Harke Luse

Harke Luse was named on a list of men able to bear arms at Scituate, Massachusetts in 1643 (Nathaniel B. Shurtleff, ed., Records of the Colony of New Plymouth, in New England (1857), 191).

Justin Durand has suggested Harke Luse was the same person as Hercules, servant of Elder William Hatch. The circumstantial evidence is short and simple.

1. In August 1643 Harke Luse is named on a list of men able to bear arms. The authorizing legislation required the list to include “The names of all males that are able to bear arms from 16 years old to 60 years, within the several townships.” That is, the list was intended to include all males, including servants, not just the householders normally obligated for military service.
2. Harke’s name appears immediately following householder William Hatch and his son Walter Hatch, and immediately before householder “Thomas Clay” [Thomas Clapp]. This position on the list implies Harke was a servant of William Hatch. Further, Harke Luse must have been the only male servant in the household of William Hatch who was a male between 16 and 60.
3. Five months later, in January 1644 the Plymouth Court rendered a decision in the case of Hercules, a servant of William Hatch over a question of whether Hercules was bound to serve 6 years or 7 years. The court decided Hercules was serving for a term of 6 years, and indenture would end on June 3, 1644. Hercules had nearly completed his 6 years’ service in 1644. He was almost certainly an adult at the end of his service and therefore ought to have been listed on the 1643 list of men able to bear arms.
4. From the similarity of the names Harke and Hercules, and the short interval (5 months) between the two records, these two were almost certainly the same man. His name would have been Hercules Luse or Luce, nicknamed Herk.

Combining information about Hercules and Harke Luse allows us to reconstruct a sketchy biography.

At the outset, we can accept “Harke” as a form of “Hercules.” We see similar cases in other English records at the time. One Hills family in Kent used the given name Hercules over many generations. We see different forms for the given name Hercules in the parish records. For example:

1. Archelaus Hilles, baptized November 4, 1621 at Boughton under Blean, Kent.
2. Archelaus Hill, baptized September 23, 1638 at Great Yarmouth, Norfolk.
3. Harkelas Hilles, baptized July 3, 1653 at Saint Lawrence Thanet, Kent.
4. Hercules Hill, married December 12, 1661 at Great Yarmouth, Norfolk.

Similarly, there are spelling variations of Hercules in other parishes. For example:

1. Harcules Ballay, buried 12 September 1616 at Lenton, Nottinghamshire.
2. Hurculus Bach, baptized March 13, 1647 at Worcester, Worcestershire.
3. Harkeles Mathew, baptized February 25, 1619 at St. Keverne, Cornwall.
4. Harkeles Mudg, baptized May 10, 1652 at Berry Pomeroy, Devon.

From Harke’s presence on the 1643 list, he must have between 16 and 60. That is, he was born after about 1583 and before about 1627, almost certainly in England. We can guess he was probably at least 21 in 1644 when he completed his service. If so, he would have been born before about 1623. We might then venture a guess, he was at or near 21 when he completed his service, and his age might have been a factor in the court’s decision about when his service would end. That would place his birth right around 1623.

Situate Court, 5 June 1644: “Vpon heareing of the differrence betwixt Willm Hatch, of Scittuate, & his servant Hercules, for the terme he should serue him, whether six or seauen yeares, the Court, haueing heard the euedence on both sides, do order that the said Hercules is to serue the said Willm six yeares, wch wilbe vntill the third day of July next, & then to be free from him.” (Records of Colony of New Plymouth, Court Orders, Volume 1 1633-1640, Nathaniel B. Shurtleff, ed. Boston, 1855. Page 69.)

We can try to tease out further information from the wording of the court’s decision. It seems unlikely the evidence considered by the court included a written contract. A written contract would have specified the term of years. There would have been no reason for a dispute. Probably the evidence was oral testimony. The phase “having heard the evidence on both sides” further suggests the evidence was presented orally.

Further, the court finding a specific date for Hercules’ emancipation suggests the two parties did not disagree about the date Hercules’ service began. The only dispute was the length of the indenture.

