> Women of the peerage This was relatively rare though and most peerages would never have legally passed to women. Especially if the woman had a brother, the p

> Women of the peerage This was relatively rare though and most peerages would never have legally passed to women. Especially if the woman had a brother, the peerages that could have, would have passed to their brothers instead. > Their brothers lose their bids to enter parliament afaik at that time, if you had a peerage with the right to enter the house of lords, you could go at any time. I can imagine a scenario that could fit here. The woman's marriage to a poorer man caused a break up of the estate as a dowry which left her brothers less well off and unable to afford the social standing to acquire peerages in their own name. Her brothers, plural, can't all inherit a peerage, only one of them could. Likewise if her brothers planned to enter the House of Commons. Or maybe her husband chose to represent the location? The way the article is worded it feels like there is a confusion between the House of Commons and House of Lords. It's also possible the conclusion is just a non sequitur and the marriages of the rich women to poorer men had nothing to do with state education and this was just a correlation.