The 4th century BCE Greek philosopher Aristotle once wrote in his essay Politics, “If liberty and equality…are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost.” Regrettably for Rome, when the Etruscan king was finally ousted in 509 BCE, the aristocratic families of the city - the patricians - seized control of the government and created a republic, but a republic in name only. The noble patricians considered themselves privileged and better capable of ruling; certain people were born to lead and others were destined to follow. The majority of the citizens, the plebians, were denied any part in how, or by whom, they were ruled.
During the rule of the Etruscan kings, the patricians (the word comes from the Latin patres meaning “fathers”) owned most of the land, and while there were many wealthy plebians (a word meaning “the many”), a handful of patrician families rose to become advisors and warlords to the king, although some historians argue that even the king may not have always been a patrician. For decades to come, all patrician families could trace their ancestry to these original clans. Among these were the Claudii, the Julii or the Cornelii. This natural born right, the right to govern, became hereditary and thereby allowed the patricians to distinguish themselves from those they considered a lower class. With the advent of the republic, the patricians sought to maintain this hold on governmental power.
The patricians realized they needed the plebians more than the plebians need them and decided to relinquish some, but not all, authority.
This new government was truly unique and, in all appearances, representative. There was a centuriate assembly or Comitia Centuriate, a Senate, and two co-consuls. The latter were elected by the assembly for a one-year term but had the power of a king. All of this was open only to the patricians and only concerned their welfare. This extreme authority allowed them to sustain both their economic and political status, but this was not the only method used to suppress the plebians. Another way was through the priesthood - something they would control for years to come. Religion had always been an integral part of a Roman citizen’s life, and one method of suppressing any possible rebellion among the plebians was for the patricians to maintain their role as the “gatekeepers to the gods.” They dominated both the college of priests and the position of pontifex maximus. The patricians simply claimed to have special knowledge of the gods and therefore served as custodians of religious law with authority to punish offenders.
Unfortunately for the patricians, this dominance would and could not last. There had always been little, if any, relationship between the two classes - by law they were even forbidden to intermarry. The patricians gradually began to lose control when many of the more wealthy plebians wished to secure some voice in the government, threatening, more than once, to leave Rome. As the majority of the Roman citizenry, the plebians were a diverse group. They were the urban poor, wealthy farmers, tradesmen, as well as the core of the Republican army. The menial positions of tradesman or craftsman were never considered a job for a patrician; he believed he was better suited for leadership positions in politics, law, or the army. However, the patricians realized they needed the plebians more than the plebians need them and decided to relinquish some, but not all, authority. Unfortunately, this battle between the two classes would continue for decades to come.
This threat to abandon the city eventually brought about a compromise: the Conflict or Struggle of Orders, an agreement between the two classes that allowed the plebians to have a voice in government. The Concilium Plebis or Council of the Plebs, a legislative assembly that would make laws relative to the concerns of the plebians, was created in 494 BCE. Over two centuries later, in 287 BCE, the Lex Hortensia was passed, making all laws enacted by the plebian assembly binding to all citizens, patricians included. Initially, two officials or tribunes were elected by the Council to act on behalf of the plebians, but this number was later increased to ten. However, the creation of the Council was not enough. Without any law code in place, the plebians feared possible abuses by the patricians, so a series of laws, the Twelve Tables, was enacted in 450 BCE. These laws proved to be the foundation for Roman justice; one law that remained, and was later discarded, was the prohibition against intermarriage between the two classes.
The Roman author and historian Livy wrote in his History of Rome of the patricians’ concern for maintaining the purity of their class:
… a tribune of the plebs, introduced a law with regard to the intermarriage of patricians and plebeians. The patricians considered that their blood would be contaminated by it and the special rights of the houses thrown into confusion. Then the plebeians … brought in a measure empowering the people to elect consuls from the plebeians or the patricians as they chose. The patricians believed that, if this were carried, the supreme power would not only be degraded … but would entirely pass away from the chief men in the State into the hands of the plebs.
This latter concern was not so easily dismissed by either side. Gradually, as time passed, laws were relaxed, allowing plebians to become consuls, the first one elected in 367 BCE.
