1551
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 2
EDUCATION AND SOCIAL STATUS IN THE NOVEL “CATHERINE”
Isomova
Manzura Baxriddinovna
Master's student at Asian International University.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14942729
Abstract. To understand how Thackeray addresses education in Catherine, it is essential
to situate the novel within its historical and cultural context. Although Catherine is set in an
earlier period, Thackeray himself was writing in the early reign of Queen Victoria. In many
respects, the eighteenth-century setting is filtered through Thackeray’s own vantage point and
comedic-satirical style typical of the 1830s. He used historically distant settings partly to parody
then-popular “Newgate novels”—sensational stories that glorified criminals—and to highlight
broader truths about English social life.
Keywords: education, novel, Thackeray, Catherine, historical, cultural, context, period,
Queen Victoria, Fraser's Magazine, comedic-satirical, popular, "Newgate Novels", parody,
criminal, sensational, story, social life, truth, historical.
ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ И СОЦИАЛЬНЫЙ СТАТУС В РОМАНЕ «ЕКАТЕРИНА»
Аннотация. Чтобы понять, как Теккерей рассматривает образование в
«Екатерине», важно поместить роман в его исторический и культурный контекст. Хотя
действие «Екатерины» происходит в более ранний период, сам Теккерей писал в раннее
правление королевы Виктории. Во многих отношениях обстановка восемнадцатого века
фильтруется через собственную точку зрения Теккерея и комедийно-сатирический стиль,
типичный для 1830-х годов. Он использовал исторически далекие места действия
отчасти для пародии на популярные в то время «новеллы Ньюгейта» — сенсационные
истории, прославляющие преступников, — и для того, чтобы подчеркнуть более широкие
истины об английской общественной жизни.
Ключевые слова: образование, роман, Теккерей, Екатерина, исторический,
культурный, контекст, период, королева Виктория, журнал Fraser's Magazine, комедийно-
сатирический, популярный, «новеллы Ньюгейта», пародия, криминальный, сенсационный,
история, общественная жизнь, правда, исторический.
In approaching William Makepeace Thackeray’s early novel Catherine (1839–1840), one
is immediately struck by the author’s satirical lens and his unflinching depiction of social and
moral failings. Although Catherine is often overshadowed by Thackeray’s later works such as
Vanity Fair or Pendennis, it nonetheless provides fascinating insights into the social fabric of the
late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.
1552
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 2
Central to these insights is the question of education—how it was understood, who
received it, and how it shaped one’s place in the rigidly stratified society of Thackeray’s era. This
essay explores the significance of education in Thackeray’s novel Catherine by first examining
the author’s social and cultural context, then describing the state of education in England around
the time period depicted, and finally analyzing the ways in which various characters’ literacy and
learning relate to their social standing, moral behavior, and personal aspirations. Throughout, we
shall see that Thackeray employs satire, irony, and occasionally poignant realism to underscore
how educational disparities both reflect and reinforce social stratification. [1;300]
To understand how Thackeray addresses education in
Catherine
, it is essential to situate
the novel within its historical and cultural context. Although
Catherine
is set in an earlier period,
Thackeray himself was writing in the early reign of Queen Victoria (the novel appeared serially
in
Fraser’s Magazine
in 1839–1840). In many respects, the eighteenth-century setting is filtered
through Thackeray’s own vantage point and comedic-satirical style typical of the 1830s. He used
historically distant settings partly to parody then-popular “Newgate novels”—sensational stories
that glorified criminals—and to highlight broader truths about English social life.
From the late eighteenth century through the early decades of the nineteenth century, the
educational landscape of Britain was undergoing gradual but significant changes. While the
privileged classes often sent their sons to grammar schools, private academies, or exclusive
institutions such as Eton or Harrow, the broad mass of the population had much more limited
opportunities. Charitable or religious societies established “charity schools” or “ragged schools”
aimed at the very poor. Sunday schools operated by the Church of England (and, in some places,
by nonconformist congregations) began teaching rudimentary literacy to lower-class children—
sometimes only scripture reading. For young women of higher social standing,
“accomplishments” (music, drawing, needlework, perhaps some French) often mattered more
than deep intellectual pursuits. For girls of lower status, the idea of formal schooling was even
more precarious, reliant upon local philanthropic efforts or intermittent public (and paternalistic)
support.
