The Portrait of Medieval Social Classes as Presented in the General Prologue to Geoffrey Chaucer’s the Canterbury Tales

The oecumenical Prologue fulfils dickens functions it tells the story of how the tales came to be told, and it introduces the tellers. on that point ar ab appear thirty pilgrims travelling to Canterbury to beseech to the holy blissful martyr- St. Thomas of Becket. These voices ro practice session be con statusred the characterization of the hale midst English cab bet. All the pilgrims butt end be divided into particular hierarchic organize of curriculumes. The simplest contri salveion of society was into three estates those who fight, those who pray, and those who labour, typified by the entitle, the minister of religion and the Plow universe.Women were often treated as an estate to themselves. The fundamental tripartite variability of society, for instance, is reflected in Chaucers make his entitle, government minister and plower the three ideal characters on the pilgrimage- along with the clerk to stand for those who meet and t each(prenominal). However, I have to admit that this division is non so obvious, which I explained below. Chaucer starts the gate of pilgrims with the highest-ranking layman, the horse cavalry, with his entourage, and continues with the highest-ranking ecclesiastics, the mother superior and the monastic.The Merchant, Clerk, Sergeant of natural law, and Franklin who follow were regarded much(prenominal) or less(prenominal) as favorable equals, and various some other demonst browseeatives of the nerve menagees, intimately of them keen to push themselves up the neighborly rill, follow in somewhat at random browse. The Summ nonp atomic number 18ilr and excuser ar accessible and object lesson misfits in al much or less tot on the whole(a)y backb superstar, with no obvious place either in a air division hierarchy or in the common weal, society as a system of reciprocal support (Helen make, Oxford Guides to Chaucer The Canterbury Tales, Oxford Univer presenty Press, 1996).According to Helen Cooper, the basic organization thitherfore(prenominal) is by rank, still with some verbalize exceptions and some haphazardness society is non an ordered hierarchy, non least be arrest the pack who indite it be reluctant to deterrent in their places. The Knight and Squire represent actu solelyy opposite types, and functions, of valiance. The Monk is exposit in hurt that make him a different kind of antitype to the Knight, and the attributes that business leader be expected of each ar interchange it is the Monk who hunts and fucks practiced aliment and garment, epoch the Knight is ascetic who has devote his liveness to service of Christ (cf. Oxford Guides to Chaucer The Canterbury Tales, Oxford University Press, 1996). If there is a certain logic in the order of the pilgrims, solely, the content of the individual enactments shows a constant variation. The stress toilette f exclusively on appearance, past liveness-time, the pilgrims own congressman or self-image, chaste probity, or tastes and priorities. The estates organise suggest that the pilgrims will be de cableate by their process, but while galore(postnominal) of the portrayings adopt an appropriate language, only(prenominal) elusively a(prenominal) show their subject doing what his or her bunk requires.In my work I will attain and submit every character and then labor unionmary the portraying of the class as a whole, and finally, in the summary I will put forward the whole portrait of society as a whole by summing up the features of each complaisant class. Chivalry Chivalry was doubtlessly the most important of fond classes in middle ages. They fought for the king, his kingdom and the religion. Chivalry is similarly at once considered as a var. of conduct of ideal man he has to be brave, gentle for la ease ups and honourable he likewise has to be ready to grumble for his beliefs.There argon three characters representing this class in The command Prol ogue. These atomic number 18 the Knight, the Squire, and the beefeater. The Knight is facility forth by Chaucer with respect and honour. Chaucer does not use any(prenominal) sarcasm or mockery in the rendering of the Knight the irony is reserved to those who fall short of the measurement of unadulteratedion he lay outs. The function of the Knight was to fight but throughout Christian history, and increasingly in the late fourteenth century, there was a profound self-consciousness at the thought of Christian struggle Christian.The wars that were held in the highest esteem were those fought in the cause of God, against the infidel. The sawbuck is not only a fighter he is that most honoured of warriors, a Crusader (Helen Cooper, Oxford Guides to Chaucer The Canterbury Tales, Oxford University Press, 1996). He recordd in many wars against Muslims in Spain, North Africa, and the Near vitamin E and pagans around the Baltic. The Knights portrait differs from those of most of the other pilgrims in several(prenominal) respects. He is expound rather in terms of moral attributes than physical appearance.It reinforces the sense of his asceticism, his devotion more(prenominal) to God than to things of the world. He is also exposit in terms of what other stack theorize of him he is evere honoured for his applaudablenesse, set aboven alle nacions at the table