As the plebians began to obtain more and more control of their own government, several of them rose to the level of a dictator, a position that allowed an individual to assume supreme power in times of an emergency. Tiberius Gracchus, a 2nd century BCE tribune whose mother was a patrician, proposed land should be given freely to the poor and unemployed farmers, an idea not widely popular to many of the wealthy patricians in the Senate. Tiberius was killed, along with 300 of his followers. His brother Gaius would fair no better. In 81 BCE, Sulla, another tribune, rose to power, also assuming the title of dictator. One of his first moves was to eliminate all opposition, executing over 1500 patricians, although some chose to commit suicide in order to allow their families to keep their wealth; an executed individual would have relinquished all wealth to Sulla.
As time passed the patrician class still maintained some influence within the government, largely due to their wealth and land ownership. Unfortunately, the old idea of birthright changed; identity with the old clans was no longer valid. Julius Caesar established new patricians from the plebian class in order to strengthen his power. Emperor Augustus also named new patrician families in an attempt to create a revitalized sense of morality within the empire, along with loyalty to the state cults. He reestablished the old priestly colleges (naming himself pontifex maximus) and rebuilt old temples and shrines. And, while the patrician class would exist long into the Byzantine Empire, it was not the same as the small group of families who established the Republic. Emperor Constantine would use the term “patrician” only as a title. The original patricians’ attempt at controlling the power within the Republic had been short-lived, for the plebians chose to rise up and demand a voice. As Aristotle stated, a democracy or a republic can only truly exist when all people participate.
"Nobles" redirects here. For other uses, see Nobles (disambiguation).
Nobility is a social class in aristocracy, normally ranked immediately under royalty, that possesses more acknowledged privileges and higher social status than most other classes in a society and with membership thereof typically being hereditary. The privileges associated with nobility may constitute substantial advantages over or relative to non-nobles, or may be largely honorary (e.g., precedence), and vary by country and era. The Medieval chivalric motto "noblesse oblige", meaning literally "nobility obligates", explains that privileges carry a lifelong obligation of duty to uphold various social responsibilities of, e.g., honorable behavior, customary service, or leadership roles or positions, that lives on by a familial or kinship bond.
Membership in the nobility and the prerogatives thereof have been historically acknowledged or regulated by a monarch or government and thereby distinguished from other sectors of a nation's upper class wherein wealth, lifestyle, or affiliation may be the salient markers of membership. Nobility per se has nonetheless rarely constituted a closed caste; acquisition of sufficient power, wealth, military prowess, or royal favour has enabled commoners with varying frequency to ascend into the nobility.
There is often a variety of ranks within the noble class. Legal recognition of nobility has been more common in monarchies, but nobility also existed in such regimes as the Dutch Republic (1581–1795), the Republic of Genoa (1005–1815), the Republic of Venice (697–1797), and the Old Swiss Confederacy (1300–1798), and remains part of the legal social structure of some non-hereditary regimes, e.g., San Marino and the Vatican City in Europe.
Hereditary titles often distinguish nobles from non-nobles, although in many nations most of the nobility have been un-titled, and a hereditary title need not ipso facto indicate nobility (e.g., vidame). Some countries have had non-hereditary nobility, such as the Empire of Brazil.
The term derives from Latin nobilitas, the abstract noun of the adjective nobilis ("well-known, famous, notable"). In ancient Roman society, nobiles originated as an informal designation for the political governing class who had allied interests, including both patricians and plebeian families(gentes) with an ancestor who had risen to the consulship through his own merit (see novus homo, "new man").
In modern usage, "nobility" is applied to the highest social class in pre-modern societies, excepting the ruling dynasty. In the feudal system (in Europe and elsewhere), the nobility were generally those who held a fief, often land or office, under vassalage, i.e., in exchange for allegiance and various, mainly military, services to a suzerain, who might be a higher-ranking nobleman or a monarch. It rapidly came to be seen as a hereditary caste, sometimes associated with a right to bear a hereditary title and, for example in pre-revolutionary France, enjoying fiscal and other privileges.
While noble status formerly conferred significant privileges in most jurisdictions, by the 21st century it had become a largely honorary dignity in most societies, although a few, residual privileges may still be preserved legally (e.g., Netherlands, Spain, UK) and some Asian, Pacific and African cultures continue to attach considerable significance to formal hereditary rank or titles. (Compare the entrenched position and leadership expectations of the nobility of the Kingdom of Tonga.)
