shenk and others (2010) expose how intergenerational wealth transmission among agriculturalists tends to be rather unequal. Only slightly more than half of the societies they study practice equal division of real property; customs to preserve land relatively intact (most commonly primogeniture) are very common. Borgerhoff Mulder (2010) shows how wealth transfers are more egalitarian among pastoralists, but unequal inheritance customs also prevail in some of these societies.

The high historical prevalence of male primogeniture among upper classes around the world has been subject to some evolutionary theories, such as those elaborated by Betzig (1993) and Bergstrom (1994). Patrilineal primogeniture was generally more common among the wealthy landowners, as in pre-industrial Europe, where it prevailed among aristocrats, but wasn't that widespread among peasants. However, there have also been societies where patrilineal primogeniture was used by common peasants, but ignored by aristocrats and rulers; such was the case in Pre-Colonial Mexico, for example, to the surprise of Spanish chroniclers

Employing differing forms of succession can affect many areas of society. Gender roles are profoundly affected by inheritance laws and traditions. Impartible inheritance has the effect of keeping large estates united and thus perpetuating an elite. With partible inheritance large estates are slowly divided among many descendants and great wealth is thus diluted, leaving higher opportunities to individuals to make a success. (If great wealth is not diluted, the positions in society tend to be much more fixed and opportunities to make an individual success are lower). Inheritance customs can even affect gender differences in cognitive abilities: a recent study showed that among the Karbis, who employ male primogeniture, men perform significantly better than women in tasks of spatial ablities, while there are no significant differences in the performance of men and women among the Khasis, who employ female ultimogeniture.

The degree of acceptance that a society may show towards an inheritance rule can also vary. In South Africa, for example, the influence of more modern, western social ideas has caused strong opposition, both civil and official, to the customary law of patrilineal primogeniture traditionally prevalent among black peoples, and inheritance customs are gradually changing. In Zambia, Zimbabwe, Namibia and Cameroon, the customary law of patrilineal primogeniture prevalent in these countries is also beginning to be challenged in court. In South Sudan, Uganda and Gambia, however, the custom of patrilineal primogeniture predominant in all these nations hasn't yet caused much opposition. In South Korea, favouring the eldest son has been predominant almost up to this day, despite laws of equal inheritance for all children, and even in 2005, in more than half (52.6 percent) cases of inheritance the eldest son was the main heir. (in North Korea, which obviously had the same family pattern as the South in the past, when they formed a single country, there has been no individual ownership of property since its proclamation as an independent, communist country in 1948). In Japan, during the Tokugawa era, in approximately 61 percent of cases the successor to the family property was the eldest son, while in 4 percent of cases a younger son succeeded, in 3 percent a cousin was the successor, in 15 percent an adopted son (including sons-in-law) succeeded and in 16 percent other person succeeded. During the Postwar period, the eldest son was seven times likelier than other sons to co-reside with his parents and inherit their property property across the whole country, in spite of the fact that the Civil Code of 1947 imposes forced heirship, and surveys conducted during the 1950s demonstrated a predominant approval and practice of the custom among the Japanese population, even in the southwest part of the country. Although co-residence of seniors aged 65 and above with a child has decreased from 86.8 percent in 1960 to 46.8 percent in 2005, partly due to the increase in the number of childless people, in most regions, such as Yamanashi prefecture, the first son has almost always inherited all the land even up to this day. In Germany, there are still laws of primogeniture (Ältestenrecht) and ultimogeniture (Jüngstenrecht) regulating the inheritance of farms. Unlike legislation during the Nazi period, that made the youngest son heir in areas where no particular custom prevailed, since the 1950s the eldest has been favoured in these cases. These laws are also still in force in Austria. In Styria, Carinthia, Salzburg, Voralberg, Tyrol and western Upper Austria, primogeniture predominates, while ultimogeniture predominates in most of Lower Austria and central and eastern Upper Austria. In Burgenland, as well as parts of Lower Austria, partibility prevails.

