Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2024-08-11 04:05 pm
[ SECRET POST #6428 ]
⌈ Secret Post #6428 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

__________________________________________________
03.

[House of the Dragon]
__________________________________________________
04.

__________________________________________________
05.

__________________________________________________
06.

Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 47 secrets from Secret Submission Post #919.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - isn't this the same secret as the last one? ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

no subject
(Anonymous) 2024-08-12 05:20 am (UTC)(link)no subject
(Anonymous) 2024-08-12 06:45 am (UTC)(link)(And while it's true that most titles went down the male line, that depends on the terms upon which it was granted.)
no subject
(Anonymous) 2024-08-12 07:50 am (UTC)(link)no subject
(Anonymous) 2024-08-12 09:57 pm (UTC)(link)Similarly, if (when a title was created) it used certain language like "in fee simple" (as opposed to "in fee tail male"), that left inheritance a bit more open to interpretation. This happened with some baronies, which meant a daughter could ostensibly inherit when there was no available son. Additionally, there were some cases where a woman held a title in her own right ("suo jure"), which meant it could be passed down to her heirs. There are also (albeit rare) cases of men inheriting a title via their wife ("jure uxoris"), the most famous example being Richard Neville,16th Earl of Warwick aka the Kingmaker.
Like I said, it's a lot more complicated than most people realize.
"As a newly rich man from trade he would not be seen as good marriage material for any titled family anyway. He's not in their class."
Not necessarily true. It was not uncommon for a titled family with no money (which was also not uncommon) to form a marriage alliance with someone of a lower class with lots of money. Man with a title but little money + heiress with money from trade was more common, to be certain. But it doesn't make sense to say that, for example, the daughter of a viscount who'd run his estate into the ground and was heavily in debt would turn down a marriage alliance with Mr. Bingley, a wealthy man who's good looking AND has an agreeable personality.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2024-08-13 02:12 pm (UTC)(link)As for man of trade marries up, that is more a Victorian trope than a Georgian and later Regency one. It was the Victorian era where it was respectable to marry up in one go like that. In the late Georgian/Regency era you were still expected to marry into good breeding and landed gentry for a couple of generations before marrying into the titled class.