In both The General Prologue and Gullivers Travels, Geoffrey Chaucer and Jonathan Swift

have satirized aspects of the estates system of medieval Europe and the political (class)
system of a more modernized European society. The General Prologue; an estates satire
(system of 3 classes- commoners, nobility and clergy), was written by Chaucer in the 14
th

century (1380-1392). Satire was a window in Medieval Europe through which one saw how
the system had gone out of hand. Chaucer creates his satire through various personalities of
his pilgrims- the knight, merchant and religious figures. Gullivers Travels, written almost
400 years later by Swift (in 1726), satirizes the modern political/ class system. He satirizes
the Lilliputians pretence that they are good people and the Lilliputian Emperor, who is
supposed to be King George I. Both authors are critical of greed and corruption in the 14
th

and 18
th
century.

Chaucers portrait of the knight in The General Prologue depicts him as a stereotypical man.
This can be seen when Chaucer describes him as A KNIGHT there was and that a worthy
man, and also He was a very perfect gentle knight. The knight can be interpreted as the one
who is usually the hero whenever there is trouble. However, in the analysis of The Knights
Tale, it is said that the knight was a mere mercenary (one who fights for money). This means
that the knight doesnt care which side he is on, as long as one pays him more. Through the
knight, Chaucer has satirized the type of person that has an outward appearance of one thing
(perfect) and an actual personality of another. This flaw is common among the upper
classes of the estates system, especially the clergy and nobility, and is still a common one
throughout the higher socio-economic classes of todays ranking system.

Swift has, like Chaucer, also satirized this flaw through his characters, the Lilliputians. When
Gulliver first comes upon their shores, the Lilliputians, although they tie him down, treat him
rather nicely. The Lilliputians show their intentions of not harming him through an orator
making a speech, of which Gulliver could observe many Periods of Threatenings, and others
of Promises, Pity and Kindness, through which the conclusion is drawn that they will not ill-
treat him, unless he provokes them first. However, when they realise that Gulliver can be
used to their advantage in destroying Blefuscu, the Lilliputians instantly arent as hospitable
anymore. Their greed is clear when Gulliver says And so unmeasurable is the Ambition of
the Princes, that he seemed to think of nothing less than reducing the whole Empire of
Blefuscu into a Province. Like Chaucer, Swift has satirized this flaw, but through a whole
group of characters than one.

The Merchant, in Chaucers The General Prologue, is the satirical embodiment of a person
with a moral weakness. The merchant is said to be wealthy which is shown when he is
described- In motley, and high on horse he sat and Upon his head a Flandrish beaver hat,
His boots clasped fair and fetisly. Motely was an expensive cloth with variegated colours
and patterns, so not everyone could afford it, meaning that the merchant was rich. Later on,
Chaucer says There wist no wight that he was in debt (which means there was no person
who knew he was in debt). In Chaucers time, being indebted was symbolic of moral
weakness, since one would spend the money rather than saving it. In another analysis, when
Chaucer says Forsooth he was a worthy man withal, he is supposed to have written it
ironically, since the merchant was not at all worthy.

Swift has likewise satirized this flaw through the Lilliputian Emperor. The Emperor, who
represents King George I, is easily influenced by his favourites, Flimnap and Skyresh
Bolgolam. The Emperor prefers to listen to Flimnap more than his own conscience. This is
evident during Chapter 5 of Voyage to Lilliput, as the Emperor greets Gulliver rather coldly,
and Gulliver hears from a certain whisper that Flimnap and Bolgolam had represented my
intercourse with those ambassadors as a mark of disaffection. Gulliver also says- I have
some private reasons to believe, that this visit from his majesty gave Flimnap an opportunity
of doing me ill offices to his master when the Emperor dines with him. With a similar
purpose to Chaucer, Swift has satirized this flaw, except in his instance, as a mirror of King
George I, who supposedly has a weak moral.

Chaucer has also, in his satire, expressed the corruption of the Church, which was a major
flaw in his time. The Church, because of the amount of power it had, usually became faulty
in their reasoning. Chaucer has shown this through 2 of his pilgrims- the prioress and monk.
They are all religious figures, yet they dont behave as they should in one way or another. In
The General Prologue, it is quite evident in places that Chaucer is mocking the Church- A
pair of beads gauded all with green, And thereon hung a brooch of gold full sheen On which
was written first a crowned A, And after: Amor Vincit Omnia (the prioress is too flashy and
wears too much jewellery) and A MONK there was, a fair for the mastery, An outrider that
loved venery., meaning that the monk loved hunting, which is against the rules of a
monastery. This shows that the Church is much more lenient with its own people.



Swift, whose society was now more dependent on the government than the church, satirized
the corruption of the government instead. The British government, which had the most power,
replaced the Church of medieval times. Swifts fictional satire morphed the British
government into a race of tiny, cruel, self-serving people whom inhabit an island. This
government corruption is evident when one of the Lilliputians read a contract- FIRST, The
Man-Mountain shall not depart from our Dominions, without our License under our Great
Seal, which proves how they believe Gulliver can be controlled; despite him being much
larger, showing how highly they think of themselves. Swifts satire is based off a more
modern approach to politics, while Chaucers is more medieval- the corruption of the Church.

In conclusion, both Chaucer and Swift have created satires that mock the flaws of the ranking
systems of their time. Chaucer mocked the flaws of the higher classes- clergy and nobility
through his estates satire by creating twisted versions of stereotypical characters. Swift has
created a satire on the more modern class system of his day, which mocks human nature,
politics and society. Chaucer has parodied the flaw of dishonesty through the Knight, moral
weakness through the merchant and corruption of the Church throughout The General
Prologue, mainly using the friar, monk and prioress. Swift mocked his system using the
Lilliputians, which represented its corruption and dishonesty. The Lilliputian Emperor was
symbolic of King George I. The two authors had provided their readers with a valuable
insight into their world and satirized the many flaws of their time, which includes ones of
ours as well.