The Origins of European Aristocracy

by Marcos Gimeno

From the Instituto Carlos V - For Long European Memory

---

The word “aristocracy” comes from the Greek root “aristos” (ἄριστος), which is derived from the term “areté” (ἀρετή) and refers to excellence or virtue. In practice, the aristoi (ἄριστοι) were individuals with exceptional qualities that made them capable of governing. To understand the essence of this superiority, we must ask: in what sense were they better?

This question has been approached from many different perspectives. While some attribute it to a set of spiritual characteristics or ethical and intellectual qualities, others are more critical, suspecting that this terminology is used by the ruling classes to manipulate and justify their power. Without dismissing these interpretations, which can certainly shed light on important aspects of the phenomenon, we will propose an alternative hypothesis here. In other words, we will examine whether it is possible to conceive of aristocracy as a matter of manipulating nature rather than economic status.

To develop our argument, we must first consider the conditions that preceded the formation of our culture. In her book The Goddesses and Gods of Ancient Europe, the archaeologist and anthropologist Marija Gimbutas, based on an analysis of contemporary tribal societies and material remains from prehistory, demonstrates that in “Old Europe” (a term coined to refer to sedentary societies — first hunter-gatherers and later agriculturalists — that flourished during the prehistoric period on the European continent), women’s reproductive capacity was highly valued, as women were believed to be conduits of the cosmic forces that generate fertility. This belief was associated with matriarchal and matrilineal societies, where women held political and religious power and inheritance was passed down through the maternal line.

The oldest archaeological evidence of this system of values consists of numerous figurines dedicated to the “Mother Goddess” or “Great Mother”, dating back at least 25,000 years. Examples include the famous Venus of Willendorf. This trend intensified with the emergence of agriculture during the Neolithic period. Examining the site of Çatalhöyük on the Anatolian peninsula corroborates this hypothesis, as figures discovered there date back to around 6000 BC and depict the Great Mother have been discovered there. Similarly, Minoan religion revolved around female deities such as the Snake Goddess, an example of which has been preserved in the form of a figurine dating to 1600 BC found in the Palace of Knossos. Furthermore, the global spread of this type of deity suggests that it was a cross-cultural phenomenon characteristic of an era when humans were extremely vulnerable to nature.

Conversely, the period in European history when women played a dominant role coincided with a time when the process of gestation was not understood. Men were unable to identify their own role in procreation and attributed pregnancy to a special power women had to communicate with nature and embody reproductive power. In his book The Family among the Australian Aborigines: A Sociological Study, Bronisław Malinowski explains that tribes who maintain a lifestyle similar to prehistoric societies still do not understand the link between sexual intercourse and procreation. In any case, according to Gimbutas, the matriarchal context that flourished in Europe between 7000 and 3500 BC was characterized by peaceful, cooperative and egalitarian existence.

However, this social order failed to stop the migration of Indo-Europeans — or Indo-Aryans — which spread in all directions over a period of between one and three thousand years. This migration had a radical impact on Europe and the rest of the world. These populations emerge in history as nomadic horsemen and herders organized into stratified, heteropatriarchal and warlike groups. According to the Kurgan hypothesis, these invaders were mounted warriors from the south of present-day Russia. Gimbutas describes how they subjugated agricultural societies through three successive waves of migration between 4000 and 1000 BC. Some feminist intellectuals, such as Riane Eisler (author of The Chalice and the Blade), argue that the emergence of Indo-European and patriarchal culture led to the spread of war, inequality, alienation and the destruction of ecosystems, representing a cataclysm that should be lamented. Without delving into the merits of these assessments, we will continue our analysis and return to this debate in the conclusions.

To enable their expansion, the Indo-Europeans made use of significant technological advances, such as the bridle and the wheel, and above all, the domestication of the horse. Due to intense migration, the religion of the invading peoples gradually merged with the telluric spirituality of the indigenous European populations. Consequently, deities associated with nature were relegated to the background, as happened in Greece with the chthonic deities and in Norse mythology with the Vanir. The Indo-European cult, centered on Deus Pater, had a celestial character (a “Uranian spirit”, in Julius Evola’s terminology) and was no longer linked to fertility, but rather to the cultural values of an emerging warrior aristocracy. Family structures also changed, giving rise to a patrilineal and patrifocal system derived from the observations of Indo-European herders regarding kinship ties. This system refuted the matriarchal prejudice that men played no role in procreation.

It is worth noting that this phenomenon is not limited to the expansion of the Indo-European language family, but has occurred on every continent throughout history. Consider, for example, the relationship between the Tutsi and the Hutu in Rwanda. Although the Hutu were the indigenous population of present-day Rwanda, the Tutsi established themselves as an aristocratic elite who administered the vast territory until the 20th century, despite representing only 17% of the population. Pierre Van den Berghe analyzed this case in Race and Racism: A Comparative Perspective (1967), in which he argues that the Tutsi developed racist beliefs that exalted their own physical traits (such as aquiline noses, tall stature and slender builds) and devalued those of the Hutu, whom they defined as inferior.

Similar phenomena can also be observed in China, which was conquered by both the Mongols and the Manchus. Both ethnic groups share a pastoral origin in the mountainous northern regions. Like the Tutsi, the Manchus imposed a system of racial discrimination to preserve their culture and genetic traits, thereby avoiding assimilation by the vast indigenous population, as had happened to the Mongols. As the 14th-century Arab historian Ibn Khaldun already intuited, there is a constant in human history: nomadic peoples conquer sedentary ones and impose their own laws.

