matrilineal marriage, how common were they in the middle ages?

[Jia Xu]

This is one of those cases where gameplay>historical accuracy.

Agreed. I'd like to say I'm surprised that some people would rather get game over than allow matrilinial marriages, but I'm not surprised as this has been the sentiment since the feature was first revealed.

The way Crusader Kings works as a series is that your dynasty has to survive. Not a cadet branch, not some cousins from a different dynasty, but your specific dynasty. If we didn't have matrilinial marriages, then only having daughters would likely mark the ruination of your game because you can not continue the game as a member of a different dynasty, period.

 

[Mikebloke]

One would assume that any man marrying 'upwards' that wasn't particularly power hungry himself would be happy for their children to inherit their Wife's higher status. While their lineage might only be recognised by her side, if your married into it and your children have the titles, you probably wouldn't care.

 

[Drakken]

Also, as far as I know matrilinear marriages are the only way to marry off male acknowledged bastards.

 

[morhange]

Matrilineal marriages are a gameplay mechanic, not an appeal to modern sensibilities.

Great post.

 

[Brannart]

Not the Middle-Ages, but the Hapsburgs as you know them today are actually the House of Lorraine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habsburg-Lorraine

 

[Pope Pius V]

This personal question and I understand if don't but where do you teach?

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to make it seem like I teach anything. I'm just saying I don't know much about the topic.

 

[Duke of Bavaria]

Not the Middle-Ages, but the Hapsburgs as you know them today are actually the House of Lorraine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habsburg-Lorraine

Yes i know , and as you said its the only signifacant case in history and not even the middle ages. And even back than it was a total cheat by those sneaky Austrians, winning the marriage game for hundreds of years then cheat when loosing it once.

Matrilineal marriages fit into the game like a dinosaur for me , i get that you say its nice to continue your dynasty , but i dont like it to continue it with something totally unhistorical like such a marriage or a dinosaur. ;-)

I just prefer a historical plausible game, i mean if a big blob runs over my single county somewhere maybe its game over too, still i dont want a tank reserve to help me out.

 

[Saulot]

Not the Middle-Ages, but the Hapsburgs as you know them today are actually the House of Lorraine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habsburg-Lorraine

Also, outside the time frame, but the House of Romanov in later years was the Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov Dynasty.

 

[Hidden Legend]

The house of Percy.

It started in Yorkshire and died in the male branch around the time they did a demesne swap to Northumberland and they kept the name Percy for those who inherited. 12th Century for the win.

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

They aren't totally ahistoric, although they didn't tend to be kings and powerful dukes contracting them.

Some minor noble houses would follow this if the dynasty was left with just daughters and no (close) male relatives. It could include a legal loophole where effectively the son in law took his father in laws name and arms, thus becoming for inheritance purposes his son. One would assume it took permission from the parliament or monarch in order to do so, since it involved inheritance of lands as well as titles and arms.

 

[Hidden Legend]

They didnt usually take the name more like accepted the inheritances. Examples being the Capets for different branches of the house i.e Burgundy, Brittany, Naples or people like John of Gaunt who was Duke of Lancaster in the second creation after marrying Blanche Plantagent of Lancaster a distant cousin and heiress. So that can be one way to keep it alive in game. Your agnate cousin is to far removed to inherit but with a Matralinial marriage they can.

It happened with the Valois a couple of times and the Hapsbergs tried it on in Spain to little success in the war of spanish succession but managed with the Austrian succession a little better.

 

[znrch]

Matrilineal marriages are a gameplay mechanic, not an appeal to modern sensibilities.

100% agreed.

 

[Duke of Bavaria]

Respct my historical sensibilities too please. ;-)

 

[Ruwaard]

The house of Percy.

It started in Yorkshire and died in the male branch around the time they did a demesne swap to Northumberland and they kept the name Percy for those who inherited. 12th Century for the win.

The one who inherited was IIRC Joscelin of Louvain/Leuven from the Brabant branch of the house of Reginar. He (at the time half brother of the queen (consort) of England) married the Percy heiress, although he and his successors did adopt the name Percy.

 

[Hidden Legend]

The one who inherited was IIRC Joscelin of Louvain/Leuven from the Brabant branch of the house of Reginar. He (at the time half brother of the queen (consort) of England) married the Percy heiress, alkthough he and his successors did adopt the name Percy.

You sir are full of win. +1

I would say it does happen then although the more typical was for another branch of the family to marry the female heiress as to keep it in both direct lines and hold a history. During the 15th and Sixteenth centuries both the main Royal House of Capet and several cadet branches did this.

It was also a famous happening when the first Burgundian Capet line died out only to marry the heiress to Philip the younger son of John II of France. Anjou/Napels did it a few times as well I think.

 

[xcrissxcrossx]

It surprises me how easy it is for a matrilineal marriage to go through. I think I wouldn't mind matrilineal marriages if male rulers weren't so eager to accept them.

 

[Hidden Legend]

Yes I wounder if there is a distinguishing differance in the game mechanic between the marriage types?

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

I've had refusals based on "Too high in succession" when trying matrilinear marriages. I'd guess from that there is a difference in how the AI view them.

I'd imagine Elective and Seniority rulers wouldn't mind so much, since you are not going to inherit their titles away.

 

[unmerged(12555)]

Just an example of a matrilineal marriage in medieval times:
This is taken from Wikipedia - In 1269 the Count of Ventimiglia, Gugliemo Pietro I Balbo married Eudossia Laskaris, daughter of Emperor Theodore II Laskaris and assumed his prestigious name. From them started the dynasty of the Lascaris of Tenda. They maintained the sovereign County of Tenda till 1501 when the last of them, Anna Lascaris, married Renato of Savoy (in French René de Savoie) and transferred the County to his cadet branch of Savoy dynasty. The most famous exponent of this branch of Lascaris was Beatrice of Tenda.

 

[Ash_Crow]

I'm not sure how often, but there were marriages that were on the condition that the husband would assume the name and arms of the father-in-law. They'd be used to preserve inheritances that were to X and the heirs of his name.

True. There should be the possibility to change the new husband's name on a matrilinear marriage.

I teach medieval history and I can't think of a single example...

The first I can think of is in 1404 when Jean de Montfort married the only daughter Guy XII de Laval, it was at the condition that he would then take the name of Guy XIII de Laval. IIRC, it happen several times in this family.