While the percentage of female heads of state in the world has increased from below one per cent in the 1960s to around ten per cent in the 2010s, a female president or prime minister still remains the exception. Recent scholarship has proposed a number of institutional and contingent explanations behind this phenomenon but there exist important gaps. The contribution of this paper is threefold. First, because the phenomenon of female leadership is still a rare occurrence, we argue that this fact must be accounted for in empirical modeling. Second, we rely on the most comprehensive data to systematically examine differences in personal, education and career background between female and all male leaders from 1960--2010. We find that women are as experienced as men. Third, we develop the widow's mandate argument further: lacking personal networks and connections, many initial female heads of state tend to acquire the necessary resources, support, and name recognition for their efforts through political dynasties. However, the importance of such connections crucially depend on the institutionalization of female participation in politics. Furthermore, we test for alternative explanations that include demonstration effects, cultural norms, and the so-called ``glass cliff" effect.
