Nobility in America?

Quick question.

Presume that the 1770s crisis in the American colonies is resolved amicably, without a war, and the colonies remain in the Empire. Would titles of nobility come to America, or would it have developed its own quasi-republican political culture?
 
I can't see any amicable resolution without a change of attitude on the part of the British elites towards the colonies to recognize that the people there are not second-class subjects whose raison d'etre is servicing the Mother Country. Which means that the colonial elites would have to be integrated into British imperial structure, which means that there will be titles of nobility.
 
Not sure why they'd need titles of nobility to be less-than-second-class. Did Canadians get titles of nobility?
 
Not sure why they'd need titles of nobility to be less-than-second-class. Did Canadians get titles of nobility?

One counterpoint is that we're dealing with the 1770s vs. the 1860s. Not only is that nearly a hundred more years for a Canadian political culture to grow, but Britain itself was rapidly becoming more democratic.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but food for thought.
 
Something to chew on, yes. But the point is, if the British could treat the Canadians acceptably enough to keep Canada without granting them titles, why do Americans need titles?

As I understand it, the second class citizen thing is All Britons > Americans, not English Lords > Americans.
 
Something to chew on, yes. But the point is, if the British could treat the Canadians acceptably enough to keep Canada without granting them titles, why do Americans need titles?

As I understand it, the second class citizen thing is All Britons > Americans, not English Lords > Americans.

I guess that's mrmandias' point - for the colonies to stay, we'd have to change the order to English nobility > American elites > English commoners > American commoners. I don't know if I agree yet that titles would be necessary, but it's a good point.
 
Maybe in some parts of the country, but a lot of the people in New England came specifically to get away from nobility (well, and Catholics. But mostly nobility :D )
 
Even in the 1770s, weren't most new titles of nobility just victory titles, or titles bestowed onto royal children (not the types likely to want to move to the Americas). There weren't really any regular titles being created otherwise - there was no particular desire in this era to expand the nobility.
 
I thought there were some Americans who did receive titles of nobility, who then immediately moved to London, to be at court.
 
I thought there were some Americans who did receive titles of nobility, who then immediately moved to London, to be at court.

Hmmm, I wasn't aware of that. According to wiki, the only peer in America at the time was Lord Fairfax. I know Galloway and Arnold, to name a two, never received titles.
 
Although charters can be rewritten, one problem is that most of the colonial charters specifically forbade titles of nobility. Only New York and the Carolinas did not.

It's hard to see how this could come out of the same conflicts that led to the ARW. Parliament isn't going to stand for a separate House of Lords in America, and if there's only one House of British Lords that meets in London, titled persons born in America are just going to move back to the Home Islands.
 
Although charters can be rewritten, one problem is that most of the colonial charters specifically forbade titles of nobility. Only New York and the Carolinas did not.

It's hard to see how this could come out of the same conflicts that led to the ARW. Parliament isn't going to stand for a separate House of Lords in America, and if there's only one House of British Lords that meets in London, titled persons born in America are just going to move back to the Home Islands.

Well, the logical justification of the House of Lords way, way, way back was to have a governing house full of men who were landed (and therefor wealthy [and therefor educated]). That's what the original significance of titles was - not an extra thing to announce when you arrive at court but actual precidence over a patch of earth that could potentially make you wealthy. It's just that after half a millenium the link between land and wealth went and faded. Titles had a social value of their own, and so were worth getting even without land. Since most people who would receive them would already have land of their own, it was even in their interest to avoid grants on the opposite side of the country.

Still, IIRC, there remained on many estates privileges to the land in question. Exemption from property taxes was one of the latter day ones, although it's now disappeared completely. Since virtually any American granted a title of nobility would be landed, the natural thing in creating a new nobility would be to extend them the same sort of rights on their property, or even give them a further land grant.

Most new nobles would indeed quickly emigrate to London, but if they were landed, their families might stay behind. At the very least, they'll have a hired man running the place or collecting rent from tenants. Such people would have at least some degree of vested interest in America and be a true "American nobility." It occurs to me that the smart ones would stay in touch with events back home and function as mouthpieces for the first families in their province. The extent to which this happens would determine how the institution would last. On the one hand, these people are effectively the first representation of America in Parliament. On the other, few will be terribly enamored of men who become ennobled and immediately ship off to England.

As for American anti-noble feeling.... Well, keep in mind that by the mid-1700s the colonies were each run by a fairly small number of well-to-do families anyway. They're certainly not going to be opposed to getting more official status.
 
Top