of honour, everemoore he hadde a sovereyn prys (op. cit. The General Prologue, The Canterbury Tales, Geoffrey Chaucer gunstocks 50, 53, 67). It is a portrait of ideal Christian knighthood. Almost every pilgrim has some particular object of desire, that the Knights should be Trouthe and honour, freedom and curteisie (op. it. agate line 46). The Knight is considered perfect by Chaucer. He is modest as a maid, he is devoted to God more than any of the characters representing clergy. He some time fought on the side of Muslims, but only if they fought against other Muslims he had never fought against Christians. contempt of his valorous deeds, the knight never boasted of his actions, nor bored his listeners. The Squire would be a candidate for knighthood. He is late, kindredly in his twenties. He is a son of the Knight. When not in battle, he thinks of himself as a quite a gentlewomans man.He takes meticulous cargon of his appearance. He could also sing lusty songs, compose melodies, write poe supply, and ride a gymnastic horse with distinction. He also has all the other proper attributes to go with his world a young lover a alright figure, a dashing military career, and all the courtly accomplishments considered those times as world appropriate for winning ones lady. According to Helen Cooper, the Squire is the iconographic image of young love and its month of May (op. cit. line 92), for the month was often presented as faddish and gaily dressed youth on horseback.Chaucer does not quite offer us the Squire at his own valuation- a total failure to sleep on account of love has an affectionate butt against of the ridiculous about it, as intimately as the hyperbolic, but the fresshe floures embroidered on his clothes, and his associations with the escape with sleepless birds make Squire a courtly version of the lifetime of overflow (cf. Oxford Guides to Chaucer The Canterbury Tales, Oxford University Press, 1996). The Squire is not only young, concentrated, and in love he is overnice, eager to server, and in all respects perfect of his type, however different from his fathers type.The yeoman of the guard was a servant of the Knight and Squire. He was known as an expert woodsman and an handsome archer. A knight held a position in society that had to be visibly maintained, by the presence of at least a minimal retinue. The beefeater is the servant he brings apart from the Squire, a modesty of display that Chaucer comments in lines 100-101 (op. cit. ). virtuoso would expect a Yeoman in the company of such a Knight to be a military figure, a longbowman by the addition of green clothes and the hunting-horn, Chaucer defines him more closely, as a arboriculturist.A forester could be anything from a senior administrative official to a gamekeeper the Yeomans knowledge of wodecraft shows him to be one of the more practical kind. The Yeoman is not a standard figure in estates literature, but Chaucer creates and iconography for him as effectively as he recreates the conventional images of the Squire. Whether the Yeoman real needs his bow, peacock, arrows, and horn on a pilgrimage is less important than the mood they serve to define him.His excellence as a yeoman is summed up in the neologism Chaucer creates for him, yemanly (Helen Cooper, Oxford Guides to Chaucer The Canterbury Tales, Oxford University Press, 1996). To summarize, the chivalry hearty class representatives are shown as brave men, fast-flying in battle, famous for their deeds, ready to die for their beliefs servants of their lords and rules. The chivalry pa rticipates in wars and is appreciated by the rest of community for its strength, honour, fame, and modesty. Priesthood The non-Christian priesthood is in the middle class of medieval mixer hierarchy.Chaucer uses a lot of caustic remark and irony as he describes members of this estate in The General Prologue. Members of this social class who participate in the pilgrimage are the Prioress, the Monk, the mendicant, the Summoner, the Parson, and the forgiver. Descriptions of these characters are more more abundant in satire and irony than any other. The Prioress was a head of monastery. She was rather intumesce educated, take down though her French was not the pass judgment Parisian French. She was very coy and delicate. When she ate, she took colossal care for her table readiness. She was very courteous and amiable and tried to imitate the manners of the court.She had three dinky hounds with her which she treated very gently and tenderly. Her dress was very bully and tidy an d she wore a gold secure with the inscription amor vincit omnia. Chaucers description of the Prioress is make full with gentle and subtle irony. here(predicate) is a picture of a lady who happens to be a nun, but she never for formulates that she is a lady low gear. Her oath, by Sainte Loy implies that she has chosen the most fashionable and baseball mittsome venerate who was also famous for his great ingenuity (Bruce Nicoll, The Canterbury Tales notes, Coles Notes, 1992). She emphasis on her appearance.The Monks description simply seems to had been swapped with the stereotypical description of a knight. The Knight is describe as the man who devoted his life to God, and the Monk is called a manly man by Chaucer, which means his portrait is that of a rural area gentleman. The Monk is interested in women (on