Charmian Mansell 

When Downton Abbey first aired on 26 September 2010, the public was immediately hooked. It wasn’t just the glamour, the affluence, and the scandals of the aristocratic Crawley family living in the big house that drew viewers in. It was also the cast of servants working tirelessly below stairs that captivated audiences.  

The show gave airtime to the lives of men and women who lit fires, carried luggage, mopped floors, cooked food, served food, made beds, and did laundry, all in the service of the Earl and Countess of Grantham and their three daughters. 

Downton Abbey dramatizes service in the Crawley’s country house in the early 20th century. But what if we turn the clock back a few hundred years? What was service like in the centuries before Downton? Here are five ways in which pre-industrial English service was not as Mr Carson (the butler), Anna (the lady’s maid), or Daisy (the kitchen maid), experienced it. 

Jean Siméon Chardin, The Kitchen Maid.

1. Not all mistresses were the Countess of Grantham 

The enormous social distance between the Crawleys and their servants is central to Downton Abbey. But this was not always the case. Around 60 percent of 15- to 24- year- olds worked in service in the 16th and 17th centuries. All but the poorest households were reliant on them, and the employers of servants ranged from gentlemen to husbandmen. Not all households were headed by men, of course – widowed women ran their own homes and hired servants, too. 

In wealthy households, several servants – male and female – might be hired to undertake specialist tasks (not unlike the cooks, butlers, and footmen in Downton). Here, the disparity in wealth between master and servant could indeed be great. But most servants worked in homes of modest means, and were hired alone to take care of all kinds of work. 

2. The female servant was not just a ‘domestic’ 

Big country houses like Downton Abbey required women to cook extravagant meals, wash dishes, clean rooms, light fires, make beds, serve tea, and carry out personal care. But pre-industrial homes rarely required such large amounts of domestic work. For the most part, they were hardly big enough to need much cleaning. 

The term ‘domestic servant’ was not regularly used until later in the 17th century. ‘Servant’ would do. She might milk cows, make cheese, spin, reap corn, do harvest work, gather fruit, run errands, or sell produce at market. Her work was not just oriented to the personal needs of the family; it was economically productive.  

Even work that we might think of as ‘domestic’ – washing clothes, for instance – did not take place in the domestic space. In 1595, servant Matilda Bates of Compton Dando (Somerset) was gathering apples in her master’s orchards while two of her neighbours and their servants were doing washing in the nearest water supply – the river. These servants were not bound to their employers’ homes in the way that the Downton women are. 

Jean-Francois Millet, The Washerwomen.

3. Servants were part of the family 

Sometimes this was literally the case. Many families hired relatives. Margaret and Juliana Wathen of Longney (Gloucestershire) were both hired as servants by their aunt and uncle in the 1580s. Other men and women served their older, married, brothers or sisters. In these cases the servant benefited from the familiarity of living with a family member.  

But servants were also counted as part of the family. When diarist and Essex vicar Ralph Josselin wrote about his family in the 17th century, he specifically included the servants he hired when he used the term ‘family’. In these households, space was not divided along family and servant lines (but that didn’t always mean their relationships were close). 

4. They even shared bedrooms (and sometimes beds) with their masters and mistresses 

The four-poster double beds in which the Crawley family sleep soundly are a far cry from the narrow single beds onto which their servants flop their weary bodies at the end of each day. In the 18th century, domestic privacy was increasingly sought by families who were wealthy enough to build separate servant staircases, attic bedrooms, and below-stairs kitchens in their homes.  

Quiringh van Brekelenkam, An Old Man Sleeping by a Fireside Attended by a Maidservant. National Trust, Polesden Lacey.

But it wasn’t always so. In 16th and 17th-century England, some servants shared bedrooms with their masters and mistresses. On New Year’s Eve in 1550, Cecilia Baker returned home late to her master, William Marks house in Stogursey (Somerset). She had been drinking at a neighbour’s house with a potential suitor, Robert Stone, who accompanied her home. William and his wife rose from bed, told Robert to go home and ushered Cecilia to her bed which was in their own room.

Agnes Durram of Silverton (Devon) even shared a bed with her widowed mistress and faced the uncomfortable prospect of sharing it with her mistress’s lover in 1596!

5. Servants were difficult to define 

‘Servant’ has always been a slippery occupation. In the Crawley household, there are different types of servants, including butlers, cooks, housekeepers, and ladies’ maids. In pre-industrial England, men holding various professional occupations – scribes, clerks, secretaries, and farm managers – could all be described as servants.  

Noblewomen, too, who served in other noble households as part of their education might also be counted amongst their number. They were obviously very different from the thousands of men and women who worked in more humble households. Service was a category of work and how it was experienced varied. Environment and circumstances mattered. 

Johannes Vermeer, Mistress and Maid (Lady with Her Maidservant Holding a Letter).

The servants of Downton Abbey received wages for their work and were free to leave when they wanted. But in 16th– and 17th-century England, some servants received only bed and board. Being wageless limited their freedom to leave. If Downton Abbey’s servants seem bound within the walls of the big house, spare a thought for poor boys and girls in pre-industrial England who were bound out as pauper apprentices. This system relieved overburdened poor families of an extra mouth to feed by compelling children to serve in a more affluent homes for no wages, unable to leave until either they reached 18 (for men) or 21 (for women). 

Further reading 

• Kussmaul, A., Servants in Husbandry in Early Modern England (Cambridge University Press, 1981). 
• Macfarlane, A., The Family Life of Ralph Josselin, a Seventeenth- Century Clergyman: An Essay in Historical Anthropology (New York, 1977). 
• Mansell, C., Female Servants in Early Modern England (Oxford University Press, 2024). 
• Sharpe, P., ‘Poor Children as Apprentices in Colyton, 1598– 1830’, Continuity and Change 6 (1991).   

Tags: family history, occupations, servants, service, women's work

| This entry was posted on Thursday, March 6th, 2025 at 12:04 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.