Comparison Between Tocqueville's The Old Regime And The Revolution

Tocqueville's assertion that the phrase “gentleman” represents nothing less than the progression of egalitarian thought throughout Europe and America is one far less far-fetched than it would appear at first glance. To a modern reader, especially an American one, putting any sort of premium on the word seems somewhat odd, given its almost whimsical nature as a modifier to “men” largely used to add syllables to introductory speeches. However, it's trivial usage belies its true past as a rigidly enforced demarcation of class and status in the Old Regime.
Tracing the creation of the gentleman to the creation of a clearly defined class of nobility in feudal Europe, Tocqueville claims in his The Old Regime and the Revolution that “the class since

known as the nobility did not form a caste, but was composed originally of the chief men of the nation, thus forming a real aristocracy.” (106) A proud aristocrat himself, Tocqueville made a clear distinction between aristocrats and nobility: while both required the bearer to be born into the post, aristocrats’ privileges from the education and cultural exposure their position allowed them, while nobles were a clearly defined caste with no dedicated skillset. Tocqueville considered aristocrats to be the guardians of civilized society, the creators of its culture and defenders of its citizens, but felt no such warm feelings towards defined systems of nobility. Nobility, Tocqueville wrote, “resembled an aristocracy inasmuch as it was the governing body; but birth alone decided who should stand at the head of that body. All who were not of noble birth were excluded from its ranks, and filled a station in the state which might vary in dignity, but was always subordinate.” (106)
Nobles were often ill-equipped to serve in the lofty positions they laid sole claim to, and became increasingly isolated and unpopular among the general citizenry in much of Europe during the 18th and 19th centuries. In France in particular, that animosity served as much of the fuel for the fires of revolution. Nevertheless, the rigidly enforced class markers diving the nobility from the common people remained steadfastly intact, and the word “gentleman” remained at the forefront of that divide. “In France, the word “gentilhomme” never acquired more latitude than it possessed at first. Since the Revolution it has become disused, but not modified. The word which described members of the caste was preserved unaltered, because the caste itself was retained as widely distinct as ever from other classes of society.” (108) To address a commoner as “sir” was a conversational faux pas of the highest order, tantamount to calling Joseph McCarthy “comrade. ”
In contrast, the “gentleman” label became increasingly arbitrary in England, in which the aristocracy’s traditions and composition increasingly bore little resemblance to their continental counterparts.

While wealth and familial reputation still remained as powerful class markers, the concept of birthright nobility was slipping from societal memory. A gentleman was now someone who possessed the social graces and cultural background of the old aristocracy, regardless of their status of birth. Unlike the nobles of France, who were increasingly forced to coalesce around the almighty Bourbon monarchy in order to maintain their vaunted status, the political power of Parliament and England’s robust court system allowed English aristocrats a good deal of distance from the comparatively deferential English Crown. “As distinctions of classes became less marked in England,” writes Tocqueville, “ [gentleman's] signification widened. Century after century, it was applied to lower and lower classes in the social scale. The English at last bore it with them to America, where it was indiscriminately applied to all classes.”(108) The United States, being the logical endpoint of England’s inchings towards egalitarianism, managed to render the word completely meaningless. As Tocqueville writes in Democracy in America, Americans think so little of the trappings of nobility that “if [an American] happens by chance to become heated, he will say ‘gentleman’ in addressing his interlocutor.” (232) What was once the highest form of deference to a social superior is now a minor form of flattery, no different than addressing someone as “Mister” to win brownie points with them. As a signifier, “gentleman” has found itself subsumed wholly by

egalitarianism.