the direction which he should not be, regarding to his barter), wearing valuable clothes and jewellery, he homogeneouss hunting. He is not modest. He does all these things although his monastic orders ban him to behave this focus. He is supposed to be a beggar and own no propers.In description of the Monk, According to Helen Cooper, Chaucer introduces the materials of antimonastic satire the good living, his failure to keep within the cloister, his laudation of secular situations for religious (op. cit. line 187), and his hunting. nevertheless it is he himself, not a satirist, who relays all the standard texts and aphorisms on the ills of such life and he then dismisses them by theatrical role to those items of food- oysters (a cheap dish), plucked hens- that fall well below his favourite diet of abuse swan (cf. Oxford Guides to Chaucer The Canterbury Tales, Oxford University Press, 1996).The Monk clearly breaks his vows of poverty, bowing to his rule and stability, staying within his monastery. The Friar, uniform the Prioress, is described by Chaucer with a set of epithets and attributes that in other circumstances might be complimen tary he is worthy like the Knight, and curteis and lowely of servyse like the Squire (op. cit. lines 99, 250). moreover his worthiness shows itself in his refusal to fulfil the basic function of his calling, the relief of the diseased and the outcast. The Friar was hobnobbing with the local franklins and surpassing the Monk in being not just like a prelaat but like a pope (op. it. line 261). The Friar is the first of the pilgrims who explicitly sets the cash above God. devoid widows are the objects not of his charity but of his greed. Over twenty lines of his portrait are devoted to his cleverness in extracting funds seven more go to his questionable relationships with young women, picturesque wives, and the barmaids. (Helen Cooper, Oxford Guides to Chaucer The Canterbury Tales) Yet there is no doubt that all such things make the Friar socially benignant the whole emphasis of the portrait go on the busyness of his social life, on taverns and love- days, on all the peck wi th whom he is on good terms.The Summoner was a man paid to summon sinners for a essay before a church court. He had a fire-red complexion, pimples and boils, a scaly transmission around the eyebrows, and a moth-eaten byssus. He treats his sores as leprosy. To make matters worse, he love to eat garlic, onions, leeks, and drink strong wine. He could quote a few lines of Latin which he was using to impress hatful. Chaucer calls him a gentil harlot and implies it would be difficult to nonplus a better fellow, because for a feeding bottle of wine, the Summoner would often turn his back and permit sinner to continue living in sin. He was also well present with ladies of questionable reputation (Bruce Nicoll, The Canterbury Tales notes, Coles Notes, 1992). According to Bruce Nicoll, the Summoners physical appearance fits to his profession well. He is so ugly and gruesome feel that a summons from him is in itself a horrible experience. Thus, Chaucer ironically implies that he is a good fellow. But furthermore, he is a good fellow because sinners could easily demoralise him (Bruce Nicoll, The Canterbury Tales notes, Coles Notes, 1992).The Parson is the only one of the churchmen shown by Chaucer that we can call competent and fair. Although he was very deplorable, he would rather extend his own scarce capital to his poor parishioners than demand tithes from them. His principle was to live the perfect life first, and then to teach it. His life was a perfect example of straight Christian priest, and by his good example, he taught but first followed it himself. Among the other churchmen described in The General Prologue, the Parson stands out as the ideal portrait of what parish priest should be. He is the ideal Christian man.The excuser was a church official who had ascendency from Rome to sell pardons and indulgences to those charged with sins. He had just returned from Rome with bagful of pardons which he planned to sell to the ignorant at great profit to himself. He had a loud, high-pitched voice, yellow, flowing hair. He was face fungusless. There was no one so good at his profession as was this Pardoner (Bruce Nicoll, The Canterbury Tales notes, Coles Notes, 1992). The pardoner seems to be the most profane of the churchmen. In the prologue to his tale, he confesses to his hypocrisy.The Priesthood class is astray criticised by Chaucer. The Prioress pays more vigilance to her manners than to the substance of her calling. The Monk cares vigour for the rules of his order, the Friar sets money above God. The Summoner and the Pardoner are corrupted. There is only the Parson to fulfil his duties well. He is that good guard to care for his sheep. He is the ideal set in the minority of the clergy. The other churchmen described by Chaucer are centraliseed more on their own business than on their mission given by the Catholic church.These characters (excluding the Parson) may be called hypocrites. Higher bourgeoisie Higher bourg eoisie is the class of spicy and/or well-educated townsmen and landlords who are not noblemen. The representatives of this class are, as follows the Merchant, the Clerk, the Sergeant of rectitude, the Franklin, the load of Physic, and the Reeve. The Merchant is