The Worlds of Katherine Kurtz

The Deryni Series => The Childe Morgan => Topic started by: Elkhound on July 24, 2007, 12:22:51 PM

Title: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Elkhound on July 24, 2007, 12:22:51 PM
In Childe Morgan, we hear that Alyce could not hold her titles in her own right, although they could be passed on through her to her son.  But, in the Kelson books we met some ladies who held titles in their own right.  When was the law changed, or is it something that varies in different parts of the country?
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Braniana on July 25, 2007, 01:35:42 PM
Which titles in particular did you notice in the Kelson books that were held directly by women?  I'll admit I can't think of any off-hand, but I might just not have noticed.

In our own world, inheritance does vary by country.  From my own interest in medieval England/Wales, I know that England inherited by primogeniture (the eldest legitimate son got everything), while Wales divided land equally among all acknowledged sons (regardless of legitmacy).  English heiresses (and their husbands) could inherit, but Welshwomen couldn't.  According to Sharon Kay Penman (a writer of this time, who's a good researcher), women and handicapped men couldn't inherit in Wales because of fears they couldn't defend their lands from attack.

This could offer an explanation for Alyce's situation.  Corwyn sat on the border with Torenth, and as the raiders in ITKS proved, it wasn't going to be too difficult for Torenthi raiders, or the Torenthi army, to try to invade there if they really wanted to.  In matters where physical strength, or military action were involved, men were going to be viewed as superior and preferable.  Perhaps this requirement was set up when Corwyn became part of Gwynedd, to keep the title in the original bloodline, rather than a man marrying the heiress for the title, she dies childless, he remarries and passes the title on to the son of his 2nd marriage (meaning no blood connection to the previous ruling line).  Also might be connected to the de Corwyn line being Deryni, something often useful to the Haldane kings.

And in the Deryni world, there was a mixture of inheritance styles: the Lowlands used primogeniture, and the border regions appear to have used a mixture of primogeniture and tanistry (where the most qualified candidate inherits).  Like how Dhugal automatically got the Earldom of Transha because he was thought to be Earl Cauley's son, but it wasn't as certain that he would get the chieftanship.  As Ciard said, Dhugal could have been chosen as the next chief even if he hadn't been a blood relative of Cauley.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Elkhound on July 25, 2007, 04:02:42 PM
I'll have to check, but the two that come to mind were Charissa and Catriona.  Catriona claimed to be Princess of Meara in her own right, and Charissa thought that her Furstan heritage made her lawful Ruling Queen of Gwynned. 

It also said that if anything happend to Morgan, Bryony would become dutchess in her own right. (This was before her brother was born, of course.)

There are a few others, but as I don't have my books here I can't be more specific.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: john on July 30, 2007, 07:14:19 PM
In the UK, inheritance of titles depends on how the title was given.  Most titles are given under the inheritance by heirs male.  I believe there are a few English or UK titles thaat can pass through the female line. 

Charissa and Caitrin inherit titles (or claims to titles) that are royal.  Many royal lines (in our world) have allowed female succession (when the male line dies out) even if noble titles in the same land do not.

pax,
john
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Elkhound on July 31, 2007, 11:17:39 AM
But what about Briony?  The text does say that before Kelric was born, if anything had happened to Alric she would have become Dutchess of Corwin in her own right.  But this contradicts what we see in Childe Morgan of how Corwin's succession laws worked. 
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: BishopCullen on July 31, 2007, 04:44:39 PM
Actually, there were quite a few.  Just off the top of my head, first up are the MacLain twins.  After the "accidental" death of their father, they were declared co-heiresses, so the titles of Kierney was theirs.  Only after one was murdered by the regents, did Iver McInnes marry the survivor and become Earl of Kierney.  Morag is another.  She was known as the Dowager Duchess of Arjenol, gaining her title after the death of her husband, Lionel.  She was also Duchess of Tolan.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Elkhound on August 01, 2007, 01:01:55 AM
Well, Morag was Torenthi;  Torenthi succession laws may have been different from Gwynnedd's.  (That may explain Charissa, as well; she may have just assumed that Gwynnedd was the same as Torenth.  She was arrogant enough consider a little basic legal research beneith her.) 

