I'm looking at a 1678 record, but I've seen later:

The record uses "singleman" and "singlewoman". I find these terms
excellently clear! When - and why - did the more obscure terms come into
general use? (I can see "spinster" has some sort of romantic image of a
young woman spinning away [I don't know what batcheling might be!].)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go. - Oscar Wilde

On 15/10/2023 23:30, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> I'm looking at a 1678 record, but I've seen later:
>
> The record uses "singleman" and "singlewoman". I find these terms
> excellently clear! When - and why - did the more obscure terms come into
> general use? (I can see "spinster" has some sort of romantic image of a
> young woman spinning away [I don't know what batcheling might be!].)

Bachelor and Spinster are shown in Schedule C to the Civil Registration
Act of 1836, which probably fixed them as the approved terms for
registration, but they were almost certainly in use earlier.

http://www.histpop.org/ohpr/servlet/View?path=Browse%2FLegislation+%28by+date%29&active=yes&mno=4044

According to occupations of mediaeval Londoners, a spinster was
originally a woman who spun raw wool into yarn, which isn't really a
surprise:

https://medievallondoners.ace.fordham.edu/occupations/

Bachelor has long meant a junior rank of some sort, but the etymology
seems to be uncertain.

--
Colin Bignell

In message <RAKdnS8fULrk7rH4nZ2dnZeNn_Vi4p2d@giganews.com> at Mon, 16
Oct 2023 00:20:07, Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> writes
>On 15/10/2023 23:30, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>> I'm looking at a 1678 record, but I've seen later:
>> The record uses "singleman" and "singlewoman". I find these terms
>>excellently clear! When - and why - did the more obscure terms come
>>into general use? (I can see "spinster" has some sort of romantic
>>image of a young woman spinning away [I don't know what batcheling
>>might be!].)
>
>Bachelor and Spinster are shown in Schedule C to the Civil Registration
>Act of 1836, which probably fixed them as the approved terms for
>registration, but they were almost certainly in use earlier.

That would explain their universality later, though as you say they came
in earlier I think.
[]
>According to occupations of mediaeval Londoners, a spinster was
>originally a woman who spun raw wool into yarn, which isn't really a
>surprise:
>
>https://medievallondoners.ace.fordham.edu/occupations/

As I thought. Basically a task thought suitable for a woman, I guess -
doesn't require huge strength, and does require _some_ dexterity.
>
>Bachelor has long meant a junior rank of some sort, but the etymology
>seems to be uncertain.
>
Then there's its use in Bachelor of Arts (and later Sciences).

I still wonder _why_ they imposed those terms to replace single
man/woman though, which is very clear! (OK, I suppose it removes the
ambiguity that a widow[er] is single, but I think widow/er were in use
earlier.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

That's how he [Dr. Who] seems to me. He's always been someone who gets the
/Guardian/. There are some parts of the universe where it's harder to get hold
of. - Peter Capaldi (current incumbent Doctor), RT 2016/11/26-12/2

On 16/10/2023 00:30, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> I'm looking at a 1678 record, but I've seen later:
>
> The record uses "singleman" and "singlewoman". I find these terms
> excellently clear! When - and why - did the more obscure terms come
> into general use? (I can see "spinster" has some sort of romantic
> image of a young woman spinning away [I don't know what batcheling
> might be!].)
see
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/where-did-spinster-and-bachelor-come-180964879/
which includes
The Oxford English Dictionary’s first recorded use of the word
“bachelor” to mean an unmarried man came around 1386, with Geoffrey
Chaucer. In one of the stories in The Canterbury Tales, the about
twenty-year-old squire is described as “a lover and lively bachelor” who
spends time chasing the ladies, partying and jousting, and who barely
sleeps.

In message <ugil0v$1837k$1@dont-email.me> at Mon, 16 Oct 2023 08:25:36,
john <john1@s145802280.onlinehome.fr> writes
>On 16/10/2023 00:30, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>> I'm looking at a 1678 record, but I've seen later:
>> The record uses "singleman" and "singlewoman". I find these terms
>>excellently clear! When - and why - did the more obscure terms come
>> into general use? (I can see "spinster" has some sort of romantic
>> image of a young woman spinning away [I don't know what batcheling
>> might be!].)
>
>see
>https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/where-did-spinster-and-bachelo
>r-come-180964879/
>which includes
>The Oxford English Dictionary’s first recorded use of the word
>“bachelor” to mean an unmarried man came around 1386, with Geoffrey
>Chaucer. In one of the stories in The Canterbury Tales, the about
>twenty-year-old squire is described as “a lover and lively bachelor” who
>spends time chasing the ladies, partying and jousting, and who barely
>sleeps.

