SPINSTERS: Single Women in the Victorian Era

Spinster

 /ˈspɪnstə/

Noun derogatory • dated

an unmarried woman, typically an older woman beyond the usual age for marriage.

Illustration by Connie Piper

 Spinster, old maid, and the modern cat lady are all terms to refer to single women with a dash – or lashings – of judgement. Particularly in the Victorian era, when a woman’s marriage status determined so much of her worth and identity, to be a spinster was to be ‘an unsuccessful human being’ (as Janet Dunbar writes in The Early Victorian Woman). The term originated from women who spun yarn, and morphed during the 17th century into a legal term for unmarried women, which was used in the UK until 2005! The closest thing to a male equivalent is “bachelor”, which has few of the same negative connotations.

 Relative to age, spinsters can be tricky to define. If classic novels are anything to go by, the ideal age to be married was early 20s, with characters nearing 30 becoming ever more anxious of their matrimonial prospects. However, some definitions place the spinster as over 40 or even 50 years old, so it can often be a loose and murky term.

 Spinsters, whether or not they were called that, have always been a part of society. However, the Victorian period has its own particular discussion concerning these women past usual marrying age. According to Bridget Hill, author of Women Alone, spinsterhood was regarded as a serious social problem in the second half of the 1800s. (Even though levels of spinsterhood were actually higher in the 17th century.) The 1851 Population Census recorded over a million unmarried women over the age of 25, out of a general population of 20 million.

The fact there were also 500,000 more women recorded than men was cause for further worry. They were called ‘redundant’ and ‘surplus’ women. In 1862, William Rathbone Greg penned an article called “Why are Women Redundant?” in the National Review, writing: ‘There is an enormous and increasing number of single women in the nation, a number quite disproportionate and quite abnormal; a number which, positively and relatively, is indicative of an unwholesome social state, and is both productive and prognostic of much wretchedness and wrong.’ Spinsters were often considered to be failed women, and certainly not beneficial to the nation or Empire.

There were of course many reasons for a woman not to marry, too many to name here. Some, such as Florence Nightingale, prioritised their careers. With the rise of the love marriage, some waited for their ideal suitor to appear. Queer women rejected the heterosexual ideal, while some simply did not desire to be a wife either from lifestyle preference or feminist resistance.

Unsurprisingly, it was not easy being an unmarried woman in Victorian Britain. Not only were you societally pressured to couple up and bear children, but, economically, marriage could be extremely beneficial. Unless they could rely upon the generosity of their relatives or were lucky enough to be an heiress, a single woman would have to seek some form of employment, which was especially tricky for middle class women. In 1839, Sarah Strickney Ellis wrote that while a gentle man could pursue any career, ‘if a lady but touch any article, no matter how delicate, in the way of trade, she loses caste and ceases to be a lady’. Kathrin Levitan in “Redundancy, the ‘Surplus Woman’ Problem” writes the problem of single women was ‘labelled as a middle-class problem, because of the specific challenges that middle-class women faced in attempting to support themselves. Poor women had always worked, and they continued to do so in the industrial age.’ Middle class women had fewer socially acceptable avenues to choose from, such as teachers, governesses or companions. Luckily, in the later decades of the century, the working and educational world widened for them, and they could enter offices and study at universities.

 It was also an expectation for spinsters to make themselves of use to their family, particularly by looking after aging parents. In some families, the youngest sister could be encouraged not to marry and to stay in the familial home. Bizarrely enough as well, spinsters were sometimes encouraged to emigrate to corners of the Empire, in effort to make the “redundant women” productive members of society. (The British male population in the colonies was often much higher than British women, and marriage to native populations was almost always discouraged.)

 Of course, it was not all bad for spinsters. Some of them could indeed be very comfortable if they were fortunate. Spinsters, along with widows, had an independent legal status, unlike married women, who until 1875 had no rights over their property. Many spinsters used their status to enable their careers, such as Florence Nightingale, famous nurse of the Crimea. She wrote a feminist essay, “Cassandra” (1852), which argues that marriage is detrimental to a woman’s life. She wrote that if a woman that is to be married has ‘any destiny, any vocation of her own, she must renounce it, in nine cases out of ten’. Instead of dropping their work as soon as they get married, spinsters could potentially pursue a long-lasting career.

 T he idea of the spinster evolved at the turn of the century, when the 1890s “New Woman” gained popularity, and more roles opened up for women in the workforce. The New Woman wasn’t necessarily a spinster, but she did exhibit a general disinterest in marriage that could lead to spinsterhood. This character type was also readily mocked, New Women being thought of as unattractive, masculine, overtly-feminist and thus ill-suited for domestic married life. Yet, she represented a woman better able to support herself and secure her own independence, which could make life where one did not rely on a husband, much more achievable.

 What I find interesting about the spinster (among many things), is the fact that the stigma she faced hasn’t quite gone away. We don’t tend to use the term much anymore, but there will always be women “past usual marrying age” who are single or unmarried. There’s still this idea that there must be something wrong with you if you have made it to 40 without a long-term partner. I think of classic 90s/2000s media in particular exploring this, from Bridget Jones’ thoughts about being single and alone in her early 30s, and Carrie Bradshaw and her friends’ anxieties in their mid to late thirties. Analysing those could be a whole article in of itself, so I shall refrain. But while Bridget and Carrie have been in our pasts, the expectation that women have a sell-by date, a ticking clock, certainly hasn’t.

Written by Jasmine Fry (23-24 Historia Editor) English & History Graduate.

Issue 19, 5th Anniversary, June 2025

---

Jasmine Fry is an English and History graduate and was the 23/24 Editor of Historia. Her interests include women’s social history and the 19th century