The British Monarchy

Post Reply New Topic

missed my point. To be an aristocrat (in the continental European context) genes are just one factor, you also need good upbringing to be "well breed":

It's like pedigree dogs, they not only have to "be pure" (dog breeders amusingly sound very similar to nazis) but they have to be bought up (well trained) otherwise they are not "high born".

Pedigree humans have to be nurtured in the rareified atmosphere of a palatial estate far from the peasants, go to the best elite boarding schools and only the top exclusive universities. Only socialise and work with fellow aristocrats and of course have inheritance.

If this sounds vaguely familiar to Americans because their society evolved from a master-servant-slave structure for several centuries.

None of the people on my father's side were slaveowners----or would have countenanced slaveowners.

They were fairly wealthy until about 1877 or so----when the Panic of 1877 took away much of their money. They might have had "servants"---but they certainly wasn't any thought of an "aristocracy."

My mother's side were peasants from Belarus who were urbanized somewhat by the late 19th century. They would have been your typical urban artisans----sort of like Tevye in "Fiddler on the Roof." They were Jewish. They were part of the "huddled masses" as depicted in that famous poem which is etched on the Statue of Liberty. My great-grandfather came here in the late 19th century. He sent for the rest of the family in 1910. They lived in tenements in Manhattan, and later the Bronx.

My family certainly weren't aristocrats either