Thanks - a most interesting article! (I hadn't known we'd officially
dropped them in 2005.) The one thing now left missing is the etymology
of ba(t)chel{o|e}r; obviously, a spinster comes from "one who spins",
like maltster and so on, but what ba(t)ching is isn't clear. (Though
there's some faint hint in that article that it's a supporter of some
sort, as in a knight's assistant - but that doesn't explain the
etymology.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Eve had an Apple, Adam had a Wang...

On 16/10/2023 08:46, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> In message <ugil0v$1837k$1@dont-email.me> at Mon, 16 Oct 2023 08:25:36,
> john <john1@s145802280.onlinehome.fr> writes
>> On 16/10/2023 00:30, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>>> I'm looking at a 1678 record, but I've seen later:
>>>  The record uses "singleman" and "singlewoman". I find these terms
>>> excellently clear! When - and why - did the more obscure terms come
>>> into general use? (I can see "spinster" has some sort of romantic
>>> image of a young woman spinning away [I don't know what batcheling
>>> might be!].)
>>
>> see
>> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/where-did-spinster-and-bachelo
>> r-come-180964879/
>> which includes
>> The Oxford English Dictionary’s first recorded use of the word
>> “bachelor” to mean an unmarried man came around 1386, with Geoffrey
>> Chaucer. In one of the stories in The Canterbury Tales, the about
>> twenty-year-old squire is described as “a lover and lively bachelor” who
>> spends time chasing the ladies, partying and jousting, and who barely
>> sleeps.
>
> Thanks - a most interesting article! (I hadn't known we'd officially
> dropped them in 2005.) The one thing now left missing is the etymology
> of ba(t)chel{o|e}r; obviously, a spinster comes from "one who spins",
> like maltster and so on, but what ba(t)ching is isn't clear. (Though
> there's some faint hint in that article that it's a supporter of some
> sort, as in a knight's assistant - but that doesn't explain the etymology.)
https://www.etymonline.com/word/bachelor
and worth checking the spinster entry
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=spinster

In message <ugiog0$18qjf$1@dont-email.me> at Mon, 16 Oct 2023 09:24:48,
john <john1@s145802280.onlinehome.fr> writes
>On 16/10/2023 08:46, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>> In message <ugil0v$1837k$1@dont-email.me> at Mon, 16 Oct 2023
>>08:25:36, john <john1@s145802280.onlinehome.fr> writes
[]
>>> see
>>> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/where-did-spinster-and-bachelo
>>> r-come-180964879/
[]
>> Thanks - a most interesting article! (I hadn't known we'd officially
>>dropped them in 2005.) The one thing now left missing is the etymology
>>of ba(t)chel{o|e}r; obviously, a spinster comes from "one who spins",
[]
>https://www.etymonline.com/word/bachelor

Thanks. Agrees that it's "A word of uncertain origin." Does give some
suggestions.

>and worth checking the spinster entry
>https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=spinster
>
(Why the different URL form?) Agrees that its meaning clearly derives
from "one who spins [yarn, not just a rotating nitwit]". Interesting
discussion of whether -ster is specifically a feminine suffix (giving
examples of ones that aren't, like my "maltster" [I have some in my
ancestry]).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

My movies rise below vulgarity. - Mel Brooks, quoted by Barry Norman in RT
2016/11/26-12/2

On 16/10/2023 07:25, john wrote:
> On 16/10/2023 00:30, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>> I'm looking at a 1678 record, but I've seen later:
>>
>> The record uses "singleman" and "singlewoman". I find these terms
>> excellently clear! When - and why - did the more obscure terms come
>> into general use? (I can see "spinster" has some sort of romantic
>> image of a young woman spinning away [I don't know what batcheling
>> might be!].)
>
> see
> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/where-did-spinster-and-bachelor-come-180964879/
> which includes
> The Oxford English Dictionary’s first recorded use of the word
> “bachelor” to mean an unmarried man came around 1386, with Geoffrey
> Chaucer. In one of the stories in The Canterbury Tales, the about
> twenty-year-old squire is described as “a lover and lively bachelor” who
> spends time chasing the ladies, partying and jousting, and who barely
> sleeps.