Nobility is a historical, social and often legal notion, differing from high socio-economic status in that the latter is mainly based on income, possessions or lifestyle. Being wealthy or influential cannot ipso facto make one noble, nor are all nobles wealthy or influential (aristocratic families have lost their fortunes in various ways, and the concept of the 'poor nobleman' is almost as old as nobility itself).
Various republics, including former Iron Curtain countries, Greece, Mexico, and Austria have expressly abolished the conferral and use of titles of nobility for their citizens. This is distinct from countries which have not abolished the right to inherit titles, but which do not grant legal recognition or protection to them, such as Germany and Italy, although Germany recognizes their use as part of the legal surname. Still other countries and authorities allow their use, but forbid attachment of any privilege thereto, e.g., Finland, Norway and the European Union, while French law also protects lawful titles against usurpation.
Although many societies have a privileged upper class with substantial wealth and power, the status is not necessarily hereditary and does not entail a distinct legal status, nor differentiated forms of address.
Not all of the benefits of nobility derived from noble status per se. Usually privileges were granted or recognised by the monarch in association with possession of a specific title, office or estate. Most nobles' wealth derived from one or more estates, large or small, that might include fields, pasture, orchards, timberland, hunting grounds, streams, etc. It also included infrastructure such as castle, well and mill to which local peasants were allowed some access, although often at a price. Nobles were expected to live "nobly", that is, from the proceeds of these possessions. Work involving manual labour or subordination to those of lower rank (with specific exceptions, such as in military or ecclesiastic service) was either forbidden (as derogation from noble status) or frowned upon socially. On the other hand, membership in the nobility was usually a prerequisite for holding offices of trust in the realm and for career promotion, especially in the military, at court and often the higher functions in the government, judiciary and church.
Prior to the French Revolution, European nobles typically commanded tribute in the form of entitlement to cash rents or usage taxes, labour or a portion of the annual crop yield from commoners or nobles of lower rank who lived or worked on the noble's manor or within his seigneurial domain. In some countries, the local lord could impose restrictions on such a commoner's movements, religion or legal undertakings. Nobles exclusively enjoyed the privilege of hunting. In France, nobles were exempt from paying the taille, the major direct tax. Peasants were not only bound to the nobility by dues and services, but the exercise of their rights was often also subject to the jurisdiction of courts and police from whose authority the actions of nobles were entirely or partially exempt. In some parts of Europe the right of private war long remained the privilege of every noble.
During the early Renaissance, duelling established the status of a respectable gentleman, and was an accepted manner of resolving disputes. According to Ariel Roth, during the reign of Henry IV, over 4,000 French aristocrats were killed in duels "in an eighteen-year period" whilst a twenty-year period of Louis XIII's reign saw some eight thousand pardons for "murders associated with duels".
Since the end of World War I the hereditary nobility entitled to special rights has largely been abolished in the Western World as intrinsically discriminatory, and discredited as inferior in efficiency to individual meritocracy in the allocation of societal resources. Nobility came to be associated with social rather than legal privilege, expressed in a general expectation of deference from those of lower rank. By the 21st century even that deference had become increasingly minimised.
In France, a seigneurie (lordship) might include one or more manors surrounded by land and villages subject to a noble's prerogatives and disposition. Seigneuries could be bought, sold or mortgaged. If erected by the crown into, e.g., a barony or countship, it became legally entailed for a specific family, which could use it as their title. Yet most French nobles were untitled ("seigneur of Montagne" simply meant ownership of that lordship but not, if one was not otherwise noble, the right to use a title of nobility, as commoners often purchased lordships). Only a member of the nobility who owned a countship was allowed, ipso facto, to style himself as its comte, although this restriction came to be increasingly ignored as the ancien régime drew to its close.
In other parts of Europe, sovereign rulers arrogated to themselves the exclusive prerogative to act as fons honorum within their realms. For example, in the United Kingdom royal letters patent are necessary to obtain a title of the peerage, which also carries nobility and formerly a seat in the House of Lords, but never came without automatic entail of land nor rights to the local peasants' output.
