Why this question comes up
In modern usage, “gentleman” usually describes a man who behaves politely.
However, evidence from multiple 19th-century British novels shows that the term originally functioned as a marker of class and income, not manners.
Example 1: Pride and Prejudice — A Gentleman Can Be Rude
In Pride and Prejudice (1813) by Jane Austen,
Mr. Darcy is consistently identified as a gentleman from the beginning of the novel.
This status is based on:
-
His inherited wealth
-
His family background
-
His position within the landed gentry
At the same time, Darcy is widely regarded by other characters as proud, aloof, and socially unpleasant.
The novel makes it clear that unpleasant manners do not disqualify someone from being a gentleman.
Example 2: Great Expectations — A Gentleman Can Be Manufactured
In Great Expectations (1861) by Charles Dickens,
Pip becomes a “gentleman” through financial transformation rather than moral development.
He is considered a gentleman once he:
-
Receives money
-
Leaves manual labor
-
Adopts upper-class education and lifestyle
His ethical judgment, however, often worsens during this period.
Here, “gentleman” is explicitly tied to money and social position, not virtue.
Example 3: Wuthering Heights — Education Without Acceptance
In Wuthering Heights (1847) by Emily Brontë,
Heathcliff acquires education, wealth, and refined manners later in life.
Despite these changes, he is never fully accepted as a gentleman by the established social world.
The novel shows that:
-
Manners can be learned
-
Wealth can be acquired
-
Social legitimacy, however, is not automatically granted
“Gentleman” remains a question of origin and recognition, not conduct alone.
Example 4: Vanity Fair — Manners Without Status
In Vanity Fair (1847) by William Makepeace Thackeray,
many characters display polished manners and social charm.
However, Thackeray repeatedly distinguishes between:
-
Social performance
-
Actual gentlemanly status
Polite behavior does not guarantee inclusion within the gentleman class.
The novel treats “gentleman” as a structural social category, not a behavioral reward.
What these different works collectively show
Across multiple 19th-century British novels:
-
A man may behave badly and still be a gentleman
-
A man may behave well and still be excluded
-
Class origin, income, and recognition outweigh manners
Conclusion
In 19th-century British novels, “gentleman” does not simply mean a well-mannered person.
It primarily denotes social rank and economic independence, with behavior treated as secondary.