Wasn't Sofiana Sovereign Princess of one of the Forcinn States?  (Again, not in Gwynnedd.)

That might explain Catriona, too.  Mearan law might have been different.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Braniana on August 01, 2007, 10:57:11 PM
Several Festillic pretenders were women, though they didn't actively lead attempts to gain their 'rightful' title (Ariella and Charissa were exceptions).
Other of the Eleven Kingdoms do appear to have allowed female succession.  Sofiana probably inherited Andelon because she didn't have a brother and was the elder of two daughters.
With Morag being Dowager Duchess of Arjenol, that just means she was the wife of the dead duke, not that she became Duchess herself (her husband's brother, Mahael, got that title).  And she wasn't Wencit's heir, even though she was his sister; it was her sons who were next in line.  So Torenth appears to permit female succession to noble titles, just not to the throne.
With the MacLean sisters, Richeldis and Giesele.    I know they were co-heiresses to the lands, but wasn't the title going to go into abeyance after their uncle's death, until one of them died too, and then the other would actually inherit the title?  Wasn't that why Giesele was murdered, so that her sister would be the only heir, and married off to a son of a great lord?
The Briony point was one that had struck me too.  Maybe it's something that will be addressed in the last book.  I could see it being proposed given how long Corwyn was without a Duke.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Gyrfalcon64207 on September 12, 2008, 01:21:44 AM
How hard was it to change the succession laws?  Couldn't Morgan have designated that the title would pass to her in a will or something, just in case?  And wouldn't that mean that he could also designate Richenda regent for Briony the same way?  Would he have been able to choose succession like that any other way without a male heir?
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Elkhound on September 17, 2008, 12:34:23 PM
Quote from: Gyrfalcon64207 on September 12, 2008, 01:21:44 AM
How hard was it to change the succession laws?  Couldn't Morgan have designated that the title would pass to her in a will or something, just in case?  And wouldn't that mean that he could also designate Richenda regent for Briony the same way?  Would he have been able to choose succession like that any other way without a male heir?

In the case of a noble title, the rules of succession would be spelled out in the original patent conferring the title.  For royal or sovereign princely/ducal titles, it would depend on the constitutional processes of the particular country.  In the case of Corwyn, the treaty by which Corwyn was united to Gwynned might have some such provision. 
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: BalanceTheEnergies on January 31, 2009, 08:10:22 PM
I seem to recall that Corwyn had a degree of autonomy, since it came from the old kingdom of Mooryn (along with Carthmoor and some other areas). There may be some clause in the original treaty that incorporated Corwyn into Gwynedd which applies, or allows the patent to be amended.

There were also civil strictures on Deryni inheriting property. Even as things were eased, Ahern (brother to Alyce, Marie and Vera) had to wait until he was 25 to govern Corwyn in his own right, though the age of majority is 14 and the accolade of knighthood is generally bestowed at 18. I'm sure that when Kelson isn't fighting rebels and Torenthi rivals, he'll have his lawyers remove any of the civil disabilities that remain for Deryni, so something might be done then.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: drakensis on November 25, 2014, 03:37:45 PM
Quote from: BishopCullen on July 31, 2007, 04:44:39 PMMorag is another.  She was known as the Dowager Duchess of Arjenol, gaining her title after the death of her husband, Lionel.  She was also Duchess of Tolan.
Dowager Duchess more or less means widow of the last Duke and usually mother of the current Duke, Morag never had any direct authority over Arjenol except through her husband.

Very few kingdoms seem to have accepted female succession to royal or even major noble titles. Roisian inheriting Meara was considered unprecedented (and not necessarily superior to the claim of her sisters, despite her father's preference for that). That's not too unusual considering our own world - look at the historical example of Mathilda of England. The French monarchy in fact didn't even recognise succession through a female intermediary.

