The problem of leadership succession is perennial; the death of the ruler poses a significant threat to the stability of any polity. Arranging for a peaceful and orderly succession has been a formidable challenge in most historical societies, and it continues to be a test that modern authoritarian regimes regularly face and often fail. There is in practice no optimal solution to the problem of who should succeed the ruler, at least not when power is vested in one person. The absence of a successor causes uncertainty and plotting; the existence of one creates another centre of power, with dangerous implications.
This book documents how successions have historically been moments of violence and insecurity: The succession wars known from European history are simply the tip of the iceberg. But the book also shows that the development and spread of primogeniture—the eldest-son-taking-the-throne—mitigated the problem of succession in Europe in the period after AD 1000. Primogeniture presented a reasonable compromise that in ‘normal’ circumstances allowed for an orderly transfer of power while minimizing threats to the incumbent ruler. In a long-term historical perspective, father-to-son successions—in the context of hereditary monarchy—therefore created political stability and facilitated state-formation. Today, representative democracy does the same, but in a very different way where frequent rotations in power and guarantees against the misuse of power are used to lessen the stakes of leadership succession.
Table of Contents:
- Introduction
- The Politics of Succession
- Conceptual Framework and Data
- The Origins and Spread of Primogeniture
- Civil War and International War
- Leader Depositions
- The Development of Parliaments
- Family and Dynasty
- The Politics of Succession in Comparative Perspective
- Conclusions
