AHC: Create a New World aristocracy

The idea of a New World aristocracy, particularly with regards to the British colonies, has often come up in discussions of what might happen after a failed American Revolution. I have doubts that any such aristocracy would be stable.

But what about earlier?

The most plausible approach would be including noble titles with the colonial charters. An example would be if Charles II had made William Penn the Earl of Pennsylvania. The only difficulty would be that establishing hereditary New World titles would weaken the crown's control of colonies, something many European rulers would be reluctant to do. One solution might be reducing the size of the titles and having an appointed governor or administrator above them.

If a New World aristocracy emerged, what might be the consequences when the revolutions hit? Assuming they remained relevant, there are two paths I can see. One would be the aristocrats being loyalists to the crown, and consequently tossed out by the rebels (I certainly doubt that a New England aristocracy would survive). The other would be the aristocrats themselves leading the rebellions, resulting in a number of monarchies in the New World.
 
Where would these nobles belong? Under Charles II, who issued most of the big land grants (New York, Pennsylvania, Carolina), there were separate Houses of Lords for England, Scotland and Ireland.

I assume an American peer would have the right to sit in the English HoL, but that might differ from colony to colony. The creation of an American Parliament just to unite these American peers would be highly anachronistic, I think.

But how localized will it be, can it be? In british law, the Crown is the sole Fount of Honours. No one else can confer titles of nobility. So a Duke of Carolina could not create a Viscountcy of Pamlico. But the crown creating new titles inside the area formerly granted to someone else? Not good for the loyalty of the older peers.
Of course, if it is just picking a funny name and adding a title, that would work. After all, creating an earl of Wessex today does not mean that the holder has peculiar privileges or powers in certain parts of the West Country. But that would hardly be "creating a New World aristocracy" beyond the top layer. Most of the Lords Proprietors of New World grants had noble titles, anyway.

One rather strange option would be to revive the creation of palatine counties like Lancaster, Chester or Lancaster. Here, the rulers

were granted palatine ("from the palace", i.e. royal) powers within their territories, making these territories nearly sovereign jurisdictions with their own administrations and courts, largely independent of the king, though they owed allegiance to him. (Wikipedia)

Creating lower-ranked noble titles in connection with land grants for smaller tracts might be one of these special powers. But then there would probably titles that were not used in the peerage of England. Whatever strikes the monarch's fancy, like the right to appoint hereditary patricians, counts, lairds, margraves, whatever.
 
I was going to bring up the Lords Baltimore, till I realised that that title referred to Baltimore in Ireland, not in Maryland. :eek:

But, if you want a New World aristocracy, maybe you could have the colonial legislatures set up on the model of the English/British Parliament, with a (more-or-less) democratically elected House of Commons and a House of Lords. The Peers of each colony could then sit in the upper chamber of their respective colonial legislatures.
 

TinyTartar

Banned
Having a feudal control of land in England last longer, perhaps not weakened by the War of the Roses, might do the trick.

Remember that initially, French land in the New World in Quebec represented the feudal landscape it came from. The seigneurial system ruled, with ties to nobility, and a large castle was constructed in Quebec City.

To get this to happen in the English colonies, you need an England that stays in the Old Ways longer.
 
The most plausible approach would be including noble titles with the colonial charters. An example would be if Charles II had made William Penn the Earl of Pennsylvania. The only difficulty would be that establishing hereditary New World titles would weaken the crown's control of colonies, something many European rulers would be reluctant to do. One solution might be reducing the size of the titles and having an appointed governor or administrator above them.

The English crown has always had the power to create life peerages and those are not hereditary. It could simply do this in the colonies.

Or, they could just do what the Portugese did in Brazil, which didn't seem to create any undue instability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_nobility
 
If we include Latin American nobility (Spanish titles during the colonial period, as well as those issued by the Mexican, Haitian and Brazilian Empires), it's already a thing. If any of those monarchies survived (not impossible), then presumably their noble titles would remain, and more nobles would be created.
 
Mary I and Philip II have a child, and the colonization of English north America follows the pattern of New Spain and Peru; starting with military conquest, the colonizers ally with, rule over, and mix with the natives instead of displacing them wholesale. Prominent figures in the colonization of North America are given noble titles, and the Habsburg English Crown recognizes indigenous nobility.
 
I don't think like in Turtledove's Two Georges, the Kennedys will become aristocracy. They're Irish and a British Empire might discriminate against them more than OTL American society, depending on the policy and state of Ireland and rebellions there.

In Russian America, Rezanov died trying to get a dispensation to marry a Spanish aristocratic Don's daughter in California. Maybe keep him alive to marry and have it start a trend and a Spanish-Russian aristocracy could develop on the west coast.
 

TinyTartar

Banned
Well, you can argue the American South had an aristrocracy until the end of the ACW.

Not really. There were no titles, fiefs, or anything of the sort. The upper classes exercised their power by controlling land and agricultural production, which was a sign of aristocracy in Europe as well, but the political power did not come with it.

For true aristocracy, you need political and economic power based around land rather than trade (except in cases like Venice and the Italian Republics). The economic power was there, but the political was not.
 
As for a real POD:

The British win the ARW very late. As a result they are forced to give Hessian soldiers incredible amounts of land and many of those soldiers become knighted. These knights are seen by fellow upper echelons as higher in class and eventually an aristocracy is created.
 
I was going to bring up the Lords Baltimore, till I realised that that title referred to Baltimore in Ireland, not in Maryland. :eek:

They had multiple titles. Their preeminent titles were Baron of Baltimore, yes, but they did have American titles, actually. They were also the Earls Palatine of Maryland and Avalon.
 

So did Saybrook, I believe.

The fundamental problem is not so much getting American nobility to be declared, but getting it to mean anything. Nobility is fundamentally defined not by its membership, but by those who are excluded from membership and the privileges thereof. Any colony that effectively asserts the rights of its self-appointed nobility is going to be ignored as a destination by aspiring colonists, who can just as easily move somewhere that won't define them as an underclass.
 
I don't think like in Turtledove's Two Georges, the Kennedys will become aristocracy. They're Irish and a British Empire might discriminate against them more than OTL American society, depending on the policy and state of Ireland and rebellions there.

In Russian America, Rezanov died trying to get a dispensation to marry a Spanish aristocratic Don's daughter in California. Maybe keep him alive to marry and have it start a trend and a Spanish-Russian aristocracy could develop on the west coast.

Its been years since I read it, but didn't Turtledove have George Washington and many of the OTL founding fathers as noblemen? So, Lord George Washington? IIRC the plot also involved Sir Martin Luther King as the Governor General of North America and on his retirement he would be made into a life peer as was custom with former GGs.
 
Remember the story about George Washinton's officers offering to make him 'king' and him turning it down ? (it was the system most of them were familiar with, and not this new-fangled 'democracy' thing....)

So post Revolutionary War, what might a different outcome to that offer have led to ?
 
I think a minor pod could achieve this, you would just have to kill off a few democracy supporters and have more greedy figures take their places in fighting the revolution as they die (so no one event that kills all at once, rather one event that kills 1-2 and butterflys others to die early).

Then when everyone is talking at the constitutional convention, the idea of American Nobility comes up, and it ends up being integrated. Publicly, it's justified as a way to keep capitalism flowing and have an investing/officer class to maintain order and avoid mob rule. However privately the decision is by-and-large a power grab, with the initial nobles all being founding fathers who take the positions for influence and power.

I think there are many today and would be many more back then who would see society as needin "shepards" so I could see precedent in essentially making a cult of investors and war heroes.
 
Top