Llannedd is noted as unusual in allowing Ruling Queens - Gwynedd and Torenth very specifically do not permit it - otherwise Morag could have inherited Torenth from Wencit (or at least taken the lead in regency) and Malcolm inherited Gwynedd from his brother Cinhil although Cinhil had a surviving daughter (Rhetice who disappeared mysteriously years later).

In the case of Cassan we have two cases where succession skipped daughters - from Ambert Quinnell to his grandson Tambert I and from Tambert II to his grandson Andrew. On the other hand, we know that when Hrorik of Eastmarch died the rule of Eastmarch was deemed to be jointly that of his daughter Stacia and her husband Corban. Possibly the Kheldour lords operate on their own customs.

Ultimately the Eleven Kingdoms are ruled by a warrior nobility however, which is going to skew towards male heirs who are trained to arms. There would be grave scepticism at the notion of a woman wielding that power.

Charissa does seem to have been an exception. She inherited the Duchy of Tolan from her father and the Duchy of Marluk from her mother (Marluk appears to have had no less than three ruling Duchesses) as well as the County of Gwernach. She did lose the Duchy of Truvorsk to a male cousin though, suggesting differing laws of succession. Truvork is a fairly central region of Torenth, probably more 'traditional' whereas the other territories are more peripheral and likely had divergent cultural expectations. It's also possible that a deal was cut - after all, she no sooner inherited the lands than she was semi-adopted by King Nimur and before her 13th birthday she was married to Nimur's grandson, the second-in-line to the throne, so to all practical purposes this was supposed to unite these wealthy lands with the Crown. It's entirely possible there was another 'corrupt bargain' when she was widowed - the next king, Wencit, did offer to marry her and when she turned it down she did make it clear she wasn't expecting any further children (at the age of sixteen!) and Wencit was her heir.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Elkhound on November 25, 2014, 07:08:05 PM
Quote from: drakensis on November 25, 2014, 03:37:45 PMLlannedd is noted as unusual in allowing Ruling Queens - Gwynedd and Torenth very specifically do not permit it - otherwise Morag could have inherited Torenth from Wencit (or at least taken the lead in regency) and Malcolm inherited Gwynedd from his brother Cinhil although Cinhil had a surviving daughter (Rhetice who disappeared mysteriously years later).

I knew about Torenth, but I'm not sure about Gwynedd.  I don't have my copy of KKB here, but I remember that there was a discussion about the Haldane potential in the female line, and someone said that Gwynedd has never had a Ruling Queen---which indicates that it is theoretically possible, it just hasn't come up.

Also, some at least of the Forcinn States allow a woman to inherit in her own right. 
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Laurna on November 26, 2014, 10:04:24 PM
Both Meara and Cassan were not to have any female inheritance do to the treaty that was signed when the two parts of the country split in 770.

Summery from the Codex, Page 60-Cassan- In 762, Prince Janus died with a young son Prince Alphonse. Janus's brother, Prince Armon, however, assumed the throne. For eight years Alphonse's mother held a revolt in the name of her son. In 770 a treaty was signed making Meara and Cassan independent of each other, "but including a provision that, should either branch of the family become extinct in the male line, the other would have succession rights."  Cassan became extinct in the male line in 921 when Ambert died. But due to political support from Gwynedd Ambert's grandson Tambert I was able to retain the title. Which was completely against the treaty. This also happened a second time after Tambert II died in 1025 and the title went to his grandson, Andrew, who was born in 1034.

Now Meara was even worse about upholding the treaty. In 877, Alban dies and his daughter Jorianna takes the title. She marries her cousin and gives the title to her son. In 877 was when the treaty was first broken; right then Cassan should have had rightful inheritance of Meara, but for political alliances, Meara was able to refused the recognition of Cassan's rights.  In 1025, Jolyon II dies and his daughter Roisian was proclaimed his successor. But when she married Malcolm King of Gwynedd, the family declared Roisian abdicated and placed her sister, Annalind, on the throne of Meara. Caitrin assumes the title two generations later in 1109.

