completed Woodreeve

[floggle toggle]

I have found Woodreeve as "The steward or overseer of a wood".
However, Robert and Mercy (married 1800 at Hartfield) had 13 children inc -
Sarah, Susanna, Thomas, William and Abigail all of whom seem to have Woodreeve as an occupation.

Could a Woman at this time be a Woodreeve?

floggle toggle

[stanmapstone]

Where does it have this?

Stan

[floggle toggle]

From a reply to a question -
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,451566.msg3138384.html#msg3138384

Reply 8.

[JenB]

On reply 8 these are presumably all baptisms - in which case the occupation given is that of the father.

Jennifer

[floggle toggle]

Sorry to be pickey, but, what about the first 5 children who have no occupation and then "Catherine 3 April 1814, occupation - sawyer"!

floggle toggle

[JenB]

Sorry to be pickey, but, what about the first 5 children who have no occupation and then "Catherine 3 April 1814, occupation - sawyer"!

If the information is taken from a baptism record, then the only occupation shown thereon is that of the child's father.
Before about 1813 only very basic information was given, and it did not necessarily have to  include the father's occupation.
After 1813 a standardised form was used, which did include a column for the father's occupation.
http://www.ukbaptisms.org/baptisms.htm
http://www.british-genealogy.com/resources/registers/3baptpost1813.htm
This would explain the first five children with no 'occupation' given.

Perhaps Robert was a sawyer before he became a woodreeve. Both occupations are wood-related 

[stanmapstone]

From a reply to a question -
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,451566.msg3138384.html#msg3138384

Reply 8.

It would have made things clearer if "father's" had been put  before "occupation"   

Stan

[floggle toggle]

Thankyou.

As Stan says - It would have made things clearer if "father's" had been put  before "occupation"

However, peace once again reins.