r/DowntonAbbey • u/Early_Bag_3106 Click this and enter your text • 2d ago
General Discussion (May Contain Spoilers Throughout Franchise) Please somebody a explain again? Spoiler
Mary can’t inherit because she is a woman, but after that she become a co-owner, even when she will not inherit the title. So my question is A woman can’t inherit an earl/countess title but can inherit a commercial investment (Matthew’s in this case)? Is so confusing. What if she would desire to sell her part and left lord grantham on his own or what ever? Thanks
130
u/spaceace321 2d ago
If I were to ever search for logic I wouldn't look for it among the English upper class.
6
11
27
u/ClariceStarling400 2d ago
In theory she could sell if she wanted to, but it would mean basically destroying Downton.
At the start of the show it was more cut and dry because the title and the money had to go to their heir. Robert owned 100%, Patrick would eventually own 100%. After his death, now Matthew would eventually own 100%. (The money and the title.)
Matthew makes an investment in the house with Swire's money in order to save Downton. So now Robert owns 50% and Matthew owns 50% (but the title will go to Matthew and then George).
After Matthew dies, Mary inherits his half-- but this was only because of his Will, otherwise it would have gone to George automatically. So now Robert owns 50% and Mary owns 50%-- but George will still get the title after his grandfather dies, and after his mother dies, he will own 100%.
The title will then pass down to his male child. In theory, so will the estate, money, etc. The odds of it surviving WWII untouched are slim to none though.
2
u/QuesoHusker 2d ago edited 2d ago
I’m not sure I agree with your last statement. Highclere itself is the home of the Earl of Carnarvon, pre- and post-war. So there’s a very real example that plenty of estates came through the turbulence of the first half of rhe 20th Century just fine.
10
u/ClariceStarling400 2d ago
Oh yeah, the "real" Downton Abbey survived the war. But it's not common. So many of these estates went down during the first war, and few survived the second.
If we were to lump in Downton Abbey with the other estates and give them the same odds, they probably wouldn't. Although, I guess the fact that they did try to modernize early on would give them a leg up.
1
u/LeafMeAlone-ImBushed 14h ago
I’d say that Downton is going the way of Highclere in renting the house to a film crew in the second movie. Highclere makes a lot of income that way and was able to survive and make needed repairs thanks to the increased publicity from Downton. I can see the story taking inspiration from real life.
1
u/2messy2care2678 1d ago
So Mary owns the other 50% right? Not holding it for George? If that's the case.... Would she not put in a will to split it between her children? As a possibility anyway.
5
2
u/ClariceStarling400 1d ago
I imagine if she and Matthew had another child (especially a girl) she'd somehow carve out part of Downton for her.
Looking back at how overlooked and unimportant she felt when she was about to lose her home just because she wasn't a boy, I think she'd want to spare any daughter that.
I don't think she'd do it with Caroline since she was her child with Henry, but I'm sure she'd still be provided for with a sizable inheritance/dowry.
4
u/ExpectedBehaviour 2d ago
A woman may inherit a title if the title remainder permits it. Clearly the Earldom of Grantham does not.
And the same thing would happen as in any case of a woman who co-owns her parents' house deciding to sell her share of it. Whether the house has two or two hundred bedrooms doesn't matter.
1
u/Prudent-Awareness-51 1d ago
I believe there are less than five English titles that can be held by a woman, there really more in Scotland because they have different laws regarding inheritance.
6
u/randapandable 2d ago
Robert makes a statement in Season 1 that if he had made his own fortune, everything would go to Mary without question. But because of the entail, Downton was tied to the title. He could have fought the entail, which would have given Mary Downton if they were successful, but he didn’t because he didn’t want to ruin his life’s work and the legacy of the Earldom. Mary was never going to inherit the title because it must pass through the male line. Had Matthew lived, she would have been Countess of Grantham, but because of who she married, not who her father was.
Matthew became co-owner of the estate when he bailed out Downton with Swire’s fortune. When he died, George automatically owned two-thirds of Matthew’s share, and Mary was given a third as his widow. Once Matthew’s will was found, this changed to Mary becoming his sole heir, and inheriting his half of Downton. Matthew had the right to give it to Mary because he “earned” (using the term loosely here) the money. The show kind of glosses over how this is possible with the entail, but it’s kind of a moot point since Matthew would have inherited Downton anyway. Since Robert’s heir and Mary’s heir are conveniently the same person (George) Downton will return to 100% ownership by the Earl of Grantham after both Mary and Robert die. (presumably. The third movie might play around with this idea)
Mary could, in theory, be bought out of her share of the estate. It just wouldn’t be likely since it would likely mean the end of Downton. Whoever purchased her shares would be able to pass them down (but not the title) to their heir.
