Terms used to describe the work people did.

[neverendingstory]

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.

[stanmapstone]

My 4 X great grandfather's sister's second husband was described in one doc. as a 'servant'.

What was the document?

Stan

[neverendingstory]

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

[pinefamily]

Could he have been left some money or property by his master?

[neverendingstory]

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.

[pinefamily]

Have you located Thomas in the 1841 census? Being only two years after Amelia's baptism, it is likely he is still listed as a servant.

[Marmalady]

If his wife Sarah was comfortably off, when she died he would inherit all her wealth ( or maybe even before -- not sure when married women were allowed to keep their own money rather than it automatically becoming their husband's on marriage)

If the money was sufficient for him to live off, he could accurately describe himself as a "Gentleman" as he had no occupation.

I have an ancestor who was the illegitimate son of a pauper, born 1794.
He is listed in a trades directory in the mid 1840's as a second hand clothes dealer.
On his death certificate in 1849 he is listed as a "Gentleman"

[mike175]

One of my ancestors, who never married, was a lady's maid in 1881/91 censuses yet I have documents related to her purchase of two cottages for the sum of £420 in 1894. This was a year after the death of her stepmother, so it doesn't take much imagination to assume there was an inheritance. I doubt if a servant could save up enough from her wages to buy two houses.

There was an old saying about the three ways to become rich: Patrimony, Matrimony & Parsimony. I would guess Thomas took the second route 

Mike.

[neverendingstory]

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.