Hello Chris The answer, from my experience, is no, not always. I have had labourers (probate documents) who have been quite well off as well as poor ones. I have a feeling that it just means that he does physical work for his living. I'm not even sure that it means that he works for someone else as I have a feeling that at least one was also a tenant, but I can't say for certain on that one. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Bartlett" <woodcom@ihug.co.nz> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 11:12 PM Subject: [OEL] Laborer 1636 > > > Hello All > > I have a will for a John Meykin laborer (sic) 1636. He seems to > leave quite a lot of money and assets for the time and I > wondered if the term laborer was the same as we consider > labourer today. > > Thanks > Chris Bartlett > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > OLD-ENGLISH Web Page > http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ >