| Question Home |
Position:Home>History> Founding Brothers: Revolutionary Generation Question?Question: Founding Brothers: Revolutionary Generation Question!? On pg!. 13 it says "America's first, and in many respects, only natural aristocracy!." Ellis [the writer of the book] is referring to the founding fathers!. I don't understand this statement and it is a question on my summer homework!. I didn't think the founding fathers had any relation and therefore were not part of an 'aristocracy'!. Maybe I am taking this too literally!. What do you all think that quotation means!?Www@QuestionHome@Com
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: As to the "founding brothers"- try to think of it in the same respect as military men being called "brothers in arms"!. The founding fathers were brothers in a sense that they were all committed to the same cause!. If it failed they lost everything!. The only way I can think of them being an aristocracy is possibly because they were the most influential men from their states!.Www@QuestionHome@Com Ellis borrows the term "natural aristocracy" from T!. Jefferson, who remarked that one consequence of liberty was to allow men to reach their full potentials!. Hence democracy would yield a "natural aristocracy" of leaders!. Jefferson used the word in the older, Greek sense, "aristoi" means best, the man superior by nature, not by birth, fortune, title, or any other artificial distinction!. The Founders were remarkable in their common, deep appreciation of liberal education; they knew the classics as well as modern, contemporary thinkers!. This shared knowledge, and devotion to saving democracy from its bad reputation as mob rule, made them--relative to earlier political thinkers and political leaders--a natural aristocracy among free men!.Www@QuestionHome@Com The natural aristocracy means that the main leaders of the Revolution were men of wealth and property who had risen to positions of importance and influence without the benefit of inherited titles (although many in fact were inheritors of land and wealth and connected to the aristocracy still extant in England)!. Franklin is still the best example of a self made man, the ideal rag to riches through industriousness, intelligence, perseverance and the occasional connection through the 'good old boy network!.' The leaders were the natural aristocracy through personal merit, personal effort, not family ties!. Equally important, they were recognized as such and holders of English titles in the colonies were often held in contempt- many choose not to flaunt their titles once they got 'the lay of the land!.'Www@QuestionHome@Com Because the founding brothers were land owners and rich they were the ruling class of the nation!. Therefore they were considered aristocracy, not because they were noble, but because they controlled the economy and the nation!. Every body else was considered a common man!. Most of them were farmers and didn't have time to dwell on philosophy and running for office!. also, the first landowners came from the nobles in England!. Many of them retained their titles!. I don't know if this answers your question but at least it's interesting!.Www@QuestionHome@Com The concept of a "natural aristocracy" needs to be viewed as a contrast to the "hereditary aristocracy" that marked England and most of Europe!. "Aristocracy" itself was not viewed as the enemy of liberty; indeed, many of our founding fathers feared "the mob" as much as, if not more, than the stultifying impact of hereditary control!.Www@QuestionHome@Com In pre-revolutionary times America was still a sovereign state and held by British ways and standards!. Calling the founding father aristocracy would have been correct!. Men who performed such noble deeds as they would have been awarded titles back in England but given the situation they would have been hung for treason if the Revolutionary war had gone the other way!.Www@QuestionHome@Com You are taking it too literally!. The aristocracy in Europe were the monied land owning class, therefore the "first aristocracy" in America were the founding fathers who all were land owners!.!.!.well except Madison who lived at home well into his 30's!. Jefferson, Washington, Hamilton, Adams, Franklin were all very wealthy land owning politicians!.Www@QuestionHome@Com Well, it is too late to think about this too much, but I can get you started with this much!. America was founded on the basis that there would be no social classes!. Therefore there would be no aristocracy or pheasants!. The quote is not based on relations, but on the fact that they were the group of men who "founded" America in writing, theories, and in battle!. Good luck!.Www@QuestionHome@Com Founding Fathers : Fathers of the Nation Founding Brothers: Brothers in the battle (Brothers as children of the revolution, etc!.!.!.) And a lot of them were related to each other!. It's actually kind of crazy how many of them were related!. However, some were only relations like 5th cousins 7 times removed, but nonetheless!.Www@QuestionHome@Com I don't understand that qiestoinWww@QuestionHome@Com |