Some things don't change!
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 16/10/2023 09:39, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> In message <ugiog0$18qjf$1@dont-email.me> at Mon, 16 Oct 2023
> 09:24:48, john <john1@s145802280.onlinehome.fr> writes
>> On 16/10/2023 08:46, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>>> In message <ugil0v$1837k$1@dont-email.me> at Mon, 16 Oct 2023
>>> 08:25:36, john <john1@s145802280.onlinehome.fr> writes
> []
>>>> see
>>>> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/where-did-spinster-and-bachelo
>>>>
>>>>
r-come-180964879/
> []
>>> Thanks - a most interesting article! (I hadn't known we'd
>>> officially dropped them in 2005.) The one thing now left missing
>>> is the etymology of ba(t)chel{o|e}r; obviously, a spinster comes
>>> from "one who spins",
> []
>> https://www.etymonline.com/word/bachelor
>
> Thanks. Agrees that it's "A word of uncertain origin." Does give some
> suggestions.
>
>> and worth checking the spinster entry
>> https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=spinster
>>
> (Why the different URL form?) Agrees that its meaning clearly derives
> from "one who spins [yarn, not just a rotating nitwit]". Interesting
> discussion of whether -ster is specifically a feminine suffix
> (giving examples of ones that aren't, like my "maltster" [I have some
> in my ancestry]).

The etymology is as good as you are likely to get!

The different URL is because I used the Search box on the bachelor page.

If you use the same URL format as that for bachelor
https://www.etymonline.com/word/spinster
you get a different related entries and that seemed more interesting, if
I was giving one link

As an aside, the -ster entry under the
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=spinster seemed more interesting

On 15/10/2023 23:30, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> I'm looking at a 1678 record, but I've seen later:
>
> The record uses "singleman" and "singlewoman". I find these terms
> excellently clear! When - and why - did the more obscure terms come into
> general use? (I can see "spinster" has some sort of romantic image of a
> young woman spinning away [I don't know what batcheling might be!].)

I occasionally find "spinster" and "singlewoman" both used in the same
set of parish records, particularly marriages. I've worked out that
"singlewoman" applied to a woman who had already had an illegitimate
child. (Mainly 18th century, my data is all Bedfordshire.)

Steven

Colin Bignell wrote:
> According to occupations of mediaeval Londoners, a spinster was
> originally a woman who spun raw wool into yarn, which isn't really a
> surprise:

It's the female form, spinner being the male although by the time of the
mills the spinners were mostly female. In the domestic textile industry
the wife would have spun yarn for her husband to weave so why it became
a term for an unmarried woman seems a little obscure.

On 16/10/2023 10:26, john wrote:
> On 16/10/2023 09:39, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>> In message <ugiog0$18qjf$1@dont-email.me> at Mon, 16 Oct 2023
>> 09:24:48, john <john1@s145802280.onlinehome.fr> writes
>>> On 16/10/2023 08:46, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>>>> In message <ugil0v$1837k$1@dont-email.me> at Mon, 16 Oct 2023
>>>> 08:25:36, john <john1@s145802280.onlinehome.fr> writes
>> []
>>>>> see
>>>>> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/where-did-spinster-and-bachelo
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
>>>>>
r-come-180964879/
>> []
>>>> Thanks - a most interesting article! (I hadn't known we'd
>>>> officially dropped them in 2005.) The one thing now left
>>>> missing is the etymology of ba(t)chel{o|e}r; obviously, a
>>>> spinster comes from "one who spins",
>> []
>>> https://www.etymonline.com/word/bachelor
>>
>> Thanks. Agrees that it's "A word of uncertain origin." Does give
>> some suggestions.
>>
>>> and worth checking the spinster entry
>>> https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=spinster
>>>
>> (Why the different URL form?) Agrees that its meaning clearly
>> derives from "one who spins [yarn, not just a rotating nitwit]".
>> Interesting discussion of whether -ster is specifically a feminine
>> suffix (giving examples of ones that aren't, like my "maltster" [I
>> have some in my ancestry]).
>
> The etymology is as good as you are likely to get!
>
> The different URL is because I used the Search box on the bachelor
> page.
>
> If you use the same URL format as that for bachelor
> https://www.etymonline.com/word/spinster you get a different related
> entries and that seemed more interesting, if I was giving one link
>
> As an aside, the -ster entry under the
> https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=spinster seemed more interesting

And there is also bachelorette
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=bachelorette and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachelorette

Steven Gibbs wrote:
> I occasionally find "spinster" and "singlewoman" both used in the same
> set of parish records, particularly marriages. I've worked out that
> "singlewoman" applied to a woman who had already had an illegitimate
> child. (Mainly 18th century, my data is all Bedfordshire.)

