This new nobility gradually became as well marked and as exclusive as the old patriciate.
But if differed from the old patriciate in this, that, while the privileges of the old patriciate rested on law, or perhaps rather on immemorial custom, the privileges of the new nobility rested wholly on a sentiment of which men could remember the beginning.
That is to say, it consisted of the remains of the old patriciate, together with those plebeian families any members of which had been chosen to curule offices.
The cause of the difference seems to be that, while the origin of the patriciate was exactly the same at Rome and at Athens, the origin of the commons was different.
The Spartan patriciate could afford to disfranchise some of its own members.
The renowned patriciate of Venice was as far removed as might be from the character either of a nobility of conquest or of a nobility of older settlement.
Athenian At Athens, as at Rome, an old patriciate, a nobility of by commerce.
Such a nobility differed far more widely from either the Roman or the Venetian patriciate than they differed from one another.
The privileges of the Roman patriciate, whatever we may call them, were not usurpations; and, if we call the privileges of the Venetian nobility usurpations, they were stealthy and peaceful usurpations, founded on something other than mere violence.
Now the analogy between this change and the change from the Roman patriciate to the later Roman nobilitas is obvious.
This new nobility of office supplanted, or perhaps rather absorbed, the older nobility, just as the later nobilitas of Rome supplanted or absorbed the old patriciate.
It never could come so nearly as a civic patriciate could to being something like the rule of the best in any sense of those words.
In the words of Dr Kriegk, Geschichte von Frankfurt, (1871), the insurrection completely destroyed the political power of the gilds, gave new strength to the supremacy of the patriciate, and brought no further advantage to the rest of the citizens than a few improvements in the organization and administration of the magistracy.
Fabio Chigi, on being made pope (Alexander VII.) in 1655, conferred the Roman patriciate on his family, and created his nephew Agostino prince of Farnese and duke of Ariccia, and the emperor Leopold I.
On the contrary, Rome itself was now for the first time affected by the predominance of the new empire; for Charlemagne converted the patriciate into effective sovereignty, and the successor of St Peter became the chief metropolitan of the Frankish empire.
By procuring the transference of the patriciate from the Roman people to himself Henry assured his influence over the appointment of the popes, and accordingly also nominated the successors of Clement II.
Casimir the Great even tried to make municipal government as democratic as possible by enacting that one half of the town council of Cracow should be elected from the civic patriciate, but the other half from the commonalty.
Foremost among these was the great commercial capital, Amsterdam, whose rich burgher patriciate did not scruple on occasion to defy the authority of the States-General, the stadholder and even of the States of Holland themselves.
The old municipal patriciate, which used to form the connecting link between the bourgeoisie and the nobility, had disappeared, and a feeling of common civic fellowship had taken its place.
The traditions of early Rome indeed represent the patricians as receiving the Claudii by a collective act into their body; but the first authenticated instance of the admission of new members to the patriciate is that of the lex Cassia, which authorized Caesar as dictator to create fresh patricians.
A comparison of this procedure with the original conception of the patriciate as revealed by the derivation of the word, is significant of the history of the conception of nobility at Rome, and illustrative of the tenacity with which the Romans clung to the name and form of an institution which had long lost its significance.
As a matter of fact it is clear that the patriciate of Pippin was a new office, especially as the title is henceforward generally patricius Romanorum, not patricius alone.
Such a distinction of caste is regarded by Ballanche as the original state of historical society; and history, as a whole, he considers to have followed the same course as that taken by the Roman plebs in its attempts to attain equality with the patriciate.
patriciate, senatus populusque rornanus, &c.), concealed but clumsily a purely oligarchical government.