Counting back, Hatch must have engaged Hercules on or about June 3, 1638. The date coincides with William Hatch’s return trip to America on the Castle. The Castle arrived Charlestown In Massachusetts Bay Colony in June 1638.

The oral testimony might plausibly have involved the date the Castle landed at Charlestown and the timing and circumstances of Hercules’ indenture in relation to that landing. That is, there would have been undisputed testimony along the lines that Hatch engaged Hercules at a certain date in relation to the Castle’s landing, probably a date either just before or just after Hatch disembarked.

That leaves the length of the indenture. Here, we have little to go on. There was a great deal of variation for the lengths of indentures, and Plymouth had no statutory default. However, indentures in this period were often for a term of 7 years or timed to end when the servant turned 21. The court might have made a choice between the two competing customs. And, if so, we might see the reason Hatch and Hercules disagreed about the intended term. Hercules thought his indenture should end when he was 21, while Hatch thought it should be for 7 years. If Hercules was born about 1623 (as speculated above), he would have been about 15 when he arrived in Plymouth Colony; a reasonable age. The court might then have decided, in the absence of other evidence, to end Hercules’ indenture at age 21, after 6 years.

Finally, from the dating, we notice Hatch engaged Hercules at the end of the Castle’s voyage, not the beginning. That is, if Hercules came on the Castle, he did not come as a servant to Hatch or anyone else, else his term of service would have begun in England some 60 days earlier. If he did not come on the Castle, he was already present in or around Charlestown and not otherwise engaged as a servant. That is, Hatch is not likely to have purchased Hercules’ service from someone else. We can, therefore, speculate, Hercules himself (or a relative) paid his passage to America, then Hercules arrived with no prospect of work, so put himself into the service of William Hatch.

The court’s decision in 1644 is the last record of him. Hercules / Harke might have died in the flu epidemic that swept through New England in the Spring and Summer of 1647, accounting for his absence from later records.

Harke Luse appears in Scituate in 1643, a little more than 20 years before Henry Luce appears in the same town in 1666. Other researchers have believed these facts suggest Harke might have been father or uncle of Henry Luce, but the relationship is speculative.

Charles Banks’ Theory

Banks speculated the name “Harke” might have been a copyist’s error for “Darke”; that he might have been an otherwise undocumented son of Abraham Luce and Cicely (Darke) Luce, of Horton, Gloucestershire; and that he might have been the father or uncle of immigrant Henry Luce who appeared in Scituate 20 years later.

The Internet has confidently mangled Banks’ theory in various ways. It’s worth looking at what he actually said:

“The name of Luce in this country is confined exclusively to the descendants of Henry Luce of Tisbury and with one exception, no other person of the name Luce settled in New England prior of 1750. That exception exists in the person of one “Harke” Luce who was a resident of Scituate in 1643, twenty years before the appearance of our Henry Luce in the same town. This singular baptismal name of “Harke”, which the author now believes to have been a copyist’s error for a similar name, has proven to be a clue to an English family of the name of Luce living in the west of England in 1600 near the border of Wales. The name of “Harke” Luce appears but once in the records of Scituate in a list of those able to bear arms in 1643, and an examination of thousands of English documents fails to disclose it, or one near enough like it to be mistaken for it except Harker or Hawke. In the county of England the family name of Luce has been found, namely: Gloucestershire, which borders on Wales and whose chief city Bristol, the great seaport from which so many emigrants sailed for the future homes in New England. [*”The author during recent visits to England found Luce families in Cornwall, Devon and Kent, all of them having Henry as a Christian name. Scituate, Mass. was largely settled by emigrants from Kent and in the parish of Lyminge that county is recorded in 1616 the marriage of a Henry Luce. It is here note as a reference for future investigators, but the family in Gloucestershire seems to offer the more probable solution.] A family of Luce lived in the parish of Horton, county of Gloucester, as early as 1550 and they are found there and in a number of surrounding parishes for a century and a half afterwards. Of this Horton family one Abraham Luce married 8 Oct. 1604 Cicely Darke, and this name is believe by the author to be the name originally copied in the Scituate records as “Harke”, and Darke Luce of 1643 is offered as the possible progenitor [emphasis added] of Henry Luce of the same town in 1666. If not, he was a probable near relative who influenced the migration of Henry Luce and all the surrounding circumstances make this the nearest probable origin of the Vineyard family in the matter of their English home. It should be stated, however, that Abraham and Cicely (Darke) Luce had no child named Darke and the name of Darke does not occur on the parish records of Horton. The similarity of the names, Harke and Darke, is too great to be ignored when combined with the rare name of Luce, and while other researches so far made have failed to uncover a Henry Luce in the parish of Horton, the adjoining parishes still unsearched may reveal the lost record of his baptism.” (Charles E. Banks, History of Martha’s Vineyard (1925, reprinted 1966), 3:247-48.)

