Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - neverendingstory

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 11
1
London and Middlesex / Re: St Mary's Lambeth Reburials
« on: Tuesday 18 April 17 01:03 BST (UK)  »
Thank you to respondents. I have since found out from LMA senior archivist Howard Dobie that my ancestors were reinterred at Brookwood Cemetery [aka London Necropolis or Woking Cemetery].
N.

2
The Common Room / Re: Terms used to describe the work people did.
« on: Saturday 26 March 16 21:44 GMT (UK)  »
There are a number of sites about the roles of servants, and if reasonably detailed, mention height, good legs and the livery the footmen wore.The better presented and matched they were, the higher the household status - hence the caricatured images of women fluttering their eyelashes at the footmen assisting them in some way, and, that's possibly why the young footmen portrayed in shows such as 'Downtown Abbey' are always shown as good looking.
As far as 'male' servants go, I was looking for an 'inside' servant. Valets certainly were but they had a crucial role for the master and usually travelled with them everywhere. I'm not sure they would be able to marry [twice], be able to support a family at the same time and acquire property. 'Outside' servants had even less status than the 'inner' ones. Steward is a high status role; he usually would be called that and not often be represented as 'servant', particularly by the person themselves, as has happened here.

Threlfallyorky, I think it's very likely Thomas was doing what he could to improve his circumstances and his Will certainly suggests enough to call himself a gentleman [although his actions may suggest something else].  ;) ;)
Thanks to all respondents.

N

3
The Common Room / Re: Terms used to describe the work people did.
« on: Saturday 26 March 16 00:22 GMT (UK)  »
Quote from: Colin Cruddace on Friday 25 March 16 23:42 GMT (UK)
It would be better to bear in mind who provided the information. In large estates the census entries would probably be given by the estate owner's wife or a senior servant (butler), so 'servant' is probably correct. For a death certificate any description could be given without challenge.

Colin
I was looking up the roles males could have inside a household and apart from a butler which one would think would be identified, there was 'footman'. Their job description called for them to be tall, young and good looking and leads me to think that maybe Thomas, who was ageing, was looking for an easy target to marry. I don't want to unnecessarily malign him however, hence the question.
N.

4
The Common Room / Re: Terms used to describe the work people did.
« on: Friday 25 March 16 23:10 GMT (UK)  »
I guess what I'm really asking is does the term 'servant' apply to an occupation that is different to the way we think about the role today?
N.

5
The Common Room / Re: Terms used to describe the work people did.
« on: Friday 25 March 16 10:05 GMT (UK)  »
Thanks Mike, it has fascinated me for several years; I'll keep looking - so many interesting stories in all of our backgrounds :D

6
The Common Room / Re: Terms used to describe the work people did.
« on: Friday 25 March 16 09:49 GMT (UK)  »
Hi, thank you to all the respondents - the only 1841 census, I can locate for a 'servant' is for a '40' yo. Thomas Bowditch, [read c. 45] in the Earl of Harwood's very large household.
My concern for the change in status is that it had so few years to become a legitimate claim and I find it hard to credit Sarah would be so readily taken in by a potentially much younger goldigger.
Thomas' Will speaks of numerous properties [and I do not know if they were all Sarah's prior to marriage]. There is an older 'Independent' Thomas Bowditch for  the 1841 census.
Perhaps, this is going to remain a mystery, but my original query still stands - is it possible to be both a servant and a gentleman at the same time?
N.

7
The Common Room / Re: Terms used to describe the work people did.
« on: Friday 25 March 16 09:10 GMT (UK)  »
Things get a bit murky. His 2nd wife Sarah [my ancestor] was an elderly, apparently comfortably off widow. Thomas and Sarah married in 1845 with Sarah dying in 1849 at 79 years. Thomas died in 1855, age uncertain, but his daughter Amelia was born c. 1816, so one would assume Thomas was born c. 1796 at the latest?
Sarah's father was Sergeant of the Vestry at St James Palace, and maybe servants of the Palace were familiar to her. I am perplexed that she would marry an apparently 'lowly' servant given her circumstances and England's class system. His elevation to 'gentleman' status, after the few years they were married doesn't seem quite right to me. But I do not really know what was going on here.
N.

8
The Common Room / Re: Terms used to describe the work people did.
« on: Friday 25 March 16 08:31 GMT (UK)  »
Thanks Stan for asking - it was Thomas Bowditch's daughter Amelia Charlotte Bowditch's 's baptism [as an adult] on the 23 Jan 1839, at Walworth, Surrey. His Will and his 2nd wife Sarah's Will and other cross checking docs show that they are abt. the correct persons. It is the Wills [and other family info] that show the change of status.
N

9
The Common Room / Terms used to describe the work people did.
« on: Friday 25 March 16 06:15 GMT (UK)  »
I'm aware from censuses that the terms used to indicate the work people did were simple descriptives and, sometimes, give a false picture. e.g. a warehouseman could be a labouring storeman employee or the owner of an import business.
My 4 X great grandfather's sister's second husband was described in one doc. as a 'servant'. In another he was described as a 'Gentleman' with his Will indicating a man with several properties and other wealth. I cannot find who he was 'servant' to, and that isn't my query. Is it likely a servant could also be a gentleman?
Thanks in advance.
N.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 11