Social transformations can also modify inheritance customs to a great extent. For example, the Samburu are pastoralists who have traditionally practiced an attenuated form of patrilineal primogeniture, with the eldest son receiving the largest share and each succeeding son receiving a considerably smaller share than any of his seniors. Now that many of them have become agriculturalists, some argue that land inheritance should follow patrilineal primogeniture, while others argue for equal division of the land. The Bhil, who were hunter-gatherers in the past, adopted a system of attenuated patrilineal primogeniture identical to that of pastoral Samburu when they became agriculturalists, and the same custom also prevails among the Nupe, as well as in Tanzania, where the eldest son is the main heir according to the customary law of the country. Customary law divides heirs into three degrees, where the first degree obtains the largest share, and the third degree the smallest. Under this scheme, “the first degree is for the first son, the second degree is for other sons, and the third degree is for daughters.” This law applies to approximately 80 percent of patrilineal communities in Tanzania, but not to matrilineal communities. The Amhara, who divide their property between all sons and do not leave most or all of the land to only one of them, show nevertheless biases in inheritance favouring the eldest son, and so do the Dinka in a stronger manner. Among the Shona, "the eldest son inherits first and obtains the largest and/or most productive piece of land".

The Zulus allowed only minimal grants of land to younger sons. Among the Southern Bantu in general, the first son was conceived of as superior to his siblings. As Hoernlé states, "among the children a strict hierarchy prevails, based on the seniority which serves as a fundamental principle of [...] Bantu society. The elder brother always takes precedence between brothers [...] and so too between sisters." Van Varmelo writes, "Bantu social structure knows no equals, as with whole sibs, so with individuals. The first-born of the same parents is always superior to those born after him, and this superiority is extended to his descendants, with varying consistency." This social structure even informed their religious beliefs The social system of Polynesians was similar to that of the Southern Bantu. As Sahlins writes, "The mode of succession is primogeniture; the eldest son succeeds to the position of his father. [...] Not only is he differentiated from his younger brothers, but so also is every brother differentiated from every other, in accordance with their respective order of birth and the consequent prospects of succeeding to the position of their father. [...] The seniority principle in the family is a microcosm of the ramified social system. [...] As a consequence of seniority, the descendants of an older brother rank higher than the descendants of a younger brother. [...] Every individual within this group of descendants of a common ancestor holds a differing status, one precisely in proportion to his distance from the senior line of descent in the group. [...] People descendent from remote collaterals of the common ancestor are lower in rank than those descendent from a more immediate relative of the chiefly line. People with the lowest status are those who have descended from younger brothers through younger brothers ad infinitum. The process of primogenitural succession and its consequent implication of seniority result in a ranking structure which encompasses the entire society. [...] In every ramified society one can recognise groups of statuses or status levels which are functionally significant in terms of differential socio-economic prerogatives. These different levels are normally present in all the larger ramages." Identical principles of seniority of descent also structured and organized traditional Maori society, which shared common origins with those of Polynesia. Therefore, the conical clan of the Asian steppe, Oceanic societies and Southern Bantu societies was based on a rule of primogeniture. However, the conical clan of Kachin society was based on a rule of ultimogeniture.

Inheritance customs don't tell us everything about the rules of domestic family life. For example, in Korea and Japan, where patrilineal primogeniture was the general practice, the brothers of the heir didn't even remain celibate in the household, but went away and sometimes even lost all contact with the family of origin. "The sibling is the beginning of the stranger", says a Japanese proverb, expressing this minimal level of sibling solidarity in Japanese culture. In Europe, however, although property was inherited solely by one son in many cases, his brothers were often allowed to remain in the household as long as they didn't marry. And in some African agricultural or horticultural societies the brother, nephew or son who inherited the land to the apparent exclusion of all other inheritors was in practice more of an administrator of the collectively-owned property than a real single-heir; thus customs of single-heirship in Africa regarding land entailed varying degrees of real inequality. Of course, there are always many exceptions to these rules: the Bamileke, for example, often described as "the Ibo of Cameroon", are an agricultural people who traditionally practiced a completely exclusionary form of male primogeniture.

Inheritance can be organized in a way that its use is restricted by the desires of someone (usually of the decedent). An inheritance may have been organized as a fideicommissum, which usually cannot be sold or diminished, only its profits are disposable. A fideicommissum's succession can also be ordered in a way that determines it long (or eternally) also with regard to persons born long after the original descendant. Royal succession has typically been more or less a fideicommissum, the realm not (easily) to be sold and the rules of succession not to be (easily) altered by a holder (a monarch). The fideicommissum, which in fact had little resemblance to the Roman institution of the same name, was almost the standard method of property transfer among the European nobility; Austria, Germany, Switzerland, Bohemia, Sweden and Italy were some of the countries where it became very popular among wealthy landowners, beginning in most cases around the early Modern Age. It was almost always organized around principles of male primogeniture. The Spanish mayorazgo and the Portuguese morgado also resembled the Continental fideicommissum more than the noble customs of Great Britain and most French regions; noble customs of primogeniture in these countries were more ancient and thus took different legal forms. Inheritance of noble titles also distinguished Great Britain from Continental Europe, since in most European countries most noble titles (though not estates) were inherited by all sons, sometimes even all children.