Rank within the nobility
Main article: Royal and noble ranks
Nobility might be either inherited or conferred by a fons honorum. It is usually an acknowledged preeminence that is hereditary, i.e. the status descends exclusively to some or all of the legitimate, and usually male-line, descendants of a nobleman. In this respect, the nobility as a class has always been much more extensive than the primogeniture-based titled nobility, which included peerages in France and in the United Kingdom, grandezas in Portugal and Spain, and some noble titles in Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, Prussia and Scandinavia. In Russia, Scandinavia and non-Prussian Germany, titles usually descended to all male-line descendants of the original titleholder, including females. In Spain, noble titles are now equally heritable by females and males. Noble estates, on the other hand, gradually came to descend by primogeniture in much of western Europe aside from Germany. In Eastern Europe, by contrast, with the exception of a few Hungarian estates, they usually descended to all sons or even all children
In France, some wealthy bourgeois, most particularly the members of the various parlements, were ennobled by the king, constituting the noblesse de robe. The old nobility of landed or knightly origin, the noblesse d'épée, increasingly resented the influence and pretensions of this parvenu nobility. In the last years of the ancien régime the old nobility pushed for restrictions of certain offices and orders of chivalry to noblemen who could demonstrate that their lineage had extended "quarterings", i.e. several generations of noble ancestry, to be eligible for offices and favors at court along with nobles of medieval descent, although historians such as William Doyle have disputed this so-called "Aristocratic Reaction". Various court and military positions were reserved by tradition for nobles who could "prove" an ancestry of at least seize quartiers (16 quarterings), indicating exclusively noble descent (as displayed, ideally, in the family's coat of arms) extending back five generations (all 16 great-great grandparents).
This illustrates the traditional link in many countries between heraldry and nobility; in those countries where heraldry is used, nobles have almost always been armigerous, and have used heraldry to demonstrate their ancestry and family history. However, heraldry has never been restricted to the noble classes in most countries, and being armigerous does not necessarily demonstrate nobility. Scotland, however, is an exception. In a number of recent cases in Scotland the Lord Lyon King of Arms has controversially (vis-à-vis Scotland's Salic law) granted the arms and allocated the chiefships of medieval noble families to female-line descendants of lords, even when they were not of noble lineage in the male line, while persons of legitimate male-line descent may still survive (e.g. the modern Chiefs of Clan MacLeod).
In some nations, hereditary titles, as distinct from noble rank, were not always recognised in law, e.g., Poland's Szlachta. European ranks of nobility lower than baron or its equivalent, are commonly referred to as the petty nobility, although baronets of the British Isles are deemed titled gentry. Most nations traditionally had an untitled lower nobility in addition to titled nobles. An example is the landed gentry of the British Isles. Unlike England's gentry, the Junkers of Germany, the noblesse de robe of France, the hidalgos of Spain and the nobili of Italy were explicitly acknowledged by the monarchs of those countries as members of the nobility, although untitled. In Scandinavia, the Benelux nations and Spain there are still untitled as well as titled families recognised in law as noble.
In Hungary members of the nobility always theoretically enjoyed the same rights. In practice, however, a noble family's financial assets largely defined its significance. Medieval Hungary's concept of nobility originated in the notion that nobles were "free men", eligible to own land. This basic standard explains why the noble population was relatively large, although the economic status of its members varied widely. Untitled nobles were not infrequently wealthier than titled families, while considerable differences in wealth were also to be found within the titled nobility. The custom of granting titles was introduced to Hungary in the 16th century by the House of Habsburg. Historically, once nobility was granted, if a nobleman served the monarch well he might obtain the title of baron, and might later be elevated to the rank of count. As in other countries of post-medieval central Europe, hereditary titles were not attached to a particular land or estate but to the noble family itself, so that all patrilineal descendants shared a title of baron or count (cf. peerage). Neither nobility nor titles could be transmitted through women.
Some con artists sell fake titles of nobility, often with impressive-looking documentation. This may be illegal, depending on local law. They are more often illegal in countries that actually have nobilities, such as European monarchies. In the United States, such commerce may constitute actionable fraud rather than criminal usurpation of an exclusive right to use of any given title by an established class.
"Aristocrat" and aristocracy, in modern usage, refer colloquially and broadly to persons who inherit elevated social status, whether due to membership in the (formerly) official nobility or the monied upper class.
Blue blood is an English idiom recorded since 1834 for noble birth or descent; it is also known as a translation of the Spanish phrase sangre azul, which described the Spanish royal family and other high nobility who claimed to be of Visigothic descent, in contrast to the Moors. The idiom originates from ancient and medieval societies of Europe and distinguishes an upper class (whose superficial veins appeared blue through their untanned skin) from a working class of the time. The latter consisted mainly of agricultural peasants who spent most of their time working outdoors and thus had tanned skin, through which superficial veins appear less prominently.