From this, I gather that the laws of the north were supposed to be inheritance by male only, but political ties (Cassan to Gwynedd and Meara to Torenth) allowed those laws to be displaced and/or ignored. This is why Caitrin claims to be Queen of Meara, but she truthfully is nothing more than a Pretender. I suspect that Charissa gained her title much the same way, however, I will defer to Drakensis's knowledge, for he has studied that line in some depth.  Territorial greed is a driving factor for most of the wars in the Eleven Kingdoms

At least Corwyn legally allowed daughters to hold the titles in abeyance for their eldest son so that the blood line retained the titles.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: drakensis on November 27, 2014, 03:05:45 AM
We know from the codex that Torenth doesn't allow women to be "girded as Kings" i.e. undergo the killijalay - it's mentioned as a distinction in Charissa and Morag's entries. We don't know that the inheritance rules being applied for King of Torenth and Festillic Pretender are the same and there are some hints they're not.

In the first case there's no example of a male inheriting through a female relative (semi-salic) until Liam and there seems to have been some uncertainty as how succession would work in this eventuality with Wencit being the last male-line descendant of his father Nimur II and grandfather Arkady II. The next most senior Furstan lines were through Arkady's brothers, Nikola had died without issue; Zimri whose last male-line descendant had been Hogun Gwernach, Kirill had a male line grandson Vidar (Duke of Arkadia) and Andruin who entered the church and died without issue. Lionel was of an even more junior branch of the Furstans.

Wencit made a special edict declaring the succession would pass through his sister to her sons which may have upset Vidar a little but he hasn't appeared in any of the books so presumably not to the point of doing anything. (Notably, now that Morag is dead and can't have more sons, Vidar's claim is better than that of anyone bar Ronal-Rurik or children of Stanisha. Teymuraz closest claim is through one of Arkady's sisters and sons pretty clearly take precedence).

In the latter case (the Festillic claim), since the Festil's claim that Ariella's son Marek I wasn't fathered by Imre they clearly accept succession through the female line as valid. If they didn't then their claim would have been inferior to that of a direct male line descendant like Count Festil of Fathane (although it's not clear if Festil's nephew and heir was via a sister or brother). Ariella's ambitious nature may have led to her setting some substantial precedents for her descendants.

In addition Ariella declared herself Queen of Gwynedd in her own right and by accepting that precedent the Festils evidently would be willing to see a woman on the Lion Throne of Gwynedd. Not all of the female pretenders were formally installed as Queens of Gwynedd - Imre III's sister Imriella did but this may have been calculated to establish her precedence over her great-niece Salentina who married a Haldane prince but otherwise had a potentially stronger claim. Otherwise Charissa was the next Festil woman declared Queen of Gwynedd (three of the six female pretenders of House Festil).

After Charissa's death the Festillic claim went to the next most senior descendant of her great-grandmother Chriselle, which was indeed Wencit (although she also specified him as her heir) which is another case of female succession - Wencit's mother Charchelle was Chriselle's daughter - and Morag is the next in line after Wencit in her own right by the logic of House Festil. Ironically the next after Morag, via Chriselle's sister Markella, would have been Markella's grandson Lionel: Morag's husband. Morag and Lionel's children were next of course (although presumably Liam at least has formally renounced Festillic succession), followed by Mahael and Teymuraz.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: LeDuc on October 13, 2018, 04:40:04 PM
In the CODEX DERYNIANUS, under 'Llannedd', there are three Queens Regnant, Elen Gruffud (Eldest daughter of Cynan II) reigned 905-907, Gwenlian (Second daughter of Cynan II, and sister/successor of Elen) reigned 907-944, and Gwenael (daughter of Madawc) reigned 1041-1082. It states in paragraph 3 '.....since the kingdom of Llannedd allows the succession of females while Howicce does not, the countries could split again should the male line fail'. The paragraph was stating and talking about the personal union of the royal houses of Llannedd and Howicce (male line only).In 1130, the present heirs of King Colman II MacFaolan-Gruffud are in Howicce his male line cousin Prince Cuan, and in Llannedd his half-sister Princess Gwenlian.

