I'm only 2 minutes in but the idea that nobility in the Middle ages throughout Europe did not marry save the oldest brother is factually incorrect. There were cases like that but it was not the norm and when it was the case it was normally because the brother had been given to the church
I think what the professor was trying to say is that the 1st brother/son inherited the estate. For all intents and purposes. The second brother/son or the third would go into the clergy or the military. This was literally the standard for elite English families well into the 20th Century.
@@adamwsaxe and that would still be incorrect unless you're referring to a specific time periods . Further you were making a generalization when there were exceptions and even with a nobility that was generally only the upper strands. This is the issue with generalizations were you say something nuance that is true it becomes not true
I'm only 2 minutes in but the idea that nobility in the Middle ages throughout Europe did not marry save the oldest brother is factually incorrect. There were cases like that but it was not the norm and when it was the case it was normally because the brother had been given to the church
I think what the professor was trying to say is that the 1st brother/son inherited the estate. For all intents and purposes. The second brother/son or the third would go into the clergy or the military. This was literally the standard for elite English families well into the 20th Century.
@@adamwsaxe and that would still be incorrect unless you're referring to a specific time periods . Further you were making a generalization when there were exceptions and even with a nobility that was generally only the upper strands. This is the issue with generalizations were you say something nuance that is true it becomes not true