Robert Lacey explains the genesis of the blue blood concept:
It was the Spaniards who gave the world the notion that an aristocrat's blood is not red but blue. The Spanish nobility started taking shape around the ninth century in classic military fashion, occupying land as warriors on horseback. They were to continue the process for more than five hundred years, clawing back sections of the peninsula from its Moorish occupiers, and a nobleman demonstrated his pedigree by holding up his sword arm to display the filigree of blue-blooded veins beneath his pale skin—proof that his birth had not been contaminated by the dark-skinned enemy.
European nobility originated in the feudal/seignorial system that arose in Europe during the Middle Ages. Originally, knights or nobles were mounted warriors who swore allegiance to their sovereign and promised to fight for him in exchange for an allocation of land (usually together with serfs living thereon). During the period known as the Military Revolution, nobles gradually lost their role in raising and commanding private armies, as many nations created cohesive national armies.
This was coupled with a loss of the socio-economic power of the nobility, owing to the economic changes of the Renaissance and the growing economic importance of the merchant classes, which increased still further during the Industrial Revolution. In countries where the nobility was the dominant class, the bourgeoisie gradually grew in power; a rich city merchant came to be more influential than a nobleman, and the latter sometimes sought inter-marriage with families of the former to maintain their noble lifestyles.
However, in many countries at this time, the nobility retained substantial political importance and social influence: for instance, the United Kingdom's government was dominated by the nobility until the middle of the 19th century. Thereafter the powers of the nobility were progressively reduced by legislation. However, until 1999, all hereditary peers were entitled to sit and vote in the House of Lords. Since then, only 92 of them have this entitlement, of whom 90 are elected by the hereditary peers as a whole to represent the peerage.
The countries with the highest proportion of nobles were Castile (probably 10%), Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth (15% of an 18th-century population of 800,000), Spain (722,000 in 1768 which was 7–8% of the entire population) and other countries with lower percentages, such as Russia in 1760 with 500,000–600,000 nobles (2–3% of the entire population), and pre-revolutionary France where there were no more than 300,000 prior to 1789, which was 1% of the population (although some scholars believe this figure is an overestimate). In 1718 Sweden had between 10,000 and 15,000 nobles, which was 0.5% of the population. In Germany 0.01%.
In the Kingdom of Hungary nobles made up 5% of the population. All the nobles in 18th-century Europe numbered perhaps 3–4 million out of a total of 170–190 million inhabitants.
Many peoples and nations have had noble or aristocratic classes of various kinds: these are so diverse that there may be no clear equivalents in other cultures' histories, and care in translation and context is important to minimize misconstrual, in particular when contrasting concepts and terminology with those derived from Western feudalism.
For the historical hierarchy of the Indian subcontinent, see princely state.
In East Asia the system was often modelled on imperial China, the leading culture. Emperors conferred titles of nobility. Imperial descendants formed the highest class of ancient Chinese nobility, their status based upon the rank of the empress or concubine from which they descend maternally (as emperors were polygamous). Numerous titles such as Taizi (crown prince), and equivalents of "prince" were accorded, and due to complexities in dynastic rules, rules were introduced for Imperial descendants. The titles of the junior princes were gradually lowered in rank by each generation while the senior heir continued to inherit their father's titles.
It was a custom in China for the new dynasty to ennoble and enfeoff a member of the dynasty which they overthrew with a title of nobility and a fief of land so that they could offer sacrifices to their ancestors, in addition to members of other preceding dynasties.
China had a feudal system in the Shang and Zhou dynasties, which gradually gave way to a more bureaucratic one beginning in the Qin dynasty (221 BC). This continued through the Song dynasty, and by its peak power shifted from nobility to bureaucrats.
This development was gradual and generally only completed in full by the Song dynasty. In the Han dynasty, for example, even though noble titles were no longer given to those other than the Emperor's relatives, the fact that the process of selecting officials was mostly based on a vouching system by current officials as officials usually vouched for their own sons or those of other officials meant that a de facto aristocracy continued to exist. This process was further deepened during the Three Kingdoms period with the introduction of the Nine-rank system.
