Political satire in Piers Plowman

The first thing that comes to mind about William Langland after reading the poem Piers Plowman is his courage. We have to keep in mind that in those days, monarchy was prevalent in England, and it was not like the monarchy of today. Then, people could be executed for trivial reasons, and the king had absolute power. There was no sign of democracy, and giving any speech against the king or rulers would be considered treason in many cases and severely punished. So, the way William Langland satirized in Piers Plowman is truly remarkable. We will not see many examples of satire in England from that time. Piers Plowman cannot be completely called a political satire because he did not only satirize politics but also common people, the church, and everything else.

The political situation in England at that time was somewhat troubled. The war with France had been going on for many years, and the effects of the hostility with France impacted life in England as a whole. However, simultaneously, as a result of this war with France, a sense of nationalism developed among the people of England, leading to the establishment of a new system. The foundation of the new England that we later see during Elizabeth’s reign probably began in the time of William Langland and Geoffrey Chaucer. Gradually, the power of the king was decreasing while the power of influential landlords was increasing. Parliament was the meeting place of influential landlords, and the power of Parliament started to increase somewhat during this period.

Since the king had all the power, he would often become a tyrant. William Langland was against this and called for more power to be given to the common people. In doing so, he highlighted the poor conditions at the royal court of that time and mentioned a fable where mice wanted to tie a bell around the cat’s neck. Here, the mice represent the common people who want to control the cat or the king, but tying a bell around the cat’s neck is indeed a difficult task.

The effects of bad government were felt by common people. When a ruler of a country cannot govern properly, various problems arise, and the economic condition of the people deteriorates, thus increasing corruption. He talked about beggars who begged as a hobby. Many of them could support their own families, but still, they used to beg because they made more profit from it. These beggars used to drink alcohol and had no purpose in their lives. Those who were unemployed, businessmen, or merchants would give poor-quality goods to people, and by doing this, the condition of common people worsened, but these unemployed individuals and merchants were becoming rich. It is depicted here that the ruling system at that time was not good, and the king, along with his ministers and officials, was not very successful in controlling the people of different classes and professions in society.

In this poem, William Langland talks about the common people who were illiterate and not very enthusiastic about the development of society. They would be tempted by greed very easily, and in this way, a kind of unrest prevailed in society. In fact, Langland, by highlighting the problems of the state or the bad political conditions, meant to imply that, as a result, issues were emerging in both the church and social life. 

In England, in those days, writing political satire was very difficult because the king had so much power. The judicial system was not as strong as it is today, and there was hardly any personal freedom or freedom of speech. In those days, there were no daily newspapers, radio, or television. As a result, the rulers could easily become tyrannical if they wanted, and there was no way to restrain them. Therefore, Langland wanted a system of governance where common people would have more rights and be less oppressed. Although Piers Plowman cannot be called a complete political satire, he satirized the political conditions of his time in various ways.