Mooryn (835), Llannedd (905, 907, 1041), Joux (931), Thuria (931), and Andelon (1112), Byzantyum (651, 1056) are, so far and until Year 1130, the only known and recorded sovereign states wherein succession passes through a female line.

These are the noble titles, Marlor, Eastmarch, Culdi, Marley, Sheele, Cassan, Rhendall, Kierney, Corwyn, Meara (in Gwynnedd); Pirek (in Howicce); Marluk, Tolan, Westmarcke-Sasovna, Gwernach, Arjenol, Jandrich (in Torenth); with each being inherited in a direct succession through the female line by marriage and/or descent.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: DesertRose on October 13, 2018, 10:00:48 PM
Also, re the earldom of Eastmarch passing from Hrorik to his daughter Stacia and her husband, Eastmarch was an independent earldom under Hrorik's father Sighere, who (IIRC, and I looked but cannot for my life find the citation for this; perhaps someone else can!) swore fealty to a fairly newly crowned Cinhil in exchange for Gwyneddan military aid and protection for the Kheldour lands and Eastmarch troops to assist Cinhil in staving off Ariella's forces, for which Sighere was created the first Duke of Claiborne, succeeded by his eldest son Ewan, and the borders of Eastmarch were redefined and became Hrorik's inheritance.

I think Hrorik had no surviving sons, hence the title passing to Stacia, but that might also have some basis in the tanistry system, since Kheldour is also considered Border coutnry.  In other words, it might be that the title passed to Stacia because her father said so.  :D
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Laurna on October 13, 2018, 10:44:03 PM
Quote from: LeDuc on October 13, 2018, 04:40:04 PM


These are the noble titles, Marlor, Eastmarch, Culdi, Marley, Sheele, Cassan, Rhendall, Kierney, Corwyn, Meara (in Gwynnedd); Pirek (in Howicce); Marluk, Tolan, Westmarcke-Sasovna, Gwernach, Arjenol, Jandrich (in Torenth); with each being inherited in a direct succession through the female line by marriage and/or descent.

I think we are talking about a surviving daughter holding title above her husband. There are only a few instances of this.  I believe that in most of those titles, when the only surviving child was a daughter, that daughter earned the title of heiress and not the ruling title. Her husband may or may not earn the title through marriage depending upon Royal decree. The eldest son of the heiress would become the titled lord.

Several instances of this excist. The best known is Alice as heiress of Corwyn and Lendour. Her husband Kenneth was given the title of Earl of Lendour by the king. But the title of Duke of Corwyn was held in abeyance until their son Alaric came of age. The Duchy of Cassan was treated the same way. At least twice a surviving daughter retained the title of heiress and their sons became duke. 

Kierney and Sheele both had surviving daughters who earned the tiled of countess.  I believe that is because their husbands were given the title. In both of these earldoms the ruling title was maintained by the countess, after their husbands died. The example of Sheele, Countess Agnes Von Horthy kept her title after her husband died in 984, and her son did not earn the title until she died in 998. Kierney was the same. in 1025 Glorian was the eldest surviving daughter. She was already married to Sir Roger McLain. She held the title of countess of Kierney after she became widowed. Roger held the title of Laird of Leanshire. Their eldest son, Tairchell, become Laird of Leanshire upon his father's death in 1025. Yet, Tairchell did not become Earl of Kierney until after Countess Glorian died in 1033 (note: there is an error in the Codex, Tairchell is earl from 1033-1060 and his younger brother, Arnall, becomes earl from 1060- 1076.)

As for Mooryn, the kings only surviving daughter, Heiress Brionne, was married to Festil II and he broke the kingdom into two parts within two years of their marriage. She became Queen of Gywnedd though her husband, but I don't remember if I read where she held the title of Queen of Mooryn for those two years.

Meara recognized the surviving daughter with a title as early as 877. Meara has had four sovereign queens/princesses: Jorianna, Roisian, Annalind, and Caitrin.  And as you said Llannadd recognizes their queens.