To summarize: Banks noticed another Luce, a man named Harke Luce, in Scituate, Massachusetts (1643) a generation before Henry Luce appeared there (1666). This is the only mention of Harke and the first mention of Henry. Banks’ speculated Henry might have been a son or nephew of Harke, then further speculated that Harke might have been a previously unknown Darke Luce, hypothetical son of Abraham and Cicely (Darke) Luce, of Horton. Banks believed his theory was strengthened, first by a family tradition that immigrant Henry Luce came from Wales (Gloucestershire is on the Welsh border); and secondly by the coincidence of the names Darke and Harke appearing in connection with the rare surname name Luce.

The downside to his theory, as Banks readily admits, is there is no proof of any person named Darke Luce. Nevertheless, a Darke Luce could have been born at Horton in the period 1624-1653, for which there are no records. Harke Luce must have been at least 16 in 1643 to be able to bear arms, That would place his birth in or before 1627. Therefore, if there was a Darke Luce and if he was born in Horton, we would put his birth between 1624 and 1627. No other dating will work.

In support of this identification, Henry named his second son Israel, and had two grandsons named Israel. However, these children might derive their names from Israel Peakes, half-brother of Henry’s wife. The case for Henry’s birth at Horton is supported by Banks’ theory that Arthur Bevan, who settled at West Tisbury in 1677, and was Henry’s neighbor there, came from Yate, four miles from Horton. However, this identification rests reciprocally on Henry being from Horton.

Caroline Lewis Kardell’s Theory

Caroline Lewis Kardell, sometime Historian General of the Society of Mayflower Descendants, had a different idea. She thought Harke Luce was probably an otherwise unknown Archelaus Lewis (Caroline Lewis Kardell, letter to Mrs. James E. McCourt, reproduced in Martha E. McCourt and Thomas Luce, The American Descendants of Henry Luce (1991), 10A).

Quoting: “As for the name Harke Luce at Scituate, Harke is almost certainly a nickname for Archelaus. Because of the aspirated “H” as pronounced in some parts of England, Earle became Hearle, Archelaus became Harkelas, Hercules, etc. I believe that “Hare Luce” was Archelaus Luis. John Lewis (Luis) of Dartmouth and Rochester named his eldest son Archelaus. John was a descendant of George Lewis of Scituate and Barnstable. This particular line from George were all sea-farers. I think George of Scituate has a brother Harke (Archelaus) who was a mariner and came over to Scituate as Captain or crewman on one of the early ships. Scituate records gave George Lewis two full shares. All of the other settlers received one full share. Perhaps George received a second share to hold for his brother “Harke” or “Arck”. Because he was a mariner, he may never have returned from a voyage and so, [sic] disappears from the records….

“My suspicions regarding the name Luce are two-fold. First, it is so uncommon a name that it is almost certainly not the original surname, but a variant. For instance, the name Bigelow is only traced to one immigrant to Watertown, MA. The name does not exist in England or anywhere else in that form, except for the descendants of the Watertown man. It was Baguley, etc, [sic] in England, but ended up as Bigelow here. Secondly, the name Lewis was written (and pronounced) in several ways in the early records. Two men named Lewis, George and his brother John, certainly were at Scituate and probably a third brother Harke or Archelaus was there for a very short period. I believe your Henry was perhaps a nephew or cousin of the early Lewis, Luis, Lews family of Scituate and Barnstable. It is worth investigating, anyway.”