The right of patrilineal primogeniture, though widespread during medieval and modern times in Europe, doesn't seem to have prevailed so extensively in ancient times. In Athens, according to Demosthenes, the eldest son inherited the house and with it the cult to family ancestors (he defended these special rights of the eldest son in his city). Aristotle speaks about patrilineal primogeniture during his time in some Greek cities (Thebes, Corinth), as well as the revolts that put an end to it in some others (Massalia, Istros, Heraclea, Cnido). While he was opposed to this right, Plato wanted it to become more widespread. However, the nature of inheritance practices in ancient Sparta is hotly debated among scholars. Ancient Greeks also considered the eldest son the avenger of wrongs done to parents -"The Erinyes are always at the command of the first-born", they said-.

Roman law didn't recognise primogeniture, but in practice Romans favored the eldest son. In Ancient Persia, succession to the family headship was determined by patrilineal primogeniture

Among Celtic and German peoples, the predominant custom during ancient times seems to have been to divide the land in equal parts for each of the sons. However, the house, of course, could be left to only one of them; evidence of actual practices and law codes such as the Sachsenspiegel indicate that Germans left the house to the youngest son, while Celts from Ireland and northern France left it to the eldest son. Both Germans and Irish divided the land into equal shares until the early Modern Age, when impartible inheritance gradually took hold among both peoples. The German tribe of the Tencteri, however, employed patrilineal primogeniture according to Tacitus, and there is evidence that in Schleswig Holstein, leaving the estate to the eldest son and giving only compensation to his siblings was the prevailing practice since around the year 100. Patrilineal primogeniture also prevailed among the Vikings. In Scotland, certain types of property descended exclusively to the eldest son in the Scottish Lowlands even before the Norman conquest (1066), and patrilineal primogeniture with regards to all types of immoveable property became the legal rule in all of Scotland during the reign of William I (1165–1214). Until 1868, all immovable property (buildings, lands, etc.) was inherited exlusively by the eldest son and couldn't be included in a will; after 1868, it could be included in a will or testament, but if a person died intestate, it was still inherited exclusively by the eldest son. In 1964, this rule of male primogeniture in cases of intestacy was finally abolished. In England, the custom of Northumbria (northern England) reserved a substantial birthright for the eldest son even before the Norman conquest, and other local customs of inheritance also gave certain benefits or privileges to the eldest son. After the Norman conquest (1066), male primogeniture became widespread throughout the country, and it became the common law of the country with the promulgation of the Magna Carta (1215), only somewhat later than in Scotland. After 1540, a testator could dispose of its immovable property as he saw fit with the use of a testament, but until 1925 it was still inherited solely by the eldest son if he died intestate. In England, however, altough the gentry and the nobility practiced a relatively strict form of male primogeniture, among peasants there was always considerable variation and flexibility in the application of this rule. In the Scottish Highlands and Western Islands, however, an strict form of male primogeniture prevailed (and still prevails) even among peasants.

In parts of Northern France, giving a slightly larger share to the eldest son was common among peasants even before the X century; after that century, patrilineal primogeniture developed among the nobility (impartible inheritance never obtained among peasants in most of northern France). Flanders was probably the first country where patrilineal primogeniture became predominant among aristocrats. By the time of the French revolution it had become almost universal in this social class in Western, Central and Northern Europe, but inheritance customs among peasants varied widely across regions.

Strabo also speaks about customs of male primogeniture among Iberian peoples (it must be noted that most of the Iberian peninsula was populated by then by Celtic or half-Celtic peoples, not Iberians proper). He mentions that among the Cantabrii, however, the eldest child regardless of sex inherited the family property. By the term "Cantabrii" he was most probably referring not to the actual Cantabrians but to the Basques (who were not an Iberian people); among the Basques of France, this usage survived until the French Revolution, long after it had been replaced by male primogeniture or free selection of an heir among the Basques of Spain. In Catalonia, in north-eastern Spain, the custom of male primogeniture survived in an exceptionally vigorous form among peasants until very recent times (in the province of Lleida, for example, even as late as the mid-twentieth century, only 7.11 percent of the sons who became single-heirs were not the first son). However, in other past Iberian regions which were subject to greater Muslim influence, such as Valencia, this custom only survived in some areas.

