Yellacat Ranch

Hercules Hills

Posted on by Justin Durand

Hercules Hills (1625-1696/7) was an early immigrant to Scituate, Massachusetts. He has been proposed as one of the earliest known non-white immigrants (Stratton 1986: 187-88), but the identification is demonstably wrong (Stott 2018: 2, note 2). Hercules Hills was not the same person as Hercules the servant of William Hatch, of Scituate.

Clifford Stott’s 2018 article on the family of Hercules Hills clarified many questions about Hercules’ identity (Stott 2018, 1, 13). Stott identified Hercules’ parents by mapping the names and relationships in Hercules’ will. Stott showed this Herules had been previously confused with his cousin of the same name, who was son of Augustine Hill.

In summary, Hercules was baptized 14 August 1625 at Boughton-under-Bleane in Kent, son of an older Hercules Hills (1590-1658/9) and Mary (Harmon) Hills (Stott 2018: 10). He matriculated sizar at Sidney College, Cambridge on 2 April 1644. His matriculation shows him as son of Hercules Hills, a carpenter. The younger Hercules transferred to Queen’s College a few months later, on 6 August, then came to America shortly after. His first appearance in Plymouth County records is on 15 January 1644/5, when he took the Oath of Fidelity at Scituate (PCR, 8:183; Deane 1831: 154). On August 23, 1645 he was listed as one of eight men from Scituate who went on the Narrangasset campaign (PCR, 8; Pratt 1929: 166). He had a lot at Kent Street (Deane 1831: 284), probably the land he bought from William Holmes at Scituate at an unknown date. He returned to England (Farmer 1829: 144, citing 2 Coll. Mass. Soc. 4:233), before 1652. He was living at Rochester in Kent on 16 March 1660/1 (not 1666) when he sold his land at Scituate.  He was buried 14 March 1678/9 at Rochester.

An early compilation, Deane’s History of Scituate says: “Hercules Hills was in Scituate 1636: a soldier in the Pequod war, 1637, afterward returned to England. We learn the place of his residence in England, 1666, to have been Rochester, in Kent, from the conveyance made of certain lands in Scituate, to Edward Goodwin, shipwright of Boston. He had a lot [in Scituate] at Kent street” (Deane 1831: 284).

He does not appear on the August 1643 list of Men Able to Bear Arms (PCR, 8:187-95). He was still in England when that list was prepared.

There are two problems here. First, there is no evidence Hercules Hills fought in the Pequot War in 1636. His name does not appear on list of “voluntaries” enlisted from Plymouth Colony and recorded on 7 June 1637 (PCR ,1:60-61; Pratt 1929: 158–says it does)). Secondly, he sold his Scituate land in 1660/1, not 1666.

Was Hercules Nonwhite?

In 1986, Eugene Stratton famously suggested Hercules Hills might have been a nonwhite resident of Scituate, identical with a servant of William Hatch, also named Hercules. From the information then available, Stratton seems to have believed Hercules Hill went on the 1637 Pequot Campaign and the 1645 Narrangasset Campaign but was inexplicably absent from the 1643 List of Men Able to Bear Arms. To resolve the problem, Stratton suggested Hercules Hill was the unknown “blackamore” who appears on the 1643 List of Men Able to Bear Arms at Plymouth (Stratton, 187-88).

Stratton says, “The first record we have of a black in Plymouth Colony is the list of 1643 of those men between 16 and 60 able to bear arms. The list is quite thorough, ranging from the governor and ministers to servants…. Also on the list is ‘the blackamore,’ and though attempts have been made to identify him…we still do not know who [he] was, what his status in Plymouth was, or how long he had been or remained in Plymouth. However, though highly speculative, there is indirect evidence to link him with one Hercules Hill or Hills. This person is first mentioned in the records by name on 5 Mar 1643-4 when the court, ‘upon heareing of the differrence betwixt William Hatch, of Scituate, & his servant Hercules, for the terme he shoud serve him, whether six or seaven yeares…having heard the evedences on both sides, do order that the said Hercules is to serve the said William six yeares, which wilbe untill the third day of July next, & then to be free from him.’