According to Costin Alamariu’s theories outlined in Selective Breeding and the Birth of Philosophy, the success of these people can be attributed to three main factors: diet, culture, and environment. Firstly, the diet of nomadic herders primarily consists of dairy products, meat and fruit, obtained from trees scattered throughout their territories. Prolonged intake of high protein levels over generations produces individuals of greater stature with a more robust bone and muscle structure, better suited to military exertion. This diet contrasts sharply with the diet of sedentary communities, which is based primarily on vegetables and legumes with very limited meat consumption and is tied to the cultivation of the land.

Secondly, from a cultural perspective, conquest is more closely aligned with the worldview of herders, who do not view land as a static asset, but rather as someone who owns livestock. Since livestock is more easily taken, herders are more likely to use violence. Finally, living in mountainous areas fosters values closely tied to war. It is no coincidence that mountainous regions have historically been theatres of conflict, from the Scottish Highlands to the Balkans.

Once the origins of the aristocracy have been clarified, its worldview can be better understood. For example, the evidence gathered explains why aristocrats have always looked down on manual and agricultural labour. They also commonly build country residences, as if their blood were driving them away from cities and back to the wild spirit of their ancestors. Hunting and horseback riding serve a similar function in maintaining this connection with nature.

The concern for lineage can be explained by the pastoral origins of the aristocracy. By focusing their efforts on breeding livestock, shepherds discovered the rudiments of eugenics, seeking to produce superior specimens to those of their competitors. This gave rise to one of the fundamental principles of aristocracy: that ancestors pass on characteristics to their descendants. Not only did shepherds learn how to improve livestock through selection, but they also applied these criteria to humans. This resulted in eugenic practices such as marriage restrictions or, as in Sparta, physical examinations to exclude weak or deformed children. Training aimed at enhancing the abilities of the younger generations was also introduced.

In short, when aristocrats descended from shepherds who practiced eugenics, they were simply applying to humans what they had observed in animal breeding. The aristocrat is someone who believes that they are destined to rule, not by chance, but by nature; they are superior to others, who are destined to serve by a natural disposition. These ideas are found in the works of Plato and Aristotle, who recognized the existence of different human natures — an idea that contemporary democratic orders deem irrational and inhumane.

However, these considerations would be fruitless if we did not seek to draw conclusions that are relevant to our own time. As Martin Heidegger asserted, human beings cannot be reduced to a species because they are not a fixed substance, but rather a being-there (Dasein) in a state of constant becoming. In light of this view, some schools of thought propose a return to a sedentary, matrifocal paradigm. However, historical evidence shows that the values attributed to such societies, though celebrated today, resulted in Old Europe being dominated by groups that were better prepared for conflict. Furthermore, the egalitarianism of these communities limited individuals’ capacity for self-realization.

Although the cult of the Mother Goddess is associated with matriarchal societies, this does not imply that they originated concepts such as freedom. Ecofeminist philosophers who advocate a return to nature, envisaging it as the abolition of all exploitation and suffering, perpetuate the illusion of stepping outside of history, in both its eschatological-religious and utopian-materialist forms. In reality, such societies were characterized by scarcity and vulnerability in the face of natural phenomena.

The inherent dynamics of the agricultural economy made life in these communities monotonous and incompatible with the instincts of young men. These instincts were suppressed through social conventions designed to ensure stability. As James George Frazer observes in The Golden Bough, primitive man does not distinguish between custom and nature; to him, unwritten law appears as natural as the cycles of the Earth and the Sun. The inhabitant of prehistoric sedentary societies was therefore not a free man, but the most enslaved person who ever lived.

In contrast, young Indo-European men made vitality their greatest virtue, founding the aristocracy that gave rise to the city-states of the Iron Age. Realizing the power of female reproduction prompted men to reaffirm their own creative capacity through téchne, or artificial production. Thanks to the tools he created, man increased his dominion over reality and reduced his vulnerability to nature. This attitude has characterized the Homo genus since its origins, but it is in Europe — in the Western, Faustian spirit of which Oswald Spengler speaks — that “the struggle between nature and man, who, through his historical existence, rebels against her, has been practically fought to its end”.

The artistic expression that best represents this shift is the Greek Kuroi: statues of victorious young athletes. The new society no longer venerated the Great Mother, but instead celebrated the values of youth and beauty. The European city emerged from an attempt to preserve the freedom of nomadic peoples and barbarian youth within an urban context, celebrating a way of life that nourished the cultural expressions of the pólis. Rather than repressing youthful ambitions, European civilization sought to ennoble and refine them through the gymnasium, the training ground, and the various forms of the agón — understood as athletic, artistic, military, or dialectical competition.

Finally, the selection processes employed by elites since ancient times warrant further reflection. Having domesticated the living world, the aristocracy then turned their attention to self-domestication, thereby consolidating their position as an elite and domesticating the masses. The construction of hierarchical societies therefore hinges on the relationship between the tamers and the tamed, be they inert matter or living beings. Recent events suggest that the growing sophistication of domestication techniques will accentuate the distance between tamers and the tamed in the short and medium term.

---

READ MORE from Arktos: