Nobility Essay (Grade B+)

WERE EUROPE'S LANDOWNING SOCIAL ELITES - NOBLES, PRIVILEDGED, GENTRY - INCREASING OR DECREASING IN POWER DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY? (REFER TO AT LEAST TWO COUNTRIES OR REGIONS)

For many years historians neglected the European nobility. They were seen as a declining social group, one whose power and influence had been taken by the rising middle class. The social status held by the nobility was described as being in steady decline ever since widespread destruction during the seventeenth century as well as the enlightenment and industrial revolution of the eighteenth century.

The nobility held a very dominant position at the beginning of the eighteenth century; although small in numbers (1-2% of the population) it dominated society and had done so ever since the Middle Ages. The nobility had originated as the second of three estates or social groups; they were the fighting class who protected the other groups in 18th century society, the praying class and the working class. The nobility's origin could be seen in words describing them, such as chevalier in French . In return for their service nobles were granted land as well as social and political privileges. Over time the nobility evolved into a distinct social group.

The nobility classified themselves as different from the rest of society, enjoying a distinct lifestyle that enabled them to be classified as noble. But it was often hard to tell exactly who was a noble. Some members enjoyed titles such as Duke, Count or Squire but the majority had only their privileges and their lifestyle to show that they were different from the rest of society. A very small minority of nobles in England had official titles (around 100-200 out of a nobility of many thousands .)

The nature and make-up of the nobility varied throughout Europe. Military states such as Spain, as well as countries in the east had a greater number of nobles than countries in Western Europe. Up to 10% of the population in Spain had noble status while this figure was as low as 1-2% in Britain and France . In Britain there was no real noble order at all; only the peers enjoyed any official status although the gentry, which was far larger than the peerage, enjoyed privileges in the form of patronage. This made them a similar social status to the nobility throughout the rest of Europe .

In Britain the nobility's political power was especially strong, although their formal powers as landowners were non-existent. This contrasted with the east and with absolutist nations where the nobility held little political power due to the nature of government, but held immense land-owning powers right through the eighteenth, nineteenth and even into the twentieth centuries. Prince Swarzenberg of the Austrian empire held an immense estate of 360,000 acres . In a society where wealth was measured by the amount of land owned it is clear the nobility was a powerful force in Europe.

During the 18th century major transformations took place in the structure of society as well as in other areas such as scientific, economic and industrial development. Great political changes such as the French Revolution meant that the traditional country noble had to change their lifestyle. Many moved to the cities following the migration trends of other social groups. This was a significant change for the nobility as they had traditionally acquired their social status through their ownership of land in rural areas. As the eighteenth century progressed wealth became more important than social status due to the consumer and industrial revolutions. The revolutions brought the classes closer together, as the poor were able to afford certain commodities that had previously been unattainable .

The nobility had to adjust to the changing world around them and in many ways they did strikingly well. The nobility benefited from their capacity to adapt and they were able to continue their dominance over society (especially in the case of Britain where the nobility enjoyed enduring social and political power ). After the industrial revolution the richest people in Europe were the nobility, in a similar position to the one they had prospered in for centuries.

The large variety of social systems throughout Europe makes it difficult to generalise that overall the nobility's influence was increasing or in decline. Several examples illustrate how the nobility continued to dominate European society during the eighteenth century. High political and military offices were monopolised by the nobility, who provided most of the politicians and generals at this time. Because of their dominance, the nobility became a very resilient group who were 'repeatedly able to withstand apparently overwhelming historical forces' . England is an example of extreme continuance of power held by the nobility as parliaments in the nineteenth century were some of the most aristocratic in British history. .

The French nobility which was also very resilient, numbered 200,000 out of a population of 24-26 million and managed to survive 'a full frontal assault in the form of the French revolution' . Even though many members of the French nobility were killed and had their fortunes damaged during the anti-aristocratic revolt, the majority of nobles were left alone with their fortunes untouched. As a result, the social order in France during the nineteenth century reflected that of the eighteenth century even though a revolution had occurred.

In France and Britain, as well as the rest of central Europe the nobility is said to have 'maintained its power and prestige throughout the eighteenth century' . The nobility was apparently 'as firmly in control at the end of the period (c.1800) as they were at the beginning of the period (c.1400) and possibly even more so' . However there were exceptions in some parts of Europe. In Poland Lithuania the nobility lost leadership and prestige, but this was an exception and was due to special political circumstances. In Denmark the nobility was in a slow decline, although this was not evident until the nineteenth century and culminated in the abolishment of noble privilege in 1848 .

The continual evidence of the nobility was most evident in central and eastern Europe where over half the administrative posts in German states were held by nobles. This continuity of noble power was possible because of the strong positions held either in administration or in society by members of the elite. Over 90% of Russian officers in the 1850s were members of the nobility . This influence was maintained right up until 1917 in Russia.

But then all of these examples and conclusions drawn by various historians seem to demand a reason. If the world was changing so rapidly how could the nobility maintain or possibly increase the power that it held? It was historically assumed that the nobility was in decline, so why is a different conclusion now being drawn?

Many of the initial pre-conceptions about the decline in the nobility came from the nobles themselves. Throughout the period nobles from all over Europe were reported to have complained that their power was not what it used to be. An image of crisis and decay was developed around the nobility because of these reports. This image was exaggerated by some cases of misfortune among the lower levels of the nobility. These minor cases often attracted the attention of social observers even though they were an exception to the norm.

The nobility was able to operate quite independently of the rest of society due to their lifestyle. As a result of their independence they were not necessarily carried along by the changes taking place during the 18th century that would have otherwise led to their decline.

The nobility survived many shocks through adaptation, which was either in the form of a change in the structure and function of the nobility, or a change in the way that the nobility was perceived through the eyes of the historian. Even though some power previously held through social status was lost, that influence was restored to an even higher level through economic influence, which now became the nobility's key to power. Throughout Europe and in France particularly, the nobility fulfilled a new administrative and political role. 'The noble who helped the king manage his realm became more common as the eighteenth century wore on' .

The influence of the land owning social elite either remained stable or increased during the 18th century. Even though a wide variety of cultures and political systems in Europe meant that a few of the nobles lost their influence, this was not the trend throughout Europe as a whole. The nobility remained dominant in Europe because of its ability to adapt to the changing conditions of the era. By becoming more economically based in their power rather than socially based, the nobility could benefit from the change in society. It would take the destruction of the First World War to end their influence.

By Joshua Arbury (I.D. no. 2522603).

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Dewald, Jonathan. The European Nobility, 1400-1800, Cambridge, 1996. pp.1,4,10,14

Doyle, William. The Old European Order, 1600-1800, Oxford, 1992. p.74

McKendrick, Neil. Brewer, John. Plumb, J.H. The Birth of a Consumer Society, Bloomington, 1982. p.11.

Scott, H.M., The European Nobilities in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, 2 vols., London, 1995. Vol. 1, p.9. Vol. 2, pp. 274,276.