The ancient Welsh laws of inheritance are interesting, for they inform us about the evolution of inheritance practices in Great Britain. The Venedotian Code establishes that land must be partitioned between all sons and that the youngest has a preferential claim to the buildings:

" If there be buildings, the youngest brother but one is to divide the tyddyns,* for in that case he is the meter; and the youngest to have his choice of the tyddyns, and after that he is to divide all the patrimony. And by seniority they are to choose unto the youngest ; and that division is to continue during the lives of the brothers."

"If there be no buildings on the land, the youngest son is to divide all the patrimony, and the eldest is to choose ; and each, in seniority, choose unto the youngest."

"Land of a hamlet is not to be shared as tyddyns, but as gardens ; and if there be buildings thereon, the youngest son is not more entitled to them than the eldest, but they are to be shared as chambers."

" When brothers share their patrimony between them, the younger is to have the principal tenement, and all the buildings, of his father, and eight einvs of land ; his boiler, his hatchet, and his coulter, because a father cannot give these three to any one but the youngest son, and though they should be pledged they never become forfeited. Then let every brother take an homestead with eight erws of land ; and the youngest son is to divide, and they are to choose in succession from the eldest to the youngest."

This was later replaced by a preference for the eldest son, and the Dimetian Code provides:

"[...] If there be a dispute between two lawful heirs, one is propietary heir to the dadenhudd of the whole, and another is non-proprietor; the one, however, is proprietor to dadenhudd of he whole, as dadenhudd of the whole is not appropriate to any one, but to the eldest of all the brothers. The privilege of age of the eldest brother renders all the younger brothers non-proprietors, and renders him sole proprietor for dadenhudd of all; if the younger ones come before him to obtain dadenhudd, at what time soever may come, he is to eject them all, and is to obtain dadenhudd of the whole: if they make the demand jointly, they are to obtain it jointly, as has been mentioned above. The eldest brother is likewise a primary son, and the youngest is secondary in claim; and therefore it is said: the second dadenhudd cannot eject the first. All the younger brothers are non-proprietors, as to obtaining dadenhudd of the whole, although every one shall obtain his share; and on that account it is said: no non-proprietor can eject another non-proprietor."

Canon law dictated patrilineal primogeniture:

" The ecclesiastical law says again that no son is to have the patrimony but the eldest born to the father by the married wife. The law of Howel, however, adjudges it to the younger son as well as to the oldest, and decides that the sin of the father, or his illegal act, is not to be brought against the son as to lus patrimony."

During the Modern Age, many Welsh peasants in upland areas lived in stem families where the eldest son took over the farm when his father became old. Perhaps most intriguingly, in the inner, lowland areas of Wales, where English culture was stronger and absolute nuclear families on the English model prevailed, male ultimogeniture predominated.

Islamic laws of inheritance

Main article: Islamic inheritance jurisprudence

The Quran introduced a number of different rights and restrictions on matters of inheritance, including general improvements to the treatment of women and family life compared to the pre-Islamic societies that existed in the Arabian Peninsula at the time. The Quran also presented efforts to fix the laws of inheritance, and thus forming a complete legal system. This development was in contrast to pre-Islamic societies where rules of inheritance varied considerably. Furthermore, the Quran introduced additional heirs that were not entitled inheritance in pre-Islamic times, mentioning nine relatives specifically of which six were female and three were male. In addition to the above changes, the Quran imposed restrictions on testamentary powers of a Muslim in disposing his or her property. In their will, a Muslim can only give out a maximum of one third of their property.

The Quran contains only three verses that give specific details of inheritance and shares, in addition to few other verses dealing with testamentary. But this information was used as a starting point by Muslim jurists who expounded the laws of inheritance even further using Hadith, as well as methods of juristic reasoning like Qiyas. Nowadays, inheritance is considered an integral part of Shariah Law and its application for Muslims is mandatory, though some peoples (see above), despite being Muslim, have other inheritance customs.

