Archive of Our Own ^beta

Modernity—conscious or unconscious—colors the way we consume content that examines the past. For instance, in the Regency era (1811-1820) in Britain, a marriage between a 17-year-old girl and a 44-year-old man, though potentially eyebrow-raising, would not necessarily have been considered entirely shameful at the time—uncommon, yes. Rare? No. That is, with a caveat (because all things come with strings, don’t they?). 

High-society young women were often presented at court and entered the marriage market around the age of seventeen or eighteen, so a seventeen-year-old debutante was at a typical age to marry, and marry a man of any age. 

It was not unusual for older men (especially wealthy, titled, or of high social rank) to marry a much younger woman, as it was often seen as strategic, particularly if the man was established and she was bringing a dowry or gaining status. Besides, older men are more likely to have settled comfortably in their fortunes or their fathers finally kicked the bucket, and they’ve acquired the title, property, and all the accompanying ledgers. Either way, men stayed winning (luckily so many of them suffered at the hands of syphilis, the venereal disease ravaging their bodies impotent, thank fucking god).

But that did not make it common. According to the authors of English Population History from Family Reconstruction, 1530-1837, the average age at the time of marriage was typically around 25 years old for men and 23.5 years old for women. Courtships were expected to happen in early adulthood between early adults, you know? Note: this obviously varied based on class and wealth. Low-income/middle-class people needed to secure a bag before they got their hag (some might say I’m a poet). 

 Image: Dotage, 18th century, Thomas Rowlandson // Caption: Someone help her!!

These sorts of marriages were commonly known as May-December marriages, or a relationship where there is a significant age difference between the partners, often with one partner being considerably older. Specifically referred to as a May-December relationship, May is a month that symbolizes youth, spring, and new birth, while December symbolizes old age, winter days, and greying skies.

But why? Because this era centered around money and fertility, a man was as desirable as his acquired wealth, and a woman for her ability to bear children. “Most men tend to amass money later in life, and birthing several babies is still a moderately young woman’s game,” writes essayist Lydia Shoup. 

Regardless, this does not mean there wasn’t a certain degree of shame associated with it.

In the book "The Midwife’s Guide," a Victorian edition of the 17th-century sex and midwifery manual known as "Aristotle’s Masterpiece" was the most widely read sex manual in 19th-century England. When it came to the topic of May December marriages, the unknown author (thought to be Aristotle—which…ironic considering his proclivities with the—ahem—youth) briefly makes clear how they felt about matches of unequal years (spoiler alert—it’s negative), stating “When greedy parents, for the sake of riches, will match a daughter that is scarcely seventeen, to an old miser…can anyone imagine that such a conjunction can ever yield satisfaction, where the inclinations are as opposite as the months of June and January.”

In this author’s eyes, an age gap this large can bring nothing but misery as he explains that this large age gap, “makes the woman (who still wants a husband, for the old miser is scarce the shadow of one) either to wish, or, may be, to contrive his death, to whom her parents thus, against her will, have yoked her; or else, to satisfy her natural inclinations, she throws herself into the arms of unlawful love: which might both have been prevented, had the greedy inconsiderate parents provided her with a suitable match.”

 Image: The Unequal Marriage - Vasily Pukirev (1862) // Caption: fun fact the guy in the back with his arms crossed is the painter who is also the lover of the young woman (he does NOT approve of this marriage)

So basically: if you pair a young girl with an old man, not only will he not be able to satisfy her, but also she will turn to a lover to form an unlawful tryst just to get her rocks off—because of course she would (tbh slay cunty girl boss queen shit).

Heaven forbid a girl wants to cuckold her old ass keeper of a husband to get dicked down by someone young and virile. Women can’t do anything these days!

The author later writes that the consequences of old men’s dotage and unequal marriages include: a young wife murdering her old husband ( good for her), and an old husband may be consumed with paranoia over being cuckolded by a young wife ( seriously, good for her). 

