Author Topic: Why would you be described as a singleman and not a bachelor?  (Read 371 times)

Offline Stanwix England

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 410
  • Beginner on the climb up my family tree
    • View Profile
Why would you be described as a singleman and not a bachelor?
« on: Friday 04 January 19 22:46 GMT (UK) »
Just looking at some marriage banns for the 1820s. A man is described as a 'singleman', written as one word, and not a bachelor.

The other men on similar pages are described as bachelor. It's the same person writing the entries so I can't put it down to different styles.

The women he is marrying is listed as a widow, so I can't imagine that it's another term for that instead of bachelor.

The only thing I can think of that might account for it is that he is only 20 years old, not 21, so perhaps you had to be 21 to be thought of as a bachelor?

I've tried googling it but all I get is explanations of what bachelor means, so that's not helping.
Primary interest - The Wheldale Family - Globally

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline stanmapstone

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 23,922
    • View Profile
Re: Why would you be described as a singleman and not a bachelor?
« Reply #1 on: Saturday 05 January 19 09:20 GMT (UK) »

The only thing I can think of that might account for it is that he is only 20 years old, not 21, so perhaps you had to be 21 to be thought of as a bachelor?



I think that is probably why. You were classed legally as a child, or minor, until you were 21, so he would need the permission of his parents, or guardian to get married.


Stan
Mapstone, Mapston.
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline youngtug

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,745
    • View Profile
Re: Why would you be described as a singleman and not a bachelor?
« Reply #2 on: Saturday 05 January 19 09:49 GMT (UK) »
I think it was just a matter of choice of words employed by the writer of the record. They may have wanted to show a difference due to something such as age, as noted, or maybe it was for someone who had previously been married, or,,,,

If you look here both terms are used throughout the register;  http://www.rootschat.com/links/01n7s/
.http://www.rootschat.com/links/05q2/   
  WILSON;-Wiltshire.
 SOUL;-Gloucestershire.
 SANSUM;-Berkshire-Wiltshire
 BASSON-BASTON;- Berkshire,- Oxfordshire.
 BRIDGES;- Wiltshire.
 DOWDESWELL;-Wiltshire,Gloucestershire
 JORDAN;- Berkshire.
 COX;- Berkshire.
 GOUDY;- Suffolk.
 CHATFIELD;-Sussex-- London
 MORGAN;-Blaenavon-Abersychan
 FISHER;- Berkshire.
 BLOMFIELD-BLOOMFIELD-BLUMFIELD;-Suffolk.
DOVE. Essex-London
YOUNG-Berkshire
ARDEN.
PINEGAR-COLLIER-HUGHES-JEFFERIES-HUNT-MOSS-FRY

Offline Maiden Stone

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,039
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Why would you be described as a singleman and not a bachelor?
« Reply #3 on: Saturday 05 January 19 20:03 GMT (UK) »

If you look here both terms are used throughout the register;  http://www.rootschat.com/links/01n7s/
Notice the change to bachelor and spinster when marriages were performed by a different rector.