Stratton contines, “It was highly unusual for court records to identify a person by first name only, although Hercules is so uncommon a name for a Plymouth Colony resident at this time that perhaps, like blackamore, it was considered sufficient. The next record shows that Hercules Hill was one of eight men from Scituate who went forth on 23 Aug 1645 on the Narragansett campaign. The fact that he is from Scituate, and the uniqueness of the name in Plymouth, make it likely that Hatch’s servant was Hercules Hill. It is apparent that he is able to bear arms, but the name Hercules Hill is not on the 1643 ATBA [Men Able to Bear Arms]. He is on a list dated 15 Jan 1644-5 of men from Scituate who had taken the Oath of Fidelity (by court order, above, he would have come out of servitude in July 1644). To connect this evidence it is necessary to reason that the black who was in Plymouth in 1643 was a servant to someone as early as July 1638, and was working for William Hatch in 1643-4. The name Hercules, though unusual at Plymouth for an Englishman, is the type of classical name which Englishmen seemed to like to bestow on nonwhite servants. The use of the first name Hercules to identify him on 5 March 1643-4 is again highly unusual for an Englishman, but is very consistent with usage at this time for nonwhites. If this speculative hypothesis should be true, it would show a black in Plymouth at this time not as a freeman… and not as a lifetime slave, but rather as an indentured servant with the same rights as all other indentured servants. One last bit of evidence to add to these facts is that William Hatch arrived in New England in 1634 aboard the ship called Hercules.”

The chronology of Hercules the servant shows he cannot have been the same person as Hercules Hills (Stott 2018: 2, note 2). On 5 March 1643/4 the Plymouth Court decided Hercules would be free of his indenture on 3 July 1644, after a term of 6 years (PCR, 2:69).

Counting back, we see William Hatch must have engaged Hercules on or about June 3, 1638. This was very near athe time Hatch returned to America from a trip to England. Hatch was on the Castle, which arrived at Charlestown in July 1638 (Anderson 2003: 3:241-44, citing Lechford 163-167). The timing suggests Hercules might have come to New England with William Hatch on that trip.

Confusion with Harke Luse

The evidence here is difficult but not overly complex.

Stratton argues Hercules was an uncommon name in England. It was indeed an uncommon name, but the christening records located by Stott show four men of that name in the Hill family: Hercules (bur. 1595), Hercules (chr. 1590), Hercules (chr. 1628), and Hercules (chr. 1625).

Stratton’s argument depends in large part on the fact Hercules Hill does not appear on the August 1643 List of Men Able to Bear Arms at Scituate, but Stratton misses the Harke Luse whose name appears immediately following William Hatch and Walter Hatch (PCR, 8:191). From his position on the list, Harke Luse is likely to have been the Hercules who was their servant. This Harke Luse appears nowhere else in colonial records. This is the last we see him.

Moreover, the “blackamore” referenced by Stratton appears in official records as “Abraham Pearse, the blackamore” (PCR, 8:187). His name has been crossed out in the original manuscript as shown by the double dagger (‡) marks enclosing his name (PCR, 8:v). Stratton’s argument depends on the theory the word “blackamore” was intended to appear on the line following Abraham Pearce, not on the same line.

The passenger list of the Hercules shows William Hatch, his wife Jane, five children, and six servants (Hotten, xix-xx; Stevens). Anderson names the passengers in this group: William Hatch of Sandwich, merchant, & Jane his wife with their children Walter, John, William, Anne, and Jane. Their servants were William Holmes, Joseph Ketchrell, Simon Ketcrell, Symon Sutton, and Lidia Wells (Anderson, 241, citing NEHGR, 75:219). These names are taken from Certificates of Conformity that form part of the same collection (NEHGR, 75:219). No Hercules, but we note Anderson lists five children and five servants, whereas Hotten shows five children and six servants, all unnamed (Hotten. xx).

William Hatch made a trip to England, then returned on the Castle in 1638 (Anderson, 244, citing Lechford, 163-67). There is no surviving passenger list for the Castle [1], but based on the date of the court order terminating Hercules’ indenture in 1644, after six years, we know Hercules indenture must have begun in 1638. It seems likely Hatch brought Hercules with him on his return trip that same year (Anderson, 244; Lechford, 163-67).

There are two competing puzzles here. First, Hercules Hill should appear on the 1643 List of Men Able to Bear Arms. Stratton suggests he was the anonymous blackamore at Plymouth. I suggest he was Harke Luse. But secondly, if he was the Hercules whose indenture began in 1638 and was complete in 1644, how could he have been in Scituate as early as 1636?

For the dates to work, Hercules must have been in Scituate before he was 16. That is, he must have been born, say before 1621.

  1. Hatch’s presence on the Castle is known from court records. Hatch was sued by Thomas Rucke of Charlestown on 26 August 1639 for his accounting of the expenses of the voyage. The suit mentions “the brother of the said William & 8 or 9 other persons the proper passengers of the said William.” Anderson identifies these passengers as William Hatch’s brother Thomas, Thomas’ wife and five children, their sister Elizabeth and her son William (Anderson, 243-44; Lechford, 163-67).

Sources

See Also

Revised July 27, 2026. My thanks to John Hills of Sonoma, California for bringing the Stott article to my attention and correcting me on many points.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *