Gentleman

A gentleman is a man known for being chivalrous, courteous, or honourable. The term originally referred to the lowest rank within England’s landed gentry, sitting below an esquire and above a yeoman. This rank specifically included the younger sons of the younger sons of peers, as well as the younger sons of baronets, knights, and esquires, continuing in perpetual succession. The concept of a gentleman thus captured the shared quality of gentility—often signified by a coat of arms—a status held by both the peerage and the gentry, the two classes that made up the British nobility.

In this sense, the English social category of gentleman corresponds to the French gentilhomme (nobleman), though in Great Britain it referred to a member of the peerage. The historian Maurice Keen noted that the social category of gentleman was the closest English equivalent to the French noblesse. During the 14th century, the term described the hereditary ruling class, the very group the rebels of the Peasants’ Revolt (1381) had in mind when they repeated their grievances. In the 17th century, the jurist John Selden wrote in Titles of Honour (1614) that the title gentleman was used in England interchangeably with nobilis (nobility by rank or personal quality), and he described how men were elevated to nobility in European monarchies.

Gentleman by conduct

In the 19th century, James Henry Lawrence explored the concepts and functions of social rank in a monarchy in his book On the Nobility of the British Gentry, or the Political Ranks and Dignities of the British Empire, Compared with those on the Continent (1827). The idea of a gentleman by conduct also emerged. In The Tale of Melibee, Geoffrey Chaucer wrote that a man should not be called a gentleman if he does not diligently protect his good name.

In The Wife of Bath’s Tale (1388–1396), he stated that whoever is most virtuous, both in private and public, and most intent on performing gentle deeds, should be considered the greatest gentleman. In the French allegorical poem The Romance of the Rose (circa 1400), Guillaume de Lorris and Jean de Meun described a gentleman as someone who acts as a gentleman should. This definition evolved into the 18th century, when Richard Steele wrote in the Tatler No. 207 (1710) that the title of gentleman should never be attached to a man’s circumstances, but only to his behaviour in them. This idea is reflected in the apocryphal reply of King James II of England to a lady who asked him to make her son a gentleman: “I could make him a nobleman, but God Almighty could not make him a gentleman.”

Selden argued that no charter could make a gentleman, a view attributed to some great princes, because they understood the term in its ancient sense, as if it came from geni or generosus. The word gentilis identified a man from a noble family—a gentleman by birth—since no creation could change a man’s bloodline. In modern usage, the word gentleman is ambiguous: saying someone “behaves like a gentleman” can be either faint praise or mild criticism, depending on the context.

William Harrison

For instance, “to spend money like a gentleman” is often critical, while “to conduct a business like a gentleman” is praise. In the 16th century, the clergyman William Harrison stated that gentlemen are those made noble and known by their race and blood, or at least by their virtues. At that time, a gentleman was expected to have a coat of arms, as only a gentleman could bear one. Harrison described how gentlemen were created in Shakespeare’s day: anyone who studied law, attended university, practiced medicine or the liberal sciences, served as a captain in war, or gave good counsel at home—so long as he could live without manual labour and bear the port, charge, and countenance of a gentleman—could obtain a coat of arms from heralds for money.

The heralds would claim antiquity and service in the charter, and the man would be called “master,” the title given to esquires and gentlemen, and be considered a gentleman ever after. Harrison noted this practice was not to be disallowed, as the prince lost nothing by it, and the gentleman remained subject to the same taxes as a yeoman or husbandman, bearing them more gladly to save his reputation. When called to war, he would arm and array himself accordingly, showing manly courage and the tokens of his rank, though he might sometimes overreach himself, as the proverb says, “bear a bigger sail than his boat is able to sustain.”

William Shakespeare

In this way, William Shakespeare himself was shown, through the grant of his coat of arms, to be no vagabond but a gentleman.