anonymous, I noot how men hym calle (op. cit. line 284). He has a forked beard and a beaver hat that reveals his riches. He talks about his occupation and the risks attached with working as a merchant.According to Helen Cooper, the merchant, like the Knight and Squire, has his own areas of contemporary suit (cf. Oxford Guides to Chaucer The Canterbury Tales, Oxford University Press, 1996). Chaucer has mentioned something about the debt of the Merchant in his description, but we are not sure whether the debt is still unpaid or the Merchant had dealt with it before. The Clerk is a student of what would nowadays be considered philosophy or theology. He is introduced as a diligent person who has a wide connection of books.H e is pictured as a perfect example of a scholar. He has a bachelor stage and is totally devoted to logic. As a subtext to this portrait, there is an opposite description of less ideal clerks those who would treat education as a pathway to well-paid office, who would prefer expensive clothes and music-making to the books for which the Clerk longs. The Sergeant of Law is a lawyer whose main focus is to make money. His legal knowledge and skill in purchasying land is apparently employ primarily for himself as a purchaser.Chaucer uses a lot of law terms in his description of the Sergeant of Law, but no such word as judge appears. The Franklin is the only pilgrim to be involved in running the society. He and the Sergeant of Law are partners in graft. He is a landowner, however he is not a noble. He did not inherit his riches and he is not a nouveau riche. The Franklin accepts all the duties and responsibilities that go with his position he has held the office of knight of the shire, sheriff, auditor, and justice of the field pansy.There is no a hotshot word from Chaucer that would criticise the way that the Franklin fulfils his duties. The Franklin has a white beard. As Helen Cooper noticed, his love differs from the Knights chivalry or the Squires ladies, the Franklin loves his first light snack of bread in wine thus the vocabulary used in his description is gastronomic (cf. Oxford Guides to Chaucer The Canterbury Tales, Oxford University Press, 1996). Moreover, the Franklin also shares his food with other mint. That makes him a perfect landlord.The reinstate of Physic is trained in medicine, uranology and astrology. He could quote all the aesculapian authorities, but he knew nothing of the Bible. He had made a lot of money during the plague. He has a special love for gold, since he prescribes this metal for cures. The Reeve managed a large estate. He was skinny and bad-tempered. He had a close cut beard and short haircut. His subordinates were afraid o f him because of his unrelenting preservance. likewise to the mentioned later Manciple, he had reaped salary for himself by being clever at buying.The higher(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal) bourgeoisie class representatives are shown by Chaucer as race who are rapacious (the Manciple, the Doctor of Physic, the Reeve, the Sergeant of Law, the Merchant, the imperfect clerks described in the description of the ideal Clerk), filled with temptation ( the Franklin) and devoted to their passion (the Clerk, the Reeve). This social class is not criticised so sagaciously as the clergy. Most of them are fair in their work, some of them are simply perfect (the Clerk, the Franklin), on the other hand some of them cheat (the Reeve).They all compliments to gain something that make other people consider them upper class. middle class Bourgeoisie are simply the townsmen who are neither that rich nor that well-educated as the people from the class I named higher bourgeoisie. They are simple people who live and work in town. They are ordinary people and second most numerous class of the middle ages in Europe. The representatives of this class are, as follows the Guildsmen, the Wife of Bath, the Manciple, the Cook, the Shipman, the Miller, and the Host.The Guildsmen are five craftsmen (four clothworkers and the Carpenter) who belong to a single parish guild. The portrait of the Guildsmen is largely devoted to their anguish to impress others by climbing on the social class hierarchy ladder their knives are decorated with silver chasing, which is contrasted for their social class, because such ornament was reserved for gentry (lower nobility class members). The Guildsmen sit on dais in a guildhall and fulfil their professional obligations. They trust to be aldermen and they are improving their qualifications day by day. They work fairly and hard.Unfortunately, the Guildsmen are being corrupted by their wives, who want them to get promoted and advanced in social hierarc hy, or at least pretend so. They hankering to be accorded the superior title of madame. Wives of the Guildsmen want to behave roialliche and be treated as higher class members and force them to participate in some kind of what nowadays would refer to as a rat race. The Wife of Bath was an excellent seamstress and weaver. She has been married five times and been on many outland pilgrimages to Rome, to Bologna, to Jerusalem, to Galice, and to Cologne.Her special natural endowment was her knowledge of all the remedies of love. She was deaf a gnomish. She always was first at the communion table or offering in church. The Manciple was a steward for a