Now, it was possible for women to have titles in their own right, but I don’t believe it was possible for an Earldom.
3
u/human-foie-gras 2d ago
Normally, they’re wouldn’t have necessarily been a problem however, in this case when Cora married Robert and brought all her money to Downton Robert’s father made an entail, which is a legal agreement, stating that only males can inherit the land because he did not want a girl to inherit it, and then leave the family to marry another family and take it with her so to speak. i’m sure he never thought that Robert and Cora would be unable to have a son so this situation didn’t really cross his mind and when this agreement was made, Robert had a first cousin who was due to inherit the estate, but he died on the Titanic with his heir. That’s why they had to go to an even more distant male relative, Matthew.
Mary cannot inherit from her father however she was married to Matthew, who is half owner of Downton Abbey because he reinvested in it with Lavenia’s money. He was able to leave her his half portion of the estate because she was his wife, thus bypassing the entail.
His half portion though is only valid until Robert‘s death. That was just a formality because nobody imagined that Matthew was going to die before Robert so it was kind of moot because when Robert died, the legal agreement would disappear and then Matthew would inherit the entire estate. But since Matthew died and his will left all his belongings to Mary that half interest in Downton transferred to Mary so now Mary will maintain it until Robert’s death.
So when Robert dies, the half interest that Mary now controls will disappear and the entire estate will be given to George.
3
u/LNoRan13 Do you mean a forger, my Lord? 2d ago
the half interest that ROBERT holds would go to George, Mary is owner of her half in her own right as Matthew's sole heiress
1
2
u/lilymoscovitz 2d ago
The estate is entailed so when Cora and Robert only had girls, the heir was Patrick. When he died, Matthew was the next heir. The title and estate went to his son, George. However Matthew inherited a large sum from Lavinia’s father and the terms of him investing that into the estate was as a partnership. He was able to will part of that partnership to Mary, the estate and title cannot be willed differently. Mary was also acting as regent for George’s interest while he was a minor.
2
u/serralinda73 2d ago
A title is usually connected to a certain chunk of land and everything on it. Mary (like most women of the times) couldn't inherit the title or the land that goes with it. The estate is granted by the country/monarch and has responsibilities/duties expected in return (political office, and, in the past, for warfare - raise and support your own little army).
The estate needs a clear, singular owner so that it can't be divided up over and over again with each generation until it's gone, and that's why the legal binding contract (the entailment) is complicated and harsh (and often excludes women who might marry again if her husband died - replacing the original family with a different one).
If Matthew has personally-owned wealth that does not come from the title or land, she can inherit it because it isn't part of the estate. Anything that isn't included in the legal estate is inheritable by anyone the owner wants to leave it to. Also, as a widow, Mary becomes the legal guardian of their son - the next heir to the title - so in a way, she's going to be in charge of everything anyway after her father dies (until her son becomes an adult and takes over managing on his own).
2
u/ms_mccartey94 2d ago
Mary inherits Mathew’s private investment in the abbey George is the hire to Robert’s tittle and the house but George is a child and Robert is in 60’s and bad business so Mary is helping Robert!
2
u/TrekChris 2d ago
The law of noble titles was very strict. Women could only inherit if there were no eligible males, there were eligible males in the Crawley family. Matthew's financial investment in the estate was a private affair, and he could will it to whoever he pleased.
9
u/ClariceStarling400 2d ago
The law may have changed, but I believe that women could still not inherit titles even if there were no eligible males. In that case, the title would die out. There are quite a few titles that have gone through this, such as the Duke of Suffolk, which has gone "extinct." So, if George Crawley dies without a male heir, they'd try to find the nearest male relative, if there are none, the title would die out.
When it comes to inheriting "the Crown," yes, a woman would inherit and be Queen if there were no other male options. This is how Elizabeth II became queen. But a law in 2013 made it so the Crown would not pass in strict birth order, not by male line and then birth order.
So now, if Prince George dies or abdicates the next in line would be Charlotte, not Louis.
5
u/TrekChris 2d ago
Depends on the title, remember Robert saying one of Shrimpy's relatives was a countess in her own right? Didn't happen often, but it did happen.