Summarizing: Kardell’s idea was that Harke Luce was a brother of George and John Lewis, and Henry Luce the immigrant a nephew or cousin. Kardell doesn’t make it explicit, but George Lewis’ double share would not have been for himself and brother John. John Lewis received his own share, a single share.

In support of Kardell’s theory, Banks himself notes Scituate “was largely settled by emigrants from Kent” (see above; Banks, 3:347n.). Further, the same list that contains the name Harke Luse also contains the names John Lewes at Situate and George Lewes at Barnstable.

By coincidence a ship called Hercules arrived at Sandwich, Massachusetts from Kent in 1634 (“Hercules Passenger List,” Bisbee Family Connection, retrieved Aug. 20, 2025). Further, John Lewis was a passenger on that ship. Harke is a possible nickname for Hercules, but Harke Luse must have been over 16 in 1643, so he was born before the ship arrived in 1634. He could not have been named for the ship.

Treatment Online

Harke Luse has been shabbily treated in online sources, although some of us have been working to clean up his profiles. Banks’ theories have been treated in different ways by Internet genealogists. Immigrant Henry Luce is usually presented as a son of Israel Luce, as if that were proven fact, and this has brought Harke into play in various ways.

Harke’s birthdate is frequently given as about 1628, which seems calculated to modify Banks’ theory by making Harke a grandson rather than son of Abraham and Cicely (Darke) Luce (married 1604), and an older brother rather than father of Henry Luce the immigrant. This strategy allows Henry to be son of the imaginary Israel Luce, as in a family tradition cited by Banks (3:246). We also see him frequently linked with Horton in Gloucester, which reflects Banks’ speculation. Caveat emptor.

• FamilySearch has a relatively clean profile for Harke Luce, but his surname is spelled “Luce” rather than “Luse.” Alernative names: Darke Luce and Archelaus Lewis. He said to have been born about 1628 and died 1718, despite the absence of supporting evidence. He is correctly noted as residing 1643 in Scituate. No parents or children. One of the two cited sources is WikiTree. The other is a “Legacy NFS Source.” (Updated Aug. 15, 2025.)
• Geni has Harke Luse, spelling his name correctly. His death is accurately placed “after 1643”. There is a curator note that Harke’s parents are unknown. The link to parents Israel Luce and Israel’s speculative wife Remember Munson has recently been removed. The cited sources are Banks and this page. (Updated Aug. 15, 2015.)
• Wikitree has a relatively clean profile for Harke Luce, but his surname is spelled “Luce” rather than “Luse.” This site assigns Harke a birthdate about 1628 in Horton and a death date of 1718, despite the absence of supporting evidence. Cited sources include Charles Banks and this page. (Updated Aug. 15, 2025.)
• WeRelate has a jumbled profile for Harke Luce. His surname is spelled “Luce” rather than “Luse.” This site says Harke was born 1628 at St James, Horton, Gloucester, England. No death date, not even “after 1643.” He is said to have been son of (the imaginary) “Israel Luce” and “Remember Munson,” and brother of the much younger Henry Luce (born 1640). No sources cited. (Updated Aug. 15, 2025.)

Conclusion

The Internet has widely adopted the theories of Charles Banks, modified apparently by individual whim, but has ignored the theory of Caroline Kardell. One reason Banks’ theories have won out might be that his theories have been published and are therefore more accessible, whereas Kardell communicated her theory in personal correspondence to leading researchers. However, on the face of it, there is no obvious reason to choose one theory over the other.

It should be noted the Luce yDNA Project at Family Tree DNA takes the official position the ancestry of immigrant Henry Luce is unknown. Leslie Pine, a noted English genealogist, said in a letter to the author he believes Henry Luce probably came from the same family as the Luces of Pucklechurch. One day DNA might shed further light. The male-line descendants will ultimately match a Luce or Lewis family in England, and we’ll have our bearings.

See Also

• Durand, Justin. Hercules Hills. Yellacatranch.com, Aug. 29, 2025.

Revised Aug. 6, 2026.