Aristocracy/Nobility/Gentry, History of

Abstract

These three terms embrace the elite groups originally connected with land ownership. They have been used to describe different social types, chiefly in Europe. However, along with ‘court,’ ‘king,’ ‘prince,’ etc., they are being used for description of very diverse tribal (African or Asian) systems of social stratification and power. This entry will concentrate on Europe with explicative forays to other parts. Much depends upon the language in use. In the British usage, ‘nobility’ equals ‘aristocracy’; the term ‘gentry’ being used for the landowners without hereditary titles. This does not necessarily fit the continent of Europe, where in early modern times ‘the noble’ corresponds rather to the English ‘squire’ than to the ‘aristocrat’ (Cooper 1970). All these terms (and their numerous synonymies, like Ritter, Ritterschaft) have been value-charged, often strongly, but not necessarily and not always positively, such as ‘workers aristocracy.’ The terms in question change with time: they are losing their value (such as common use of ‘Sir,’ ‘Esq.’) and follow social changes and customs. There follow sections on: seclusion of the aristocracy (and/or nobility); interplay of ‘immemorial origins,’ ‘old riches,’ and ‘royal grace’ in the reproduction process of the traditional elites; ‘patricians’ as an urban aristocracy; dérogeance and various patterns of behavior of landed and urban elites; traditional values; inheritance and preservation mechanisms of landed elites; their relations to other estates and classes; the patronage (political and cultural); the royal household; orders of chivalry; growth of the modern state, traditional elites and state service; and the twilight of the aristocracy in the industrial society; its adaptability to new conditions; aristocratic preserves.