By the Sui dynasty, however, the institution of the Imperial examination system marked the transformation of a power shift towards a full bureaucracy, though the process would not be truly completed until the Song dynasty.
Titles of nobility became symbolic along with a stipend while governance of the country shifted to scholar officials.
In the Qing dynasty titles of nobility were still granted by the emperor, but served merely as honorifics based on a loose system of favors to the Qing emperor.
Under a centralized system, the empire's governance was the responsibility of the Confucian-educated scholar-officials and the local gentry, while the literati were accorded gentry status. For male citizens, advancement in status was possible via garnering the top three positions in imperial examinations.
The Qing appointed the Ming imperial descendants to the title of Marquis of Extended Grace.
The oldest held continuous noble title in Chinese history was that held by the descendants of Confucius, as Duke Yansheng, which was renamed as the Sacrificial Official to Confucius in 1935 by the Republic of China. The title is held by Kung Tsui-chang. There is also a "Sacrificial Official to Mencius" for a descendant of Mencius, a "Sacrificial Official to Zengzi" for a descendant of Zengzi, and a "Sacrificial Official to Yan Hui" for a descendant of Yan Hui.
The bestowal of titles was abolished upon the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949, as part of a larger effort to remove feudal influences and practises from Chinese society.
In some Islamic countries, there are no definite noble titles (titles of hereditary rulers being distinct from those of hereditary intermediaries between monarchs and commoners). Persons who can trace legitimate descent from Muhammad or the clans of Quraysh, as can members of several present or formerly reigning dynasties, are widely regarded as belonging to the ancient, hereditary Islamic nobility. In some Islamic countries they inherit (through mother or father) hereditary titles, although without any other associated privilege, e.g., variations of the title Sayyid and Sharif. Regarded as more religious than the general population, many people turn to them for clarification or guidance in religious matters.
In Iran, historical titles of the nobility including Mirza, Khan, ed-Dowleh and Shahzada ("Son of a Shah), are now no longer recognised. An aristocratic family is now recognised by their family name, often derived from the post held by their ancestors, considering the fact that family names in Iran only appeared in the beginning of the 20th century. Sultans have been an integral part of Islamic history .
During the Ottoman Empire in the Imperial Court and the provinces there were many Ottoman titles and appellations forming a somewhat unusual and complex system in comparison with the other Islamic countries. The bestowal of noble and aristocratic titles was widespread across the empire even after its fall by independent monarchs. One of the most elaborate examples is that of the Egyptian aristocracy's largest clan, the Abaza family.
Medieval Japan developed a feudal system similar to the European system, where land was held in exchange for military service. The daimyō class, or hereditary landowning nobles, held great socio-political power. As in Europe, they commanded private armies made up of samurai, an elite warrior class; for long periods, these held the real power without a real central government, and often plunged the country into a state of civil war. The daimyō class can be compared to European peers, and the samurai to European knights, but important differences exist.
Feudal title and rank were abolished during the Meiji Restoration in 1868, and was replaced by the kazoku, a five-rank peerage system after the British example, which granted seats in the upper house of the Imperial Diet; this ended in 1947 following Japan's defeat in World War II.
Like other Southeast Asian countries, many regions in the Philippines have indigenous nobility, partially influenced by Hindu, Chinese, and Islamic custom. Since ancient times, Datu was the common title of a chief or monarch of the many pre-colonial principalities and sovereign dominions throughout the isles; in some areas the term Apo was also used. With the titles Sultan and Rajah, Datu (and its Malaycognate, Datok) are currently used in some parts of the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei. These titles are the rough equivalents of European titles, albeit dependent on the actual wealth and prestige of the bearer.
Recognition by the Spanish Crown
Upon the islands' Christianisation, the datus retained governance of their territories despite annexation to the Spanish Empire. In a law signed 11 June 1594, King Philip II of Spain ordered that the indigenous rulers continue to receive the same honours and privileges accorded them prior their conversion to Catholicism. The baptised nobility subsequently coalesced into the exclusive, landed ruling class of the lowlands known as the Principalía.
On 22 March 1697, King Charles II of Spain confirmed the privileges granted by his predecessors (in Title VII, Book VI of the Laws of the Indies) to indigenous nobilities of the Crown colonies, including the Principales of the Philippines, and extended to them and to their descendants the preeminence and honors customarily attributed to the Hidalgos of Castile.