By the early nineteenth century, the push to expand literacy was growing, spurred by
various humanitarian reformers. Yet this expansion was uneven: significant class-based
inequalities, as well as gender-based restrictions, permeated the system. The so-called
“monitorial” methods of Joseph Lancaster or Andrew Bell—where older or more adept students
taught the younger—were sometimes employed to provide basic reading and writing instruction
to large groups at minimal cost. Nonetheless, at the time Thackeray was writing, the division
between the small educated elite and the uneducated masses remained stark.[2; 288]
1553
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 2
Although Thackeray himself enjoyed a privileged education (at Charterhouse School,
followed by studies at Cambridge, which he eventually left without taking a degree), he was
acutely aware of the failings and absurdities within the British education system. He recognized
how the ability to read, write, and acquire social polish could become an engine not only for
moral development (at least nominally) but also for snobbery, social climbing, and hypocrisy.
Thus, in
Catherine
, Thackeray’s satirical lens takes into account how schooling, or its
absence, shapes the moral and social realities of characters who range from aristocrats to
servants.
In the period bridging the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, there were
broadly three types of educational institutions: elite public schools (and a few grammar schools),
charity or church-run institutions for the poor, and private academies or seminaries (sometimes
even informal “dame schools”) which filled the gap for the middling classes. Elite schools, such
as Eton, Harrow, Westminster, and a handful of others, catered to the sons of aristocratic and
genteel families who could afford fees, lodging, tutors, and the intangible social capital these
institutions provided. While nominally focusing on Latin, Greek, and sometimes mathematics,
such schools also transmitted the “polish” required for leadership roles in government, the
military, and the church. Social networking was arguably as important as intellectual
development.
For children of more modest means—especially those hovering around small trades,
agriculture, or artisanal employments—educational opportunities were narrower. The Church of
England or nonconformist groups might sponsor local schools that taught only reading (primarily
to enable individuals to read the Bible) and possibly some basic arithmetic. In the period after
1780–1790, these religiously oriented schools grew in number but struggled with funding. Some
philanthropic individuals, outraged at the poor’s ignorance, launched charity schools. The
curriculum often emphasized moral instruction, conformity to social hierarchy, and the
performance of menial tasks suited to the pupil’s presumed station. Meanwhile, private “dame
schools,” where an older woman (often barely literate herself) took in local children, were
known for providing minimal instruction. They served more as childcare than a rigorous
schooling environment. [3; 545-568]
Education, in short, mirrored the strict class divisions of the time. The wealthy sent their
offspring to expensive institutions that taught classical languages, courtesy, and the social mores
of the ruling class. The “middling sort,” including many Dissenters, found themselves at private
academies offering a slightly more modern curriculum. The poor, if they gained schooling at all,
encountered religious or philanthropic instruction, typically limited to the absolute basics of
literacy, numeracy, and moral or religious formation.
1554
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 2
Girls across the social spectrum faced additional obstacles. Those from well-off families
might receive a “finishing” type of education focusing on accomplishments (music, drawing,
needlework, conversation in French, etc.), whereas those from lower strata often remained
illiterate, or only half-literate.
Given this stark hierarchy of schooling, it is little surprise that literacy levels varied
dramatically. Some historians estimate that in 1750, less than half of adult Englishmen could
sign their own name; by 1800, the figure was modestly higher, though still well under 65%. For
women, literacy rates were even lower. These statistics do not capture the deeper aspects of
“education,” such as exposure to advanced subjects or critical thinking, but they give a sense of
the fundamental limitation of reading and writing skills. It is precisely this disparity—between
the well-educated and the wholly or partially illiterate—that Thackeray dramatizes in his works,
Catherine
included.
During Thackeray’s formative era, reading and writing were not purely intellectual
endeavors; they also signified one’s position in society. A well-educated individual, generally
from a more affluent background, was granted greater respect, job prospects, or marriage
opportunities. Conversely, the inability to read marked one as socially inferior, at times morally
or intellectually suspect. Thackeray, inheriting the eighteenth-century tradition of Hogarthian
satire, recognized how the veneer of “gentlemanly education” could mask moral failings, while a
lack of formal schooling did not necessarily correlate with vice. Still, the social mechanisms at
play often favored those who could manipulate the codes of literacy—such as letter-writing,
reading newspapers, or referencing classical knowledge.
From a gender perspective, women, especially in lower-income groups, had very little
access to formal education. Middle- or upper-class women might learn reading, writing, and
certain feminine “accomplishments,” but rarely were they encouraged to master academic or
professional subjects. A woman of the eighteenth or early nineteenth century, even if proficient in
reading, could suffer social censure if she displayed too much erudition—accusations of being a
“bluestocking” overshadowed genuine intellectual curiosity. Thackeray’s own attitude toward
women’s education, as gleaned from some of his writings, was somewhat ambivalent: he
endorsed the idea that women should be taught moral and practical skills but seemed cautious
about the idea of their overt intellectual equality. In
Catherine
, the female protagonist’s
ignorance or innocence merges with cunning and coquetry; Thackeray thus highlights how
female characters navigate a world in which they lack formal learning but still exhibit forms of
practical intelligence or manipulation.
