The Chiefly Council of the ASB
The Chiefly Council is an odd institution. It is not part of the confederal government, but you could say that it's government-adjacent. Since it was established, it has had to walk a fine line between causing offense by asserting itself too strongly on the one hand, and sliding into irrelevance on the other.
The CC shares its origins with the Grand Council of State, the 50-member body that acts as the collective "head of state" for the ASB. Preceding both bodies were various Grand Councils, assemblies of many leaders that met as early as the 18th century to affirm major treaties and work out details of their enforcement. After 1810 the Grand Council became a permanent and increasingly powerful institution, and some states began objecting to the fact that its members included holders of various hereditary titles. To answer these objections, the Grand Council in 1836 split off its hereditary members as a separate Chiefly Council. The CC was quickly sidelined and never managed to get any political power.
The CC over the years has opined on various major issues facing the nation, but most of its activities center around the private foundation that today sustains it in lieu of tax money. The foundation sponsors historical research and charitable programs. The Chiefs themselves meet occasionally for ceremonial events such as national celebrations and the opening of Parliament. The traditional title Avus, Latin for "Grandfather", seems almost ludicrously quaint today, but Chiefs are still addressed as Grandfather or Grandmother sometimes. They also may put the initials C.C. after their names, and even today, those initials lend a certain gravitas.
While it cannot be said that the ASB has a coherent social class that can be called an aristocracy, it is true that members of the different parts of the CC have mixed and socialized with each other, and there has been some intermarriage. Descendants of colonial gentry enjoy being able to boast of having Indian chiefly ancestry, and vice versa.
Members of the Chiefly Council include the following:
Lords Proprietor. The monarchical heads of state in the ASB have never been part of the Chiefly Council and it has never been considered appropriate for them to do so; but a few states have Lords Proprietor whose role has often been compared to constitutional monarchs, but who are not considered the heads of their respective states. Today there are only two: Penn in Pennsylvania and Calvert in Maryland. The Mayhew family of the Vineyards renounced their title in the late eighteenth century, but near the end of the nineteenth, the CC permitted the Mayhew descendants to identify a member to join the council. Today he or she bears the simple title of Chief, the same as the heads of several old Indian families in the Vineyards.
Holders of colonial titles. A very small number of people were granted peerages or baronetcies by France, England, and Sweden during colonial times. A few are still extant. The practice continued in Newfoundland into the middle of the twentieth century; titles were banned in Loyalist New England before 1800, while Carolina had its own system of local titles. Newfoundland also banned the practice in the 1950s, but still recognizes titles previously granted. Christiana had already adopted a similar statute in the 1910s.
Bonapartist barons. The only real native nobility in the ASB, at least from a European perspective, are the heirs to those who were awarded titles during the French Empire era. A few Boreoamericans hold titles originally awarded in France by the Emperor himself, to recipients who later crossed the ocean. But most of the titles came from Jerome, the king of New France. Jerome never granted any titles above the rank of Baron. If he had plans to create any counts or dukes, the revolution cut them short. The titles were awarded to prominent military and civil leaders. Most barons also received grants of land, but unlike in France, Jerome separated the title from the land grant. Some new barons, especially those who were already major landowners, received no land. Many received grants that were so distant or so tied up with local land ownership laws that they were essentially worthless. Most baronies were awarded in the present-day states of Canada, West Dominica, and Lower Louisiana; heirs to the original grantees have moved throughout the confederation.
Post-Bonapartist nobles. After the Kingdom of New France broke up, some of its successors continued the practice of bestowing titles. The very first President of the Republic of Louisiana tried it, but the highly class-conscious Louisiana aristocracy soon decided that they didn't want an elected official with this power. East Dominica granted a few titles during its years as a Principality, but it was in West Dominica that the practice lasted the longest. One reason was as a remedy for political instability: leaders of the state wanted to channel the ambitions of influential men. Perhaps if they could gain status by serving the state, they would be less inclined to overthrow it. An assertive aristocracy was also a way for the majority-Black state to show its importance and independence among its White peers. A few individuals in West Dominica attained the loftier title of Count. The state government still has the power to grant titles of nobility, but now this is extremely rare.