Example:
"Informatur per famam that John Keye of Okenshay, esquier, maried, is
reported to have had divers children by Dorothie Savell, singlewoman, of
Sutall Hall, and is now supposed to be with child by him again."

Archbishop Gindall's visitation, 1575.

The final score was 7, more than his legitimate children. John Kaye of
Oakenshaw was deputy to Sir Henry Saville as Stweard of the Honor of
Pontefract and Dorothy was his daughter. Saville seems not to have
minded as he was not only divorced and remarried, Elizabeth Soothill,
Dorothy's mother being his 2nd wife, but he also had two illegitimate
sons by his wife's maid, the surviving one of whom became his eventual
heir. Nevertheless it was Dorothy who seems to have received condemnation.

On 16/10/2023 12:48, Ian Goddard wrote:
> Steven Gibbs wrote:
>> I occasionally find "spinster" and "singlewoman" both used in the
>> same set of parish records, particularly marriages. I've worked
>> out that "singlewoman" applied to a woman who had already had an
>> illegitimate child. (Mainly 18th century, my data is all
>> Bedfordshire.)
>
> Example: "Informatur per famam that John Keye of Okenshay, esquier,
> maried, is reported to have had divers children by Dorothie Savell,
> singlewoman, of Sutall Hall, and is now supposed to be with child by
> him again."
>
> Archbishop Gindall's visitation, 1575.
>
> The final score was 7, more than his legitimate children. John Kaye
> of Oakenshaw was deputy to Sir Henry Saville as Stweard of the Honor
> of Pontefract and Dorothy was his daughter. Saville seems not to
> have minded as he was not only divorced and remarried, Elizabeth
> Soothill, Dorothy's mother being his 2nd wife, but he also had two
> illegitimate sons by his wife's maid, the surviving one of whom
> became his eventual heir. Nevertheless it was Dorothy who seems to
> have received condemnation.
>

I think you will find at that time singlewoman just meant an unmarried
woman who may or may not have had a child. At that time spinster had not
yet become common usage for an unmarried woman. What other word(s) could
have be used?

from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_women_in_the_Middle_Ages
Before 1800, the term "single women" (or "singlewomen", a 14th-century
compound) is defined as women who lived without having married, which
includes women who would eventually marry in their lifetime and women
who never would. The term "life-cycle single women" describes women who
were single for the years between childhood and marriage. Women who were
single for life fell under the category of lifelong single women.

It is important to distinguish single women from virginal nuns, another
group of husbandless women. Although unmarried, not all single women
were celibate virgins and virginal nuns practiced very different lives
than everyday single women. Widows also differed from single women, as
they often had greater economic security and occupational opportunity.
While widows and single women both lived without a spouse at some point
in their lives, their lifestyles were very different and widows were
often awarded more freedoms and opportunities.

On Mon, 16 Oct 2023 01:16:00 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>
>I still wonder _why_ they imposed those terms to replace single
>man/woman though, which is very clear! (OK, I suppose it removes the
>ambiguity that a widow[er] is single, but I think widow/er were in use
>earlier.)

Perhaps they were terms in common use.

On 16/10/2023 09:40, Steven Gibbs wrote:
> On 15/10/2023 23:30, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>> I'm looking at a 1678 record, but I've seen later:
>>
>> The record uses "singleman" and "singlewoman". I find these terms
>> excellently clear! When - and why - did the more obscure terms come
>> into general use? (I can see "spinster" has some sort of romantic
>> image of a young woman spinning away [I don't know what batcheling
>> might be!].)
>
> I occasionally find "spinster" and "singlewoman" both used in the same
> set of parish records, particularly marriages. I've worked out that
> "singlewoman" applied to a woman who had already had an illegitimate
> child. (Mainly 18th century, my data is all Bedfordshire.)

I wondered about that when I saw one of the marriages in my tree where
the woman had a child before the marriage and was the only one in the
register described as a single woman.

--
Colin Bignell