For the rare character who has some measure of schooling, the difference can be
dramatic.
1555
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 2
An example can be found in the local parson, Dr. Dobbs, who represents the parish
clergy, presumably a university-trained clergyman. In the comedic sketches where Dr. Dobbs
interacts with other villagers, his learning places him at a certain remove, allowing him rhetorical
power and community respect. He is tasked with moral oversight and, at times, with
administrative duties like officiating at baptisms or performing the occasional small-claims
arbitration. Such was the historical reality: a parish clergyman, typically literate in Latin and
possibly Greek, occupied a position of local authority that far exceeded his wages. Thackeray
uses minor scenes like the parson’s “exhortations” or musings to highlight the somewhat
condescending or paternalistic tone of a man who has read more books than the rest of the
village combined. [4; 459]
Beyond the parson, the other educated figure is the Count (or Captain), who—despite his
ambiguous claims—projects a certain martial knowledge, presumably some capacity in multiple
languages, and the social polish of a traveling soldier-of-fortune. Though the reader soon
suspects him to be morally corrupt, the advantage conferred by his “higher” background is
undeniable. He can seduce Catherine, manipulate the local innkeepers, and move about without
being questioned, in part because he carries the aura of an educated gentleman.
Thackeray thus points to a society in which superficial tokens of schooling or aristocratic
bearing grant disproportionate power.
One of the ways Thackeray distinguishes the educated from the uneducated is through
their speech patterns. Characters like Corporal Brock or Catherine’s neighbors speak in dialect,
use malapropisms, or exhibit confusion over polysyllabic words. Meanwhile, the Captain or
certain cameo roles slip into more elaborate sentences. This difference is not about intelligence
per se—rather, Thackeray’s comedic style uses the clash of registers to highlight social
difference. We see how the community’s ill-educated individuals may rely on local superstition,
secondhand gossip, or just plain ignorance in making judgments. Such limitations open them to
exploitation, especially at the hands of more verbally adept individuals.
Through Catherine’s and John Hayes’s arcs, the novel suggests that education might offer
an escape from the drudgery of lower-class life, but in practice, neither fully capitalizes on it.
John Hayes, for instance, is described as having meager literacy but big ambitions. He is
stingy, small-minded, and daydreams about rising above his station, yet lacks the moral or
intellectual substance to do so nobly. Thackeray hints that had he benefited from a sturdier
formal education, he might have channeled his ambition more productively—or at least
recognized the pitfalls of associating with criminals like Corporal Brock. Catherine, similarly,
might have used better schooling to avoid exploitative relationships, but her cunning is purely
survivalist, shaped by a childhood lacking strong moral or intellectual grounding.
1556
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 2
Thus, Thackeray’s portrayal, while comedic, underscores a serious social critique: the
lower classes remain vulnerable in an educational desert, leading them to rely on questionable
“street smarts” or to place faith in illusions of quick social mobility. Meanwhile, the aristocratic
or officer class uses education as a social weapon—learning how to speak “properly” or adopt
fashionable airs means one can charm or dupe the unlettered.
Thackeray’s trademark style blends satire, irony, and comedic hyperbole. In
Catherine
,
these literary devices serve to highlight the chasm between educational ideals and social reality.
Rather than deliver a didactic sermon on the need for public schooling, Thackeray uses
comedic episodes and ironic contrasts. He invites the reader to laugh at ignorance while also
empathizing with characters trapped by it.
A consistent pattern in
Catherine
is that the morally upright character is not necessarily
the one with more schooling. In fact, Thackeray frequently inverts the expectation that a formal
education aligns with goodness. The Captain, presumably refined, is the worst offender in
cynicism, while Catherine’s small circle—though ignorant—sometimes appear more genuine in
their emotions. Thackeray thereby jabs at the hypocrisy of society’s assumption that better-
educated equals morally superior. The novel’s comedic effect arises from seeing how the
“gentlemanly” or self-proclaimed noble manipulates simple villagers, exposing the pretenses of
education when divorced from empathy or honor.
Catherine
was originally conceived as a parody of the “Newgate Calendar” style of
criminal biography and the contemporary novels that glamorized thieves or murderers.
Thackeray wanted to puncture romantic illusions about outlaws by showing them in all
their squalor. In so doing, he also acknowledges that the failures of the education system—
society’s neglect of the poor—produce fertile ground for crime. When a character can barely
read, or lacks moral education, the lure of quick ill-gotten gains becomes stronger. Thackeray’s
satire implicates the entire social structure, including the elite who hypocritically deny real
educational reforms while lamenting rising crime rates.[5;101]
REFERENCES
1.