State aristocracy. Carolina was the only colony to set up a local system of aristocracy, the Landgraves and Caziques. At the beginning of its era of self-government, it also became the only state to set up its own House of Lords for these titled men. This house lost its political power bit by bit until the end of the monarchy in 1903. Through a compromise, the house avoided dissolution and held on to a nominal role in the legislative process. The Carolina aristocrats are therefore much more active in the affairs of their state than most other members of the CC.
Titled state gentry. A number of colonies bestowed titles and feudal rights on their principal landowners. Though the feudal and political powers have long since been abolished, many descendants continue to hold on to the titles and sit as members of the CC. These include the patroons of New Netherland, the seigneurs of Canada, and the baronets of Maryland and New Scotland. The New Scotland baronets were almost entirely absentee; only a handful live in Boreoamerica today. Many members of the various gentries have moved throughout the confederation. They have kept their titles and their seats in the CC, except for those who live in states that specifically prohibit this. For example, the Saybrook Lords of the Manor had their titles abolished in the 1780s, but some of them relocated to lands around Sanduskey on Lake Erie, and some of their titles are still extant today.
First Families. Virginia's gentry have been known as the First Families of Virginia. In the early years, a number of FFV leaders were members of the Grand Council due to their influential position. However, when the Grand Council began to clean up its membership in the 1830s, Virginia's government passed a law banning its citizens from serving on any council by virtue of heredity. Decades later, when the Chiefly Council was clearly a harmless institution and a spirit of nostalgia was in the air, Lower Virginia passed another law that laid out a process for the FFVs to name chiefs that could be CC members. Upper Virginia, now its own state, never passed such a law and the law banning hereditary positions remains in effect.
Hereditary chiefs. The largest number of CC members are heads of traditional lineages from various Indian peoples. Only a few of these chiefs have any actual political role, like the chief of Nipissing in the Upper Country, for example. Others have a long history as influential cultural leaders, such as the Upper Country's Three Fires chiefs and the leaders of various clans of the Lenape in Christiana, Ohio, and elsewhere. Some lived in obscurity until quite recently. In villages throughout the ASB, chiefly duties, traditional medicine, and syncretic religious practices were passed down through the generations beyond the notice of wider society. In recent years, many of these smaller indigenous communities have begun projects of revitalization, and they have looked to the CC to bolster their efforts. This has expanded the ranks of the Council since about 1960 and has been one of the ways that the CC has stayed relevant.
The CC shares its origins with the Grand Council of State, the 50-member body that acts as the collective "head of state" for the ASB. Preceding both bodies were various Grand Councils, assemblies of many leaders that met as early as the 18th century to affirm major treaties and work out details of their enforcement. After 1810 the Grand Council became a permanent and increasingly powerful institution, and some states began objecting to the fact that its members included holders of various hereditary titles. To answer these objections, the Grand Council in 1836 split off its hereditary members as a separate Chiefly Council. The CC was quickly sidelined and never managed to get any political power.
The CC over the years has opined on various major issues facing the nation, but most of its activities center around the private foundation that today sustains it in lieu of tax money. The foundation sponsors historical research and charitable programs. The Chiefs themselves meet occasionally for ceremonial events such as national celebrations and the opening of Parliament. The traditional title Avus, Latin for "Grandfather", seems almost ludicrously quaint today, but Chiefs are still addressed as Grandfather or Grandmother sometimes. They also may put the initials C.C. after their names, and even today, those initials lend a certain gravitas.
While it cannot be said that the ASB has a coherent social class that can be called an aristocracy, it is true that members of the different parts of the CC have mixed and socialized with each other, and there has been some intermarriage. Descendants of colonial gentry enjoy being able to boast of having Indian chiefly ancestry, and vice versa.
Members of the Chiefly Council include the following:
Lords Proprietor. The monarchical heads of state in the ASB have never been part of the Chiefly Council and it has never been considered appropriate for them to do so; but a few states have Lords Proprietor whose role has often been compared to constitutional monarchs, but who are not considered the heads of their respective states. Today there are only two: Penn in Pennsylvania and Calvert in Maryland. The Mayhew family of the Vineyards renounced their title in the late eighteenth century, but near the end of the nineteenth, the CC permitted the Mayhew descendants to identify a member to join the council. Today he or she bears the simple title of Chief, the same as the heads of several old Indian families in the Vineyards.
