[mabub24]

Wealthy individuals during and around the gilded age had a view of charity that was in some senses very similar to modern charity by the super-wealthy, but also quite different. Like today's wealthy, they often used charity as a mechanism for social climbing, and as a dick-measuring contest. They also used it to try and fend off criticism that is usually directed at them when income inequality gets very high.

However, they were also often guided by a strict idea of noblesse obliger, which we would consider patronizing and archaic today, but which was considered an extremely serious task for them. It was fundamentally their role in society, as they saw it. They were also quite a bit more religiously motivated. This extended to the idea of public service and holding public office (of course they also held those positions as a way to help themselves to the pot, but the two ideas were often present at the same time). They saw charity as an act of duty before as an act of kindness in many instances.

The modern super wealthy no longer think of themselves as constrained by a notion of "duty", for better and for worse.

[AniseAbyss]

The 1% of the past were much more involved in government and ofcourse the military. I always found it interesting that in ancient Rome even the most decadent senators spent a few years as an officer in the legions.