What defines which surviving daughter gets the ruling title to her lands and which one gets title of heiress  with regents, seems to be dependent on prior history for that title and royal decree.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: LeDuc on October 13, 2018, 11:46:31 PM
There are and have been times I have thought 'How despicable and sexist to keep the inherited title (and the right be accorded) from the inheretrix. Cassan for one, and Corwyn as another.

When the last FitzArthur-Quinnell Duke of Cassan, Tambert II, died in 1025, his line heiress was daughter Adelicia, with the title going into abeyance until the birth of a male heir of her body. I thought it unfair for her not to be called Duchess by law, and even when she married her 2nd cousin, Arnall McLain, and then he could have been Duke by marriage, and THAT didn't happen either. OH NO!!, a male child had to be born (Andrew McLain {1034-1099}), then 'All is well'. WOO! HOO!

The same thing happens in Corwyn, not once, twice. The first being, Stevana De Corwyn, surviving heir of Airlie, Hereditary Duke of Corwyn (son of Stiofan Anthony, Duke. 1026-1065) and then called Heiress of Corwyn, without the title of Duchess. Her husband, Keryell Cynfyn, Earl of Lendour could have been called Duke by marriage, that didn't happen either.
Two generations later, the same happens Alyce de Corwyn, upon the death of her brother, Ahern Cynfyn, Earl of Lendour and suo jure Duke of Corwyn. She was 'Heiress of Lendour, and Heiress of Corwyn',  yeah sure thing, but not the TITLE, though her husband was accorded the honor and title Earl of Lendour.

One would have thought with all the deaths of nobles at the Battle of Killingford (1025), and loss of many direct male line successions, things would change. King Malcolm solution was to urge the women 'heiresses' to marry and have heirs.

I may be male, but there are times the blatant 'sexism' regardless of time period, custom, tradition and law just galls me, and puts the bitter taste in the back of my throat. It goes without saying that my motto holds true 'Je promets et J'ose' (I promise and I dare). I would have equal rights all around, male of female, human or Deryni.

It was with surprise, relief and the feeling of 'about time, too', reading a FanFic story in 20th-21st century with Regnant Queens of Gwynnedd, the latest one being Sophia II Haldane.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Bynw on October 13, 2018, 11:55:02 PM

This is still a practice in our own world as well. There are titles that cannot be held by women to this day. Across Europe where titles are still recognized and across Asia as well.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Laurna on October 14, 2018, 01:11:50 AM
Bravo, LaDuc! Bravo for you're standing up to equal rights. I am glad our modern world has men who respect women's rights as strongly as their own rights. As an independent woman, I say thank you.
Imagine a medieval world where men and women are equal. That would be a good change. I think KK gives us strong women with out making them warriors types,  and she does show us women in their rolls as protectors and guardians of their families and their homes. Many ruling their castles and lands in their husband's absence.  Yet, even our beloved Alyce never ruled Corwyn. She was well educated and intelligent, Had she lived to an older age, she and her husband would have taken the reins of Corwyn and become it's regent for her son, just as they were starting to do for Lendour. But unfortunately that was not to be.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: drakensis on October 14, 2018, 03:25:28 AM
It is historically accurate to the history of Europe, alas.

It's good to see that fanfiction in later eras opens up more equal succession.
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: Evie on October 14, 2018, 11:35:11 PM
Quote from: LeDuc on October 13, 2018, 11:46:31 PM


I may be male, but there are times the blatant 'sexism' regardless of time period, custom, tradition and law just galls me, and puts the bitter taste in the back of my throat. It goes without saying that my motto holds true 'Je promets et J'ose' (I promise and I dare). I would have equal rights all around, male of female, human or Deryni.

It was with surprise, relief and the feeling of 'about time, too', reading a FanFic story in 20th-21st century with Regnant Queens of Gwynnedd, the latest one being Sophia II Haldane.