Filipino nobles during the Spanish era
The Laws of the Indies and other pertinent Royal Decrees were enforced in the Philippines and benefited many indigenous nobles. It can be seen very clearly and irrefutably that, during the colonial period, indigenous chiefs were equated with the Spanish Hidalgos, and the most resounding proof of the application of this comparison is the General Military Archive in Segovia, where the qualifications of “Nobility” (found in the Service Records) are attributed to those Filipinos who were admitted to the Spanish Military Academies and whose ancestors were caciques, encomenderos, notable Tagalogs, chieftains, governors or those who held positions in the municipal administration or government in all different regions of the large islands of the Archipelago, or of the many small islands of which it is composed. In the context of the ancient tradition and norms of Castilian nobility, all descendants of a noble are considered noble, regardless of fortune.
At the Real Academia de la Historia, there is a substantial number of records providing reference to the Philippine Islands, and while most parts correspond to the history of these islands, the Academia did not exclude among its documents the presence of many genealogical records. The archives of the Academia and its royal stamp recognized the appointments of hundreds of natives of the Philippines who, by virtue of their social position, occupied posts in the administration of the territories and were classified as "nobles". The presence of these notables demonstrates the cultural concern of Spain in those Islands to prepare the natives and the collaboration of these in the government of the Archipelago. This aspect of Spanish rule in the Philippines appears much more strongly implemented than in the Americas. Hence in the Philippines, the local nobility, by reason of charge accorded to their social class, acquired greater importance than in the Indies of the New World.
With the recognition of the Spanish monarchs came the privilege of being addressed as Don or Doña. - a mark of esteem and distinction in Europe reserved for a person of noble or royal status during the colonial period. Other honors and high regard were also accorded to the Christianized Datus by the Spanish Empire. For example, the Gobernadorcillos (elected leader of the Cabezas de Barangay or the Christianized Datus) and Filipino officials of justice received the greatest consideration from the Spanish Crown officials. The colonial officials were under obligation to show them the honor corresponding to their respective duties. They were allowed to sit in the houses of the Spanish Provincial Governors, and in any other places. They were not left to remain standing. It was not permitted for Spanish Parish Priests to treat these Filipino nobles with less consideration.
The Gobernadorcillos exercised the command of the towns. They were Port Captains in coastal towns. They also had the rights and powers to elect assistants and several lieutenants and alguaciles, proportionate in number to the inhabitants of the town.
Current status questionis
The recognition of the rights and privileges of the Filipino Principalía as equivalent to those of the Hijosdalgos of Castile seems to facilitate entrance of Filipino nobles into institutions of under the Spanish Crown, either civil or religious, which required proofs of nobility.(p235) However, such approximation might not be correct since in reality, although the principales were vassals of the Crown, their rights as sovereign in their former dominions were guaranteed by the Laws of the Indies, more particularly the Royal Decree of Philip II of 11 June 1594, which Charles II confirmed for the purpose stated above in order to satisfy the requirements of the existing laws in the Peninsula.
It must be recalled that ever since the beginning of the colonialization, the conquistador Miguel López de Legazpi did not strip the ancient sovereign rulers of the Archipelago (who vowed allegiance to the Spanish Crown) of their legitimate rights. Many of them accepted the Catholic religion and were his allies from the very beginning. He only demanded from these local rulers vassalage to the Spanish Crown, replacing the similar overlordship, which previously existed in a few cases, e.g., Sultanate of Brunei's overlordship of the Kingdom of Maynila. Other independent polities which were not vassals to other States, e.g., Confederation of Madja-as and the Rajahnate of Cebu, were more of Protectorates/Suzerainties having had alliances with the Spanish Crown before the Kingdom took total control of most parts of the Archipelago. An interesting question remains after the cessession of the Spanish rule in the Philippines, that is, what is the equivalent of the rank of the FilipinoPrincipalía, freed from vassalage yet not able to exercise their sovereignty within the democratic society in the Archipelago?
One logical conclusion would be their ancient Royal and noble title as Datu — the historical title of local nobles of ancient domains respected and protected by the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act of 1997, the existing pertinent law of the Philippines; and by a related international legislation, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Retaining as a subsidiary title the Hidalguía of Castile — their former protector State — without prejudice to their ancestral title, appears most suitable to the hispanized Filipino nobles. Besides, as stated in the above-mentioned Royal Decree of Charles II, the ancient nobility of the Filipino Principales "is still retained and acknowledged".