Armstrong N. Desire and Domestic Fiction: A Political History of the Novel. Oxford:
Oxford University Press. – 1987. – P.300.
2.
Kelly G. English Fiction of the Romantic Period 1789–1830. London: Longman. – 1992. –
P.288.
3.
Myers M. Revising the Bluestocking: The Literary and Social Commentary of Female
Intellectuals, 1750–1820. // Eighteenth-Century Studies. – 1990. – Vol. 23, № 4. – P. 545–
568.
1557
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 2
4.
Porter R. Enlightenment: Britain and the Creation of the Modern World. London: Allen
Lane. – 2000. – 459 p.
5.
Spencer J. The Rise of the Woman Novelist: From Aphra Behn to Jane Austen. Oxford:
Blackwell. – 1986. – P.101
6.
Komilovna I.N. Ziyo Distributed From Tezguzar. JournalNX, 30-33.
7.
Komilovna I.N. (2022). Ibrahim Muminov's Scientific and Philosophical Heritage and
Subjective Approaches to His Scientific Activity Under the Rule of the Former Ideology.
International Journal on Integrated Education, 5(6), 556-559.
8.
Ibodova N.K. (2023). ALI QUSHCHI FAOLIYATINI TADQIQ ETISHDA IBROHIM
MO‘MINOVNING ROLI. Oriental renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social
sciences, 3(2), 824-829.
9.
Komilovna I.N. (2024). Philosophical Lines to Academician Ibrahim Muminov's Activity.
Journal of Sustainability in Integrated Policy and Practice, 2(1), 15-18.
10.
Ibodova N.K. (2024). THE ROLE OF IBRAHIM MOMINOV IN STUDYING THE
PERSONALITY OF AMIR TEMUR. INTERNATIONAL SCIENCES, EDUCATION AND
NEW LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES, 1(4), 154-157.
11.
Ibodova N. (2024). ACADEMIC IBRAHIM MOMINOV: MY FIRST TEACHER IS MY
MOTHER. Educational Research in Universal Sciences, 3(4 SPECIAL), 436-438.
12.
İbodova N., & Raupova, R. (2023). ÖZBEK EDEBİYATI DİLİNİN MODERNİTE
DÖNEMİNDE GELİŞİMİNDE ÇOLPON'UN ROLÜ. Philological issues are in the eyes of
young researchers, 1(1). 2023
13.
Ibodova Nasiba Komilovna. (2024). ANALYSIS OF IBRAHIM MOMINOV’S
CREATION OF ABU RAYHAN BERUNI. МЕДИЦИНА, ПЕДАГОГИКА И
ТЕХНОЛОГИЯ: ТЕОРИЯ И ПРАКТИКА, 2(4), 359–365. извлечено от
https://universalpublishings.com/index.php/mpttp/article/view/5153
14.
Ibodov G.K. (2023). KLASSIK VA MAXSUS - YORDAMCHI MASHQLARNING
YUKLAMA ME’YORI. Educational Research in Universal Sciences, 2(15), 13–16.
Retrieved from http://erus.uz/index.php/er/article/view/4660
15.
Ibodov Ghalibjon Komilovich. Classic And Special -The Loading Standards of Assistant
Exercises. Journal of Sustainability Integrated Policy and Practice. 2024. 19-21-p.
https://journals.proindex.uz/index.php/SIPP/article/view/485/419
16.
N.K.Ibodova. Classification of Lexical Units in the Language of Modern Poetry According
to Form and Meaning Relationships. European Journal of Innovation in Nonformal
Education. 2024. 163-166-p. https://inovatus.es/index.php/ejine/article/view/4226/4140
1558
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 2
17.
N.K.Ibodova. RELATIONSHIPS OF FORM AND MEANING IN JADID POETRY. NEW
RENAISSANCE
international
scientific
journal.
2024.
924-978-p.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14217148
18.
N.K.Ibodova. THE PERIOD OF GREEDISM: LANGUAGE AND POETRY. International
scientific journal. «MODERN SCIENCE АND RESEARCH» 2024. 651-655-p.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14543293
19.
N.K.Ibodova. LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL FEATURES OF NEW POETRY. NEW
RENAISSANCE
international
Scientific
Journal.
2025.
905-908-p.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14738912
20.
N.K.Ibodova. LINGUISTICS - IN A LINGUISTOCULTURAL ASPECT. «MODERN
SCIENCE АND RESEARCH». International scientific journal. 2025. 634-638-p.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14888209