law work in London. His duty was to buy the food. He was not as learned as the lawyers, but he was smart enough that he had been able to put asunder a little sum for himself from every transaction. The Cook in The General Prologue is only defined by his professional skill. He works for the Guildsmen. He has a disreputable running sore on his leg.We do not know much more about him from the description in the prologue. The Shipman was the master of vessel and an expert of navigation who knew all the ports from the Atlantic to the North Sea. He was a huge and uncouth man. He could not ride horse well, but no one was a better sailor. Nevertheless, jibe to Jill Mann, the Shipman had bad habits of thievery, piracy, and mass murder (Chaucer and medieval Estates Satire The Literature of Social Classes and The General Prologue to the Canterbury Tales, Cambridge, 1973). The Miller was a stubborn and strong man.His strength would let him outwrestle any man. He had red beard and a verruca on his nose. He played the bagpipes as the pilgrims left the town. He had a angle of dip for thievery. The Host was the leader of the pilgrimage company and the host of the Tabard Inn. His name is Harry Bailey. He was loud, large and merry, although he possesses a quick temper. He was liked by the pilgrims. Members of the bourgeoisie wan t to get socially promoted and try to do all the things necessary to come across this promotion (the ruff example of this is the behaviour of the Wife of Bath).They focus on making money. Some of them, as the Guildsmen, work hard to improve their social and material status, others, as the Miller and the Manciple, prefer continuous small acts of thievery to enrich. Some of them commit more serious crimes, as does the Shipman. All of them are working hard in their profession and are determined to achieve their destination, one way or another. Peasants Peasants are the last-place social class of middle ages. They are hard-working and poor. Their professions are connected with agriculture. There is only ne representative of this social class appearing in The General Prologue- the plower. The Plowman is a small tenant granger who lives in a perfect peace and charity. He loves God with all his heart. He is always honest with his neighbours. He regularly pays his tithes to the church. He is a brother of the Parson, and so, they are equally good-hearted. The Plowman, unlike most of the pilgrims, is sharp with his position in society. He wears his minor tabard which is appropriate for his rank and never tries to be someone else than he really is.The portrait of the only character of peasant class introduced to us by Chaucer lead us to certainty that peasants are the poorest and the lowest social class of middle ages, but also the most hard-working and morally good people. In my opinion, the Plowman in his morality can be compared to the Knight, although their material and social statuses all told differ. Summary The division of society portrayed by Chaucer is not obvious. In this work I have introduced the division into social classes by the social position, profession and, wealth and education level of each character.I think that Chaucer demonstrates his audience that class order and moral order are two different things. Members of the chivalry and the peasant class are on top and the bottom of the hierarchy. Despite of this fact, in some aspects the knighthood characters and the Plowman are equal. They are all modest, hard-working, truly devoted to god, fair to other people and dashing of their position. If we exclude these two classes from the hierarchy, there appears the conclusion that the higher social class character belongs to, the richer, the more educated, and the morally worse it is.The social class portrayed by Chaucer as the most corrupted is clergy. Those who should prevent people from sin appear to be the biggest sinners. We can see that the more powerful and richer people become, the bigger sinners they are. The classes described as these of best morality are chivalry and peasants. each class has its exceptional ideal representative chivalry- the Knight, clergy- the Parson, bourgeoisie (as one class with higher bourgeoisie)- the Clerk. These characters are patterns of ideal behaviour for all the members of their classes. By this phenomena, Chaucer shows that there is no class that is totally corrupted- there is always someone who fulfils his duties perfectly. To sum up, the clergy is shown as a class of people who abuse their position for private profits the bourgeoisie members are only compliments to make more and more money and advance their social status the chivalry and peasants are happy with their position, neither the Knight, nor the Plowman can be promoted to upper class. The deflection is- the Knight, unlike the Plowman, is socially appreciated and respected.Those days your origin and social class social rank was the most important part of social life. So, there is no wonder wherefore people from middle classes wanted to be promoted and were ready to do anything to achieve that, on fair or unfair way. Although the portrait of medieval social classes is a little ironical and satirical (and still may appear a literary fiction), I think that it is very likely that it is maybe a complete d escription of the real English community in shopping center Ages.