Just like the deposed royal families elsewhre in the world, which still lay claim to their hereditary rights as pretenders to the former thrones of their ancestors, the descendants of the Principalía have the same de iure claims to the historical domains of their forebears.
See also: Lakan of the island of Luzon
Africa has a plethora of ancient lineages in its various constituent nations. Some, such as the numerous sharifian families of North Africa, the Keita dynasty of Mali, the Solomonic dynasty of Ethiopia and the Sherbro Tucker clan of Sierra Leone, claim descent from notables from outside of the continent. Most, such as those composed of the descendants of Shaka and Moshoeshoe of Southern Africa, belong to peoples that have been resident in the continent for millennia. Generally their royal or noble status is recognized by and derived from the authority of traditional custom. A number of them also enjoy either a constitutional or a statutory recognition of their high social positions.
Ethiopia has a nobility that is almost as old as the country itself. Throughout the history of the Ethiopian Empire most of the titles of nobility have been tribal or military in nature. However the Ethiopian nobility resembled its European counterparts in some respects; until 1855, when Tewodros II ended the Zemene Mesafint its aristocracy was organised similarly to the feudal system in Europe during the Middle Ages. For more than seven centuries, Ethiopia (or Abyssinia, as it was then known) was made up of many small kingdoms, principalities, emirates and imamates, which owed their allegiance to the nəgusä nägäst (literally "King of Kings"). Despite its being a Christian monarchy, various Muslim states paid tribute to the emperors of Ethiopia for centuries: including the Adal Sultanate, the Emirate of Harar, and the Awsa sultanate.
Ethiopian nobility were divided into two different categories: Mesafint ("prince"), the hereditary nobility that formed the upper echelon of the ruling class; and the Mekwanin ("governor") who were appointed nobles, often of humble birth, who formed the bulk of the nobility (cf. the Ministerialis of the Holy Roman Empire). In Ethiopia there were titles of nobility among the Mesafint borne by those at the apex of medieval Ethiopian society. The highest royal title (after that of emperor) was Negus ("king") which was held by hereditary governors of the provinces of Begemder, Shewa, Gojjam, and Wollo. The next highest seven titles were Ras, Dejazmach, Fit'awrari, Grazmach, Qenyazmach, Azmach and Balambaras. The title of Le'ul Ras was accorded to the heads of various noble families and cadet branches of the Solomonic dynasty, such as the princes of Gojjam, Tigray, and Selalle. The heirs of the Le'ul Rases were titled Le'ul Dejazmach, indicative of the higher status they enjoyed relative to Dejazmaches who were not of the blood imperial. There were various hereditary titles in Ethiopia: including that of Jantirar, reserved for males of the family of Empress Menen Asfaw who ruled over the mountain fortress of Ambassel in Wollo; Wagshum, a title created for the descendants of the deposed Zagwe dynasty; and Shum Agame, held by the descendants of DejazmachSabagadis, who ruled over the Agame district of Tigray. The vast majority of titles borne by nobles were not, however, hereditary.
Despite being largely dominated by Christian elements, some Muslims obtained entrée into the Ethiopian nobility as part of their quest for aggrandizement during the 1800s. To do so they were generally obliged to abandon their faith and some are believed to have feigned conversion to Christianity for the sake of acceptance by the old Christian aristocratic families. One such family, the Wara Seh (more commonly called the "Yejju dynasty") converted to Christianity and eventually wielded power for over a century, ruling with the sanction of the Solomonic emperors. The last such Muslim noble to join the ranks of Ethiopian society was Mikael of Wollo who converted, was made Negus of Wollo, and later King of Zion, and even married into the Imperial family. He lived to see his son, Iyasu V, inherit the throne in 1913—only to be deposed in 1916 because of his conversion to Islam.
The nobility in Madagascar are known as the Andriana. In much of Madagascar, before French colonization of the island, the Malagasy people
Left to right: Images from the Boxer Codex illustrating ancient Filipino nobility wearing the distinctive colours of their social status:  a Visayan noble couple;  a Visayanroyal couple dressed in colours distinctive of their class (gold or imperial yellow, red and blue), which are also used by royalty in Asia;  a native princess; and  a Tagalog royal and his consort.