Hercules is probably an 11 x great grandfather of mine.

A short will, possibly written the day before his burial – possibly on the day Hercules died. His children were aged about 2 to 14. As was commonly the case, the sons were listed in birth order before their sister, although she was his eldest child. However, she did get the largest bequest. I wonder what leaving children their own sheep meant. Presumably they would have run with the rest of his sheep, left to his wife. Did it mean his children would taken an interest them and thus be encouraged to learn husbandry skills? It raises various questions we can’t know the answer to – how many sheep did Joan get? Would it have been easy for the children to identify theirs? Or was it really about the value – would money to the value of the sheep have been set aside for the children?

Two provisions Hercules did not make, which men dying at his age (or rather, with a wife of her age) often did, was to allow for his wife being pregnant and likely to marry again. His posthumous daughter Frances was probably baptised within a few days of her birth and so Joan was must have been about 4 months pregnant, but there is no bequest to ‘the childe with which she nowe goeth’. Then there is no condition in the bequest to Joan that it was only until such time as she remarried and that if she married it again it should go to his children. Joan did marry again, not once but three times. Despite this his sons appear to have not been too badly off, each leaving enough to write a will. For Hercules himself and his son William probate inventories survive, as does one for his son-in-law Edward Tilson (at the time of writing I have not seen any of these) which should provide more of an idea of the lifestyle of Hercules and his family. (His other two sons both died during the interregnum, meaning their wills were proved in London and no probate inventories survive for those cases).

Probate statement

Footnotes

[1] budd – ‘A weaned calf of the first year’ (OED – 3c) – used in Kent at a later date than elsewhere – did it always mean the same? (some kind of calf, anyway)

[2] Austen / Augustine Murton – this was Hercules’ father-in-law. (I think we can be safe in assuming this; from other sources he was clearly still living, and I have seen no evidence of a younger man with the same name who might have been his Hercules’ wife’s brother or other relation)

[3] I’m not sure what this says – clearly ‘written …’ – it may explain why Austen Murton’s name as witness appears to be in the same hand as the rest of the will i.e. it looks like although not the register copy this is a copy of the original. Also, there is no signature (or copy of name, as is usual in register copies) of Hercules Hills himself (and it is clearly not nuncupative)
The probate statement is in a different hand.

Source

This is a transcription by me, Teresa Goatham, of an image of the original will, KHLC ref. PRC/31/39 H/2, viewed on FamilySearch at Yeovil FHC. (A register copy also survives which I have not seen, ref. PRC/32/56/367a).