Unequal equality
Introduction
Victorian Bournemouth (252) examines further aspects of women employed as companions and of their employers in 1901. Genealogical analysis of more than a hundred such women compares their social backgrounds, wealth, and length of service.
Victorian Bournemouth (252): social factors
Background
Comparing paternal occupations recorded for fathers of both companions and their employers provides a basis for comparing their respective social levels. In the case of widowed employers, the jobs performed by the husband also assist. Most employers came from households headed by professionals, businessmen, and a group comprising military officers, farmers, and the gentry. In broad terms, this profile matches that found for the companions’ fathers. Particular overlaps occurred for menfolk occupied as professionals, businessmen and farmers. A social match connected companions with employers in some respects. Some companions, however, came from humble backgrounds, while some employers belonged to elevated families. This suggests that both women came from similar social backgrounds, but in some cases, a gap may have existed. Thus, the companions recorded for Bournemouth in 1901 shared a similar social space to their employers. This corresponds to contemporary depictions of the relationships between companions and their employers.
Wealth
The levels dividing English society depended in part on occupations but also on differential wealth. Occupation and wealth overlapped to some extent or reflected each other. Nevertheless, substantial differences in wealth might separate people who, on occupational terms, shared social positions. Estates reported in probate records offer a rough index to an individual’s wealth, but require careful application in social analysis. A comparison between the average estates left by the fathers of companions and those of their employers suggests substantial differences. Paternal estates of employers had an average value of ten times that of their companions’ fathers. This conforms to the stereotype that economic difficulties had induced some gentle women to seek employment as companions. Despite wide differences in their respective financial situations, the women’s similar social backgrounds enable them to create conditions where companions could have much closer relationships with their employers than existed for the household’s servants.
Victorian Bournemouth (252): relationship dynamics
Short term
Longer-term analysis enables tracking the careers of some companions over decades. Some women undertook the role for no more than a few years. In several situations, the relationships ended because of life-stage events. Several women listed as employers in 1901 passed away during the next few years, thereby breaking the connection. Sometimes, the companions, often still in their twenties or thirties, accepted marriage offers, terminating the relationship from their side. Acting as a ‘companion’, however, would indicate that, while gentle, the individual had reduced socio-economic appeal to potential partners. Less than one in five of the companions surveyed appears to have married. Tracking others shows that the women, together in 1901, no longer shared a relationship in 1911. Perhaps, in some cases, a relationship did not blossom, as a companion had moved to another employer. Others, in contrast, appear to have left the occupation, living with spinster siblings or alone.
Longer term
Relationships, however, could last decades. This condition occurred in about a quarter of the pairs found in Bournemouth during 1901. Indeed, some companions had already worked with this employer before that time. In these examples, therefore, the position of companion as a paid occupation will have moved more into a personal relationship. The companion appears to have become a member of her erstwhile employer’s family rather than household. After the death of her employer, one companion continued to live with the family. Another companion, working for a married employer, after her demise, married the widower. A third developed such a close relationship that her employer adopted her as a sister. The analysis shows that the probate records of employers did not refer to their companions, but the former may have mentioned the latter in the wills. These longer-term relationships illustrate the flexible nature of a companion’s occupation.
Victorian Bournemouth (252): variation
Previous experience
The stereotypical scenario for how a woman having an upper social position became a companion centres on her father’s death. This threatened her with impoverishment, which a companion’s allowance and gentle living arrangements would address. Thus, she stepped from one privileged drawing room to another. The analysis of companions found in Bournemouth, 1901, suggests that the stereotype did not apply to all. Linked records show that, in some cases, companions had earlier worked in domestic service. The examples suggest they had worked in other jobs with a peripheral position to a household’s service hierarchy. Thus, a future companion might work as a governess, nurse, or housekeeper. One woman appears in a household working as a housemaid (1861). Thereafter, she remained with the family for another sixty years, ‘graduating’ to companion along the way. Many of the women analysed did appear to follow the stereotype depictions, but variation also existed.
Change of use
A few women worked as companions for people living in the suburbs, where working people resided. Social position, relative wealth, previous experience, and other factors suggest that these women occupied a different place in society from companions working in the smarter parts of town. These women may not have experienced a gentle background and education. Their examples may indicate that the term ‘companion’ could have lost some of its lustre over time. Indeed, the possibility arises that some employers sought to enhance their social standing by employing someone described as a companion. Thus, whereas in most cases, the term and occupation of ‘companion’ protected impoverished upper-level women from ignominy, it might also advance the social position of less elevated but ambitious employers. These examples strengthen the conclusion that the term ‘companion’ operated more as a social expression than an economic activity.
Takeaway
Victorian Bournemouth (252) has found that, underneath the stereotypical depiction of a companion, considerable variation applied. Furthermore, the nature of a longer-term appointment may have changed over time. Also, employers having social ambitions may have described an employee as a ‘companion’ to enhance their personal reputation.
References
For references and engagement, please get in touch. Main primary sources: here and here (subscriptions needed). See also here and here.
Kitablios