The Canterbury Tales brings together a number of complex characters from a wide array of social, political, and religious backgrounds. Often, these characters do not get along, and the tension between them is both a source of entertainment for the audience and a deeper critique of the social landscape of Medieval England. Despite their varied backgrounds, the characters in The Canterbury Tales can generally be categorized into three distinct groups, known as the Three Estates.
The Three Estate Model describes the organization of English society in the middle ages. These three estates were simple: those who prayed (the clergy, or other church affiliates), those who fought (soldiers and knights), and those who labored (the peasantry, or working class). One can easily determine which characters in The Canterbury Tales fall into which estate. Moreover, one can also see how some estates are treated more kindly than others. The clergy, for example, are portrayed as largely hypocritical characters whose corruption has brought them wealth in the midst of their various oaths of poverty. The fighting class is generally treated with more respect, as in the example of the earnest albeit tone-deaf knight. Finally, the working class receives the most complex portrayal of all, with Chaucer using characters like the Miller to entertain the reader at the same time such characters are often the ones to acknowledge the hypocrisy and narcissism of the others.
While scholarship on The Canterbury Tales has since complicated the Three Estate Model, it is a good place for readers to begin when considering the relationships that the pilgrims might have to one another. Furthermore, the tensions that crop up among the characters throughout the text ultimately suggest that the Three Estate Model is itself an insufficient and inequitable way to organize and maintain a prosperous society. As such, The Canterbury Tales continues to be studied as both a product and astute criticism of its time.