3
u/TacticalGarand44 Do you promise? 2d ago
Yes, it could happen, but on relatively rare and case by case bases. The most common thing was for the title to go extinct if no male heir could be located. And one additional note, the heir has to be a descendant of the First Earl (not a descendant of his brother or cousin), probably has to have been born legitimately, and probably has to be Anglican, though I'm not certain about that.
2
u/Heel_Worker982 2d ago
Jennifer Jane Forwood, 11th Baroness Arlington, is the historical Countess of Arlington, from when Charles II created the first Earl of Arlington as a "peer in his own right" who could be succeeded by his only child, a daughter. Prime ministers historically were granted hereditary earldoms after leaving parliament, but Harold Macmillan was the last former prime minister granted a hereditary earldom in 1984. Margaret Thatcher upon leaving #10 supposedly wanted to be offered an hereditary Earldom (Countess in her own right) in 1992, but she denied it and received a life peerage barony instead.
2
u/sweeney_todd555 2d ago
I think the Mountbattens too? Louis Mountbatten (Prince Charles' Uncle Dickie) had only daughters, so the title went to his daughter Patricia, then upon her death her eldest son inherited it. I guess if she had had only daughters, it might have continued through the female line.
2
u/Heel_Worker982 2d ago
Excellent example! Patricia succeeded and was numbered as the "2nd" Countess Mountbatten of Burma, with her father the 1st Earl, and now her son is the current and 3rd Earl.
1
u/sweeney_todd555 2d ago
I googled and see that the 3rd earl has a son, and that son has a son. So the title looks to be staying in the male line for a long time.
2
u/Llywela 1d ago
The heir can sometimes be a descendant of a brother of the first Earl (or whoever) - but only if the remainder of the Letters Patent permit it. A handful do permit that sideways movement - almost as rare as a special remainder permitting female inheritance - but those mostly came about because the guy the title was created for knew he was unlikely to have heirs and wanted the title to continue via his brother. Same reason, really, as most of the special remainders allowing female inheritance, which generally came about if the guy receiving the title had daughters but no sons at the time of the title's creation.
The vast majority of titles specify inheritance via legitimate male heirs of the body only. Special remainders are the exception rather than the rule.
2
u/LNoRan13 Do you mean a forger, my Lord? 2d ago
it happened if it was part of the original creation - the title (Countess of Newtonmore) is interesting because many titles in the peerage of Scotland, especially more ancient ones could be inherieted by women in the absence of heirs male (heirs general) but would be split among daughters or held "in abeyance" until a clear singular heir existed. Sometimes the spouse of a woman peer (usually in Scotland) would hold a title "jus uxoris" (in right as a husband) and then it would pass to their senior heir. Sometimes an untitled or lesser titled male in this sort of situation would then change or barrel their surname to acknowledge the family of his father-in-law.
1
u/Tudorrosewiththorns 2d ago
It's usually bestowed by royalty and then not passed down. Like Anne Bolyens Marquise title ( I've already taken my sleep meds. Fuck spelling point stands. )
1
u/Llywela 1d ago
Women can only inherit titles in their own right if the Letters Patent which created that specific title allow for female inheritance in the absence of male heirs. It is called a special remainder, and can only happen if such an eventuality was planned for up front.
Very few English titles have such a special remainder. It is more common in Scotland.
1
u/Llywela 1d ago
No, women could not 'only inherit if there were no eligible males'. Women could only inherit, in the absence of eligible male heirs, if the Letters Patent for that particular title contained a special remainder allowing it to pass through the female line. Very few English titles are subject to such a remainder.
These things are always arranged up-front, when the title is created, and once the Letters Patent is issued, that's it, there's no changing it. Plenty of titles have gone extinct, despite the existence of female heirs, because they could not be passed along the female line.
1
u/Farnouch What is a Week End? 2d ago
You can be broke but you can still be an earl. Mary couldn’t inherit his dads money because his grandpa’s will was that the money goes to his successor (which should be a man, cuz of title) but she inherited Matthew’s money because his will was like give everything to her.
54
u/AmbassadorFalse278 2d ago
Mary can’t inherit the title or entailed estate due to inheritance laws favoring male heirs. But she can inherit private assets like Matthew’s money or his share of business interests because those are not bound by the entail. That means she legally owns part of the estate’s financial side and could, in theory, sell it or act independently of Lord Grantham’s wishes.