Jewish laws of inheritance

The inheritance is patrilineal. The father —that is, the owner of the land— bequeaths only to his male descendants, so the Promised Land passes from one Jewish father to his sons.

If there were no living sons and no descendants of any previously living sons, however, daughters could inherit. In Numbers 27:1-4, the daughters of Zelophehad (Mahlah, Noa, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah) of the tribe of Manasseh come to Moses and ask for their father's inheritance, as they have no brothers. The order of inheritance is set out in Numbers 27:7-11: a man's sons inherit first, daughters if no sons, brothers if he has no children, and so on.

Later, in Numbers 36, some of the heads of the families of the tribe of Mannasseh come to Moses and point out that, if a daughter inherits and then marries a man not from her paternal tribe, her land will pass from her birth-tribe's inheritance into her marriage-tribe's. So a further rule is laid down: if a daughter inherits land, she must marry someone within her father's tribe. (The daughters of Zelophehad marry the sons' of their father's brothers. There is no indication that this was not their choice.)

The tractate Baba Bathra, written during late Antiquity in Babylon, deals extensively with issues of property ownership and inheritance according to Jewish Law. Other works of Rabbinical Law, such as the Hilkhot naḥalot : mi-sefer Mishneh Torah leha-Rambam, and the Sefer ha-yerushot: ʻim yeter ha-mikhtavim be-divre ha-halakhah be-ʻAravit uve-ʻIvrit uve-Aramit also deal with inheritance issues. The first, often abbreviated to Mishneh Torah, was written by Maimonides and was very important in Jewish tradition.

All these sources agree that the firstborn son is entitled to a double portion of his father's estate: Deuteronomy 21:17. This means that, for example, if a father left five sons, the firstborn receives a third of the estate and each of the other four receives a sixth. If he left nine sons, the firstborn receives a fifth and each of the other eight receive a tenth. If the eldest surviving son is not the firstborn son, he is not entitled to the double portion.

Philo of Alexandria and Josephus also comment on the Jewish laws of inheritance, praising them above other law codes of their time. They also agreed that the firstborn son must receive a double portion of his father's estate.

Inheritance inequality

The distribution of inherited wealth is often unequal. The majority might receive little while only a small number inherit a larger amount, with the lesser amount given to daughter in the family. The amount of inheritance is often far less than the value of a business initially given to the son, especially when a son takes over a thriving multi-million dollar business, yet the daughter is given the balance of the actual inheritance amounting to far less than the value of business that was initially given to the son. This is especially seen in old world cultures, but continues in many families to this day.

Arguments for eliminating the disparagement of inheritance inequality include the right to property and the merit of individual allocation of capital over government wealth confiscation and redistribution, but this does not resolve the problem of unequal inheritance. In terms of inheritance inequality, some economists and sociologists focus on the inter generational transmission of income or wealth which is said to have a direct impact on one's mobility (or immobility) and class position in society. Nations differ on the political structure and policy options that govern the transfer of wealth.

According to the American federal government statistics compiled by Mark Zandi, currently of "Moody's Economy.com", back in 1985, the average inheritance was $39,000. In subsequent years, the overall amount of total annual inheritance was more than doubled, reaching nearly $200 billion. By 2050, there is an estimated $25 trillion average inheritance transmitted across generations. Some researchers have attributed this rise to the baby boomer generation. Historically, the baby boomers were the largest influx of children conceived after WW2. For this reason, Thomas Shapiro suggests that this generation "is in the midst of benefiting from the greatest inheritance of wealth in history."

Inheritance and race

Inheritances are transfers of the unconsumed material accumulations of previous generations. Inheritances therefore take on a special meaning with respect to black and white Americans: they directly link the disadvantaged economic position and prospects of both white and mixed races, and in the case of black families that may have a disadvantaged positions with backgrounds of outright slavery of their ancestors.

Sometimes, depending on one's race, one inherits an inevitable amount of privilege or disadvantage at the time of their birth. This is also notable in families with adopted children when one child may be more racially acceptable in the family than another child who is left with less, as a result of parental-child preference. A number of possible explanations for this gap have been suggested, particularly differences in income and various socio-economic characteristics between black and white households. Some research reveals that race could be serving as a proxy for other, more fundamental, determinants of differences in inheritance. Among the findings, it was stated that a "father's education and variables indicating the economic conditions of childhood were the most important in predicting the size of inheritances." Based on samples of households in 1976 and 1989, researchers found that white households are at least twice as likely to receive an inheritance (than black households), yet this is not always based on race that includes other factors. White households are almost three times as likely to expect to receive an inheritance in the future as a result of socio-economic situations and the dependence of many blacks on social welfare. Hence, controlling for other factors, these researchers found that race is important in explaining whether or not a household has received an inheritance and the size of the inheritance.