Holders of colonial titles. A very small number of people were granted peerages or baronetcies by France, England, and Sweden during colonial times. A few are still extant. The practice continued in Newfoundland into the middle of the twentieth century; titles were banned in Loyalist New England before 1800, while Carolina had its own system of local titles. Newfoundland also banned the practice in the 1950s, but still recognizes titles previously granted. Christiana had already adopted a similar statute in the 1910s.
Bonapartist barons. The only real native nobility in the ASB, at least from a European perspective, are the heirs to those who were awarded titles during the French Empire era. A few Boreoamericans hold titles originally awarded in France by the Emperor himself, to recipients who later crossed the ocean. But most of the titles came from Jerome, the king of New France. Jerome never granted any titles above the rank of Baron. If he had plans to create any counts or dukes, the revolution cut them short. The titles were awarded to prominent military and civil leaders. Most barons also received grants of land, but unlike in France, Jerome separated the title from the land grant. Some new barons, especially those who were already major landowners, received no land. Many received grants that were so distant or so tied up with local land ownership laws that they were essentially worthless. Most baronies were awarded in the present-day states of Canada, West Dominica, and Lower Louisiana; heirs to the original grantees have moved throughout the confederation.
Post-Bonapartist nobles. After the Kingdom of New France broke up, some of its successors continued the practice of bestowing titles. The very first President of the Republic of Louisiana tried it, but the highly class-conscious Louisiana aristocracy soon decided that they didn't want an elected official with this power. East Dominica granted a few titles during its years as a Principality, but it was in West Dominica that the practice lasted the longest. One reason was as a remedy for political instability: leaders of the state wanted to channel the ambitions of influential men. Perhaps if they could gain status by serving the state, they would be less inclined to overthrow it. An assertive aristocracy was also a way for the majority-Black state to show its importance and independence among its White peers. A few individuals in West Dominica attained the loftier title of Count. The state government still has the power to grant titles of nobility, but now this is extremely rare.
State aristocracy. Carolina was the only colony to set up a local system of aristocracy, the Landgraves and Caziques. At the beginning of its era of self-government, it also became the only state to set up its own House of Lords for these titled men. This house lost its political power bit by bit until the end of the monarchy in 1903. Through a compromise, the house avoided dissolution and held on to a nominal role in the legislative process. The Carolina aristocrats are therefore much more active in the affairs of their state than most other members of the CC.
Titled state gentry. A number of colonies bestowed titles and feudal rights on their principal landowners. Though the feudal and political powers have long since been abolished, many descendants continue to hold on to the titles and sit as members of the CC. These include the patroons of New Netherland, the seigneurs of Canada, and the baronets of Maryland and New Scotland. The New Scotland baronets were almost entirely absentee; only a handful live in Boreoamerica today. Many members of the various gentries have moved throughout the confederation. They have kept their titles and their seats in the CC, except for those who live in states that specifically prohibit this. For example, the Saybrook Lords of the Manor had their titles abolished in the 1780s, but some of them relocated to lands around Sanduskey on Lake Erie, and some of their titles are still extant today.
First Families. Virginia's gentry have been known as the First Families of Virginia. In the early years, a number of FFV leaders were members of the Grand Council due to their influential position. However, when the Grand Council began to clean up its membership in the 1830s, Virginia's government passed a law banning its citizens from serving on any council by virtue of heredity. Decades later, when the Chiefly Council was clearly a harmless institution and a spirit of nostalgia was in the air, Lower Virginia passed another law that laid out a process for the FFVs to name chiefs that could be CC members. Upper Virginia, now its own state, never passed such a law and the law banning hereditary positions remains in effect.
Hereditary chiefs. The largest number of CC members are heads of traditional lineages from various Indian peoples. Only a few of these chiefs have any actual political role, like the chief of Nipissing in the Upper Country, for example. Others have a long history as influential cultural leaders, such as the Upper Country's Three Fires chiefs and the leaders of various clans of the Lenape in Christiana, Ohio, and elsewhere. Some lived in obscurity until quite recently. In villages throughout the ASB, chiefly duties, traditional medicine, and syncretic religious practices were passed down through the generations beyond the notice of wider society. In recent years, many of these smaller indigenous communities have begun projects of revitalization, and they have looked to the CC to bolster their efforts. This has expanded the ranks of the Council since about 1960 and has been one of the ways that the CC has stayed relevant.