He then goes on to write about the reverse situation (young man, old woman), claiming that there is nothing but divine unnatural ongoing writing that the “old bag…that marries a young boy to satisfy her lecherous itch, when she is just tumbling into the grave.” Not really relevant to what we’re discussing in this essay, but I still had to share because what do you mean people were calling elderly women' old bags'? Shit’s crazy. I, for one, look forward to being an old bag.

(Do you ever feel like a plastic bag / Drifting through the wind, wanting to start again? — Aristotle Katy Perry). 

So, I bet you’re asking yourself:

1. Why did I start reading this fucking essay?
2. Okay, so like…did society approve of age gaps or not? /gen
3. Why did I start reading this fucking essay? (but in italics)

So, to answer your question: kind of.

Anyway, thank you for reading, thank you for coming, and drive home safely.

However, society also raised an eyebrow at an age gap relationship if the older man was not titled, wealthy, or respectable. For instance, a 44-year-old bachelor marrying a teenager might cause private whispers if there were concerns about motivations like lust, control, etc. The value of propriety was high, and despite a marriage not necessarily “shameful” for its age gap, it could still attract criticism or satire if perceived as improper or opportunistic.

And if you’re wondering, “gee willikers, this cannot be legal!” 

To our modern sensibilities, it isn’t! But the past doesn’t give a fuck about modern sensibilities. At the time, it had less to do with the legality of such relationships and more to do with permission . 

Whose permission?

Surprise, surprise, not the bride’s. 

In Regency England, the legal age of consent for marriage was 12 for females and 14 for males. However, Lord Hardwicke's Marriage Act of 1753 required parental consent for all marriages of minors (under 21).

But enough of this history lesson, what about scandalous age gap relationships in literature? Did the literature of the time reflect these mixed feelings towards age gaps? 

Well, yes!

Examples of instances when it was frowned upon (aka all by Jane Austen)

• In Pride and Prejudice, when Lydia Bennet (15 years old) runs off with George Wickham (27 years old), this causes a major scandal which only dies down once they later marry. Twelve years is not a significant age gap by Regency standards, but paired with a social scandal, the age gap’s impropriety is heightened. Besides, at the time, a 27-year-old man running off with a teenage girl without marriage was seen as predatory, particularly if the girl was from a respectable family.
• In Sense and Sensibility, Willoughby (25 years old) compromises Eliza Williams (16 years old), leading to her social run. In the same book, Colonel Brandon (35 years old) and Marianne Dashwood (16/17-years-old). Jane Austen even comments on the significance of this 18-year age gap in the novel! She calls Colonel Brandon an “​​absolute old bachelor” and says that he’s "on the wrong side of five and thirty.” (Jane Austen, 200+ years and you still continue to be That Girl)
• In Emma, Mr. Knightly (37 years old) has known Emma (21 years old) since she was a child, and even says, “I held her in my arms when she was three months old.”
• This one isn’t taboo in the slightest; this quote just gave me the ick the first time I read it, and if I have to suffer, so do you.

There are more examples, but I’m tired and doing this on my own time. So here’s a helpful little chart of age-gap themes in Regency era books and how they play out:

The Bridgerton of it all

For the purposes of this story, specific age gap is particularly scandalous and upsetting as Colin Bridgerton, in the [Julia Quinn canon] is not a fan of age gaps despite being of marriageable age—a fact mentioned in chapter one of Romancing Mr. Bridgerton by Lady Whistledown, of all people: “It is difficult, however, to predict whether Mr. Bridgerton will succumb to matrimonial bliss this season; he is certainly of an age to marry (three-and-thirty), but he has never shown a decided interest in any lady of proper parentage, and to make matters even more complicated, he has an appalling tendency to leave London at the drop of a hat, bound for some exotic destination.”

Furthermore, in the book, even Penelope is aware that Colin is not interested in age gaps when her mother suggests aloud that Colin Bridgerton might pursue Felicity, who, mind you, is the same age and best friends with his youngest sister, Hyacinth.

And when this is brought up to Colin by Portia, he is deeply, deeply unsettled by it.