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 represents also to pass a characteristic, genetically. It has long played an important role in human societies. The rules of inheritance differ between societies and have changed over time.

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 jointly inheriting, 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 studies have been made in the anthropological and sociological areas 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 (male) 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 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, Huesca and other minor zones of Aragon, Catalonia and parts of the Balearic Islands and Valencia
• 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, and it was regarded as an improvement in its era, since daughters were previously usually left without. Even after the introduction of these laws, however, the eldest son still inherited the land from his parents in rural areas in exchange for taking care of them in their old age. His siblings usually 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 or Jingpo 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 Haute 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 an attenuated form of 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. According to some sources, in Germany, male primogeniture was generally the rule of succession to entailed family estates and family-trust entails, while male ultimogeniture was generally the rule of succession to peasant estates. (others maintain that male primogeniture was always predominant among peasants, too). In Pre-industrial England, the nobility and the gentry were characterized by their strict adherence to male primogeniture; among peasants, however, rules of inheritance 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, while male ultimogeniture was predominant among copyholders (who were the majority of the peasant population). 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 became prevalent among peasants during the 19th century. (it was already the custom in many regions before, though male ultimogeniture, at least judging by previous intestacy laws of most states, seems to have been more common -however, male primogeniture could have been practiced before in many regions without a legal basis for it, such as the Sauerland and Kreis Soest, in Westphalia,). Impartible inheritance was a deep-rooted tradition among german peasants. Male primogeniture and ultimogeniture were also common in many other states, like Hannover, Oldenburg, Brandenburg, and Saxony. In all these states both male primogeniture and ultimogeniture were widely practiced prior to the 19th century. In Bavaria, Schleswig-Holstein, Niederrhein, Mecklenburg, East Prussia, and Hesse, on the other hand, male primogeniture was clearly prevalent and customs of ultimogeniture were uncommon or non-existent even before 1800. 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, male primogeniture was the general practice. In Austria, male primogeniture must have become the general rule even before 1787, for in that year the Emperor issued a decree formally establishing it as the law of succession to peasant estates. 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

Rosenblatt (1974), studying 39 non-Western societies around the world, finds consistent correlations between the gender and birth order of a child and his/her outcome in life, and these include differences in the degree of property control.

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 traditionally the rule among Japanese, Korean, Tibetan, Innu, Lakher (or Mara), Kukis, Khumi, Mog, Paite, Pawi, Gangte, Tripuri, Simte, Wancho, Deccanese, Mikir or Karbi, Munda, Rajput, Kharwars, Nambudiri Brahmin, Khond, Aztec, Scottish, Catalan, Cornish, Kashubian, Moravian, Estonian, Balt, Croatian, Danish, Ossetian, Xibe, Timorese, Rukai, Lampung, Tausug, Tongan, Sumban, Batak, Nias, Buru, Florinese, Torajan, Bali Highlands, West Papuan, 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, Sotho, Swazi, etc.), Ndebele, Upper 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, Nung Rawang, 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, 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, Badaga, Han Chinese, Gheg Albanian, Southern Albanian, Gondi, Hausa, Nuba, Banen, Nubian, and Lowland Bali farmers, 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 -but not all- muslim groups -see Sharia-. Non-Arab muslims have been historically more inclined to follow their own inheritance customs and not those of the Sharia). 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 is (or was) also found 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, 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 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 some Latin American communities, where the youngest is even disadvantaged with regards to land 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 sons have over other sons is really small, so it is not correct to speak of a true primogeniture or ltimogeniture pattern. The advantage of eldest and youngest sons is somewhat more ample among the Dinka and the Rakhine), and this is also to some degree the pattern among the Sherpa and the Kachin (or Jingpos). 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

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 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, male primogeniture predominated 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 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. 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 most Arab and Iranian cultures. 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 Semites and erased the cultural notions of precedence of the first-born son over other sons in the family that previously existed among many of these peoples (though some peoples who have partially or completely embraced Islam, have also established inequality between sons, like the Oromo, who even had male primogeniture in inheritance, in spite of the fact that some of them were Muslim. Some other Muslim peoples, like the Minangkabau, the Bilen or the Fur, also have social practices regarding their treatment of children that strongly contradict their supposedly Islamic beliefs. Of course, non-Arab muslims have been historically more inclined to follow their own, indigenous inheritance customs and 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 (and hence the eldest of the brothers who jointly owned the property) 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, on average, than their younger brothers. Historical differences in marriage and/or reproductive success according to sex and parity due to unequal systems of devolution have also been demonstrated in Sweden, Quebec, Alsace, Ireland, the Arsi Oromo, the Turkana, the Datoga, Germany, Austria, England, Italy, 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, and even the Orkney Islands, Scotland or medieval Portuguese elites In the East Frisian example, inheritance also served to perpetuate economic inequalities in the whole population, since the farming class perpetuated itself and cut the access to its ranks to the rest of the population trough inheritance. In all these studies, with the partial exception of those from Germany, having elder brothers significantly decreased 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 out 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), for example, 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, later-born sons had decreased fertility precisely because of their lower mobility; 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. Kathleen A. Gillogly also 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 how 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 more in the Northern colonies, 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.

Nowadays in the western world, parents commonly show favoritism towards daughters and later-born children 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).

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 the nobility, but wasn't that widespread as a plebeian custom. 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 given 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 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 another person succeeded. During the Postwar period, the eldest son was seven times likelier than other sons to co-reside with the parents and inherit their 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 many regions, such as Yamanashi prefecture, the first son has almost always inherited everything even up to this day. In Germany, there are still laws of primogeniture and ultimogeniture 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.

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 Samburus when they (the Bhil, not the Samburu) became agriculturalists, and the same custom also prevails among the Nupe, as well as in Tanzania, where the eldest son is the main heir, too. The Amhara also show biases in inheritance favouring the eldest son, and so do the Dinka. Among the Shona, too, "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.

Nominal inheritance customs doesn't tell us everything about the rules of domestic family life. For example, in Korea and Japan, where male 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 brother 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 societies the brother or son who inherited the property to the apparent exclusion of all other inheritors was in reality more of an administrator of the collectively-owned property than a real single-heir; thus customs of single-heirship in Africa entailed varying degrees of real inequality.

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.

In more archaic days, the possession of inherited land has been much more like a family trust than a property of an individual. Even in recent years, the sale of the whole of or a significant portion of a farm in many European countries required consent from certain heirs, and/or heirs had the intervening right to obtain the land in question with same sales conditions as in the sales agreement in question.

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 (Torah/Old Testament)

The inheritance is patrilineal. The father—that is, the owner of the land—bequeaths only to his male descendents, so the Promised Land passes from one Jewish father to his sons. The Promised Land is called "The Land of Israel" because it belongs to Israel, and his sons are called Israelites denoting their connection with the land of their father.

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. In Numbers 27:7-11, Jehovah grants that if a man has no sons, then his daughters may inherit, and lays down the order of inheritance: 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 treatises insist on the right of the first son to receive a double share of his father's property. The Mishneh Torah states:

"A firstborn receives a double portion of his father's estate, as Deuteronomy 21:17 states: "To give him twice the portion."

What is implied? If a father left five sons, one the firstborn, 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. We follow this pattern in dividing the estate in all instances."

Thus, the first son receives twice the portion of each of the other sons, not twice of all that the other sons receive. If a father had three sons, for example, the first son would receive two fourths and the other two sons one fourth each. If the eldest surviving son is not the first son, he is not entitled to the double portion.

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