Author Topic: Portions  (Read 2290 times)

Offline Annie65115

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,281
  • HOLYLAND regd with guild of one name studies
    • View Profile
Portions
« on: Wednesday 27 August 25 17:27 BST (UK) »
I've been rereading Jane Austen recently and was reminded of all these wealthy young ladies with "portions" of £2000, 10000 or even 30000.

I'm presuming this was basically a dowry? And was handed it over to the husband as one lump sum (because I don't suppose for one moment that the women got to keep it - what was theirs, was his, once they were married!)

If the woman then died not long after marriage, say in the first year, in childbirth (not that uncommon), did it revert to her family? Or if not routinely, could such conditions(and others) be attached? If the husband died, did it revert to the woman, or only if specified in the husband's will?

And to look specifically at a family which I'm studying - what would a portion of £1000 in 1695 be equivalent to in 1810, when Jane Austen was writing?
Bradbury (Sedgeley, Bilston, Warrington)
Cooper (Sedgeley, Bilston)
Kilner/Kilmer (Leic, Notts)
Greenfield (Liverpool)
Holyland (Anywhere and everywhere, also Holiland Holliland Hollyland)
Pryce/Price (Welshpool, Liverpool)
Rawson (Leicester)
Upton (Desford, Leics)
Partrick (Vera and George, Leicester)
Marshall (Westmorland, Cheshire/Leicester)

Offline AlanBoyd

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,294
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Portions
« Reply #1 on: Wednesday 27 August 25 19:15 BST (UK) »
Yes, accoring to the Shorter Oxford Dictionary, a marriage portion was a dowry.
Boyd, Dove, Blakey, Burdon

Offline AlanBoyd

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,294
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Portions
« Reply #2 on: Wednesday 27 August 25 19:18 BST (UK) »
It’s not the most up-to-date converter available (it converts to 2017 values) but the converter at the National Archives gives an idea of the purchasing power of the amount too.

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/currency-converter/#currency-result

Added, sorry just realised that you want a 1695 amount value in 1810!

Added again: an AI has suggested that between 1695 and 1810 there would be a 48% increase, so that £1000 would be equivalent to £1480 in 1810.
Boyd, Dove, Blakey, Burdon

Offline AlanBoyd

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,294
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Portions
« Reply #3 on: Wednesday 27 August 25 19:27 BST (UK) »
Boyd, Dove, Blakey, Burdon


Offline Annie65115

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,281
  • HOLYLAND regd with guild of one name studies
    • View Profile
Re: Portions
« Reply #4 on: Wednesday 27 August 25 20:45 BST (UK) »
thank you   :)
Bradbury (Sedgeley, Bilston, Warrington)
Cooper (Sedgeley, Bilston)
Kilner/Kilmer (Leic, Notts)
Greenfield (Liverpool)
Holyland (Anywhere and everywhere, also Holiland Holliland Hollyland)
Pryce/Price (Welshpool, Liverpool)
Rawson (Leicester)
Upton (Desford, Leics)
Partrick (Vera and George, Leicester)
Marshall (Westmorland, Cheshire/Leicester)

Offline David Outner

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 29
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Portions
« Reply #5 on: Wednesday 27 August 25 21:17 BST (UK) »
Portion = a share of money or other property allocated to an individual, often, but not necessarily,  in a will or family trust.  Dowry = a marriage portion, often, but not necessarily, a sum of money.   The terms on which the portion was transferred depended entirely on the terms of the transferring document.  It was always possible, but not normal, to "protect" the position of a bride by transferring the portion to trustees for her, so that her future husband would receive only the the interest on it and would get nothing if he became a childless widower.  This was a matter of pre-nuptial negotiation. 

Price indices have been produced (see eg measuringworth.com) and they work fairly well for working-class families that spent most of their income on food.  But for anyone with £1000 it is difficult to compare values over a period as long as a century, because purchasing power can only be measured by what is likely to be bought, which would not have been the same.  English society (except for the working classes) was richer than in 1810 than it was 1695.   IMy guess is that in the context of the marriage market £1000 in 1695 might equate to £3000 in 1810 - less than half what Maria Ward had to attract Sir Thomas Bertram [Mansfield Park].