Whites average both better health and inheritance than minority groups in the United States. Blacks and Hispanics are disadvantaged with respect to financial and human capital resources, more specifically, lower educational attainment, income, inheritances, and great concentrations in lower-skilled occupations. Additionally, due to employment discrimination and residential segregation, minority households "have historically been denied the opportunity to accumulate wealth" and thus, acquire inheritance.

Inheritance and social stratification

Inheritance inequality has a significant effect on stratification. Inheritance is an integral component of family, economic, and legal institutions, and a basic mechanism of class stratification. It also affects the distribution of wealth at the societal level. The total cumulative effect of inheritance on stratification outcomes takes three forms. The first form of inheritance is the inheritance of cultural capital (i.e. linguistic styles, higher status social circles, and aesthetic preferences). The second form of inheritance is through familial interventions in the form of inter vivos transfers (i.e. gifts between the living), especially at crucial junctures in the life courses. Examples include during a child's milestone stages, such as going to college, getting married, getting a job, and purchasing a home. The third form of inheritance is the transfers of bulk estates at the time of death of the testators, thus resulting in significant economic advantage accruing to children during their adult years. The origin of the stability of inequalities is material (personal possessions one is able to obtain) and is also cultural, rooted either in varying child-rearing practices that are geared to socialization according to social class and economic position. Child-rearing practices among those who inherit wealth may center around favoring some groups at the expense of others at the bottom of the social hierarchy.

Sociological and economic effects of inheritance inequality

The degree to which economic status and inheritance is transmitted across generations determines one's life chances in society. Although many have linked one's social origins and educational attainment to life chances and opportunities, education cannot serve as the most influential predictor of economic mobility. In fact, children of well-off parents generally receive better schooling and benefit from material, cultural, and genetic inheritances. Likewise, schooling attainment is often persistent across generations and families with higher amounts of inheritance are able to acquire and transmit higher amounts of human capital. Lower amounts of human capital and inheritance can perpetuate inequality in the housing market and higher education. Research reveals that inheritance plays an important role in the accumulation of housing wealth. Those who receive an inheritance are more likely to own a home than those who do not regardless of the size of the inheritance.

Often, minorities and individuals from socially disadvantaged backgrounds receive less inheritance and wealth. As a result, mixed races might be excluded in inheritance privilege and are more likely to rent homes or live in poorer neighborhoods, as well as achieve lower educational attainment compared whites in America, but this is not always the case, as many interracial marriages exist that redistributes wealth among non-whites. Individuals with a substantial amount of wealth and inheritance often intermarry with others of the same social class to protect their wealth and ensure the continuous transmission of inheritance across generations; thus perpetuating a cycle of privilege. For this reason, it can even be argued that one's inheritance places them in a specific social class position that requires a level of participation in certain activities that promote the oppression of lower-class individuals in terms of the social hierarchy and system of stratification.

Nations with the highest income and wealth inequalities often have the highest rates of homicide and disease (such as obesity, diabetes, and hypertension). A New York Times article reveals that the U.S. is the world's wealthiest nation, but "ranks twenty-ninth in life expectancy, right behind Jordan and Bosnia." This is highly attributed to the significant gap of inheritance inequality in the country. For this reason, it is clear that when social and economic inequalities centered on inheritance are perpetuated by major social institutions such as family, education, religion, etc., these differing life opportunities are transmitted from each generation. As a result, this inequality becomes part of the overall social structure.

Taxation

Further information: Inheritance tax

Many states have inheritance taxes or death duties, under which a portion of any estate goes to the government.

See also

• Beneficiary
• Inheritance law of Russia
• Inheritance law in Canada
• Digital Inheritance
• Family law
• Inheritance Tax (United Kingdom)
• Intra-household bargaining
• Old money
• Pubilla
• Succession order
• Transformative asset

External links

• USA Today article on dilemma the rich face when leaving wealth to children