Fourteenth century society

cleric-knight-workman

We’re often told that medieval society consisted of three groups: those who work, those who fight and those who pray. Even by the last quarter of the fourteenth century when Langland had Piers Plowman say to the knight “I’ll toil and sweat for both of us. I’m willing to work all my life because of the good will I have towards you. But this on condition that you, for your part, protect Holy Church and myself against those ravaging villains who destroy everything they come upon” it was no longer true.

Medieval society was far more complex than the concept of the three orders would have us believe. Chaucer reflected this at the end of the century, not only in the assortment of pilgrims on their way to Canterbury, but in the subjects of the tales they tell.  His pilgrims included a miller, a knight, a cook, a reeve and a pardoner. Characters in the tales include a carpenter, an alchemist and a priest. When most of us think about the fourteenth century, however, I’m sure that we think in terms of peasants, knights (and their ladies) and priests or monks.

Not only was there diversity within society, but there was also diversity within groups. Not all peasants were poor. Some lived very comfortably and employed other peasants. Some had a lot of land, others had just enough to live. Some, reeves, had authority over the others in their village, rich or poor. Not all knights were rich. Some could barely afford to buy armour or keep their horses. Some became wealthy by capturing and ransoming other knights. Some became poor because they had themselves been captured and had to pay a ransom. The church didn’t just consist of monks and priests, but friars, pardoners and summoners.  Some priests lived well in rich parishes or in the households of wealthy men, others struggled to live on the tithes of their parishioners.

Towns had their own structures and hierarchies. Merchants had apprentices and could aspire to high office. Richard Whittington (of Dick Whittington and his cat fame) was a mercer who became mayor of London. In the towns men practised trades: smiths, bakers, apothecaries, coopers, wheelwrights, bowyers and fletchers.  Some towns had universities, which grew in the fourteenth century, producing scholars and learned texts. Increased access to education meant that there were more people, in towns at least, able to read the texts. Education gave commoners the opportunity to rise in the church or in government.

Fourteenth century society was not static. Women could rise in society by marriage and men could advance through their own efforts and by patronage.

Advertisements

20 Comments

Filed under Fourteenth Century

20 responses to “Fourteenth century society

  1. It’s easy to forget about the businessmen and women, tradesmen, and those with some administrative responsibility. I haven’t caught up with my medievalist friend lately, but last time I met her she was talking about what a rich resource medieval court records were for insights into the lives of women. They would use whatever legal powers they had.

    hat’s the same friend I mentioned earlier; she was working on a paper on the development of urban culture. Not lattes and street art back then: it was more about not upsetting your neighbours in the high density urban environment that many were new to.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Court records and wills are about the only places ordinary peoples lives are recorded. A couple of years ago there was a programme on the TV which mentioned how much information historians learn about the Black Death and the way it spread from wills.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Terry Tyler

    I’m reading a terrific book at the moment, called The Time Traveller’s Guide to Medieval England, by Ian Mortimer. I bought it for research for the 14th century novel on to-write list ~ I read it because it’s fascinating!! Love this period of history 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

  3. In Southamptin even women could become rich merchants in their own right, like Dame Claramunda in the 13th century.

    Like

  4. Michael Mulhall

    Another way of dividing society into divisions comes with the terms “nobilitas” (or nobles & upper gentry), “mediocre” (or merchant classes) and “minores” (or, both the working and non-working poor). These divisions also leave things indistinct, but it was in use in the centuries preceding the Later middle Ages, as one might term the 14th and 15th centuries. Besides employing the clergy to administrate things, because they could read, the kings and emperors also made use of the lesser nobility and gentry for the same purpose. Markward of Anweiler was elevated by Henry VI of Germany to be count of Abruzzo and margrave of Ancona – an elevation many of the emperor’s nobility protested, even though his military success prodded the emperor to do so.

    Like

  5. Nice concise over view…I am just reading a biography of William Marshal …which gives an insight into knights problems and the capturing of other knights…often very civilised too. Interesting stuff.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s