Thank you; I'm glad you enjoyed reading Balance of Power!  Of course, Sophia did have the advantage of being born in the right century to be allowed to rule Gwynedd as a sovereign Queen. Even modern-day Britain, on which my modern-day Gwynedd was very loosely based, only recently (less than a decade ago) changed its inheritance laws to allow a princess to inherit the throne even if she has younger male siblings.

Of course, KK's laws of inheritance reflect the reality of medieval law in most places and periods. They were laws created during a time when land had to be won and held by right of arms, and since men were nearly always the warriors, men were the ones favored in the inheritance laws. Landed women were taught how to defend their castles or fortified manors, or at least how to lead such a defense (with their male guards and steward doing most of the actual defending), and there are a few women who went further and led their men into battle, but they were more the notable exception than the rule by the Middle Ages.  (There's a little more evidence for women warriors in earlier periods.) But by and large, it was the lord who had the feudal obligation to his king to protect the barony, earldom, or duchy entrusted to his keeping, and therefore his land would be expected to pass down through the male line, since his right to inherit was literally won by right of his sword arm, his warrior skills being promised to his liegelord's use in exchange for the privilege of land ownership.

It was only in later centuries that the link between being able to physically take up arms to defend the land and people became more tenuously linked to land ownership, and then not really linked to it at all, but of course by that time centuries of societal thinking that "Men own the land, women simply help tend to it" was pretty deeply entrenched. But to be fair, medieval women actually had more inheritance rights than their Victorian descendants in some ways. By the Victorian age, those rights had eroded to the point that a widow with no sons might be in dire straits indeed unless she had some male relative to care for her (you can see echoes of this in Jane Austen's novels), whereas a medieval woman would have had her dower to fall back on.  It was looked at as an early form of social security system, some money or property given to the bride upon her marriage that was hers and hers alone, and which she could invest, sell, and/or bequeath as she chose, so she would not be left destitute (at least in theory) if she was widowed, even if her husband turned out to be a wastrel and squandered the rest of the family income.

But going back to medieval Gwynedd and women's roles within it, I think KK does a good job in showing that despite the systemic inequalities in medieval society, women still found ways of being strong and exercising what power they did have despite not being in warrior roles. And of course women with Deryni powers would be even more formidable. And the men of that world generally sense and respect that strength when it is displayed. Arilan, even with his full-blood Deryni heritage and much higher training than Alaric and Duncan, seems to have no problem at all working in a magical ritual alongside Richenda, or recognizing her capabilities as a trained Deryni. Morgan's junior officers distrust Richenda's capability to lead them in his absence not because she is a woman, but because she used to be the wife of a known traitor and therefore her true loyalties are in doubt. Had she not been Bran's widow, it would have been accepted as a matter of course that the Duchess has the right to govern in the Duke's absence.  And Evaine had the respect of her male colleagues in the original Camberian Council because her knowledge and talents were clearly evident. There was no "Why don't you go home and tend to your hearth where you belong, little woman!" attitude there!
Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: revanne on October 15, 2018, 05:56:51 AM
We need to bear in mind too that in medieval times the care of a home and birthing and raising children was of extreme importance. Until the improvement in agricultural practice and the drop in infant mortality ( beginning around the mid to late eighteen century) the survival of a family into the next generation was by no means assured. The idea of women as fragile and limited owes more to the Victorian  "Angel in the home" than the realities of medieval life where even wealthy women would have their hands full with real significant tasks which ensured the well-being and survival of their communities. There is also some interesting research around, which I don't have time to really  explore at the moment, about how the 16th and 17th professionalisation of things such as medicine served to exclude women from areas where their expertise would have been previously valued ( and it's then that Wise women become demonized as witches, not in medieval times).

So yes women were excluded from land holding and titles on the whole but their role in society was more important than in later times.

Title: Re: Women holding titles in their own right.
Post by: whitelaughter on October 21, 2018, 08:52:45 AM
A good rule of thumb RW is that a monarchy or republic will allow women to have titles, but an empire will not.  So I'd expect women to have titles during the era of Camber, but lose those rights as Gwynedd and Torenth gobbled up the other kingdoms.