Home / Topics / Henry Hichmough, Richard Washington, and a Windsor Master-Debtor Obligation, 1593

Henry Hichmough, Richard Washington, and a Windsor Master-Debtor Obligation, 1593

Mixed Ready evidence packet

Henry Hichmough and Richard Washington at Windsor, 1593

Central finding

Royal Berkshire Archives D/EN/F6/1/3 has been fundamentally corrected by a fresh native-resolution image pass. It is not a bond from Henry Hichmough to Richard Waynman of Witney. It is a sealed obligation from Henry Hichmough, yeoman of Windsor, to Richard Washington of Windsor, whom Hichmough calls my master.

The obligation was executed on 6 December 1593 for £9 13s. 4d, payable on demand. A separate hand repeats the same figure at the foot as the holle Som. The document never names Henry Neville and never states the consideration. Its presence within Neville's miscellaneous file is therefore a real archival problem, not permission to turn the debt into Neville's transaction.

The corrected Washington identification opens a much stronger local-history route. Windsor borough records later place Richard Washington among the town's aldermen and mayors. The document is consequently evidence for a household, employment, credit and civic network operating beside the Neville family's Windsor offices.

Controlled source text

The operative opening reads:

Be yt knowen unto all men by these p[rese]nte

that I Henry Hichmoughe of windsor in the

county of Berks yeoman do owe and stande

indebted unto my m[aste]r M[aste]r Richard Washington

of windsor aforesaid the somme

of ix^li xiij^s iiij^d of lawfull English money

The payment and binding clause continues:

to be paied unto the said Richard Washington

his Executors or assignes upon demande

demande to be made unto the said Henry

Hichmoughe to the w[hi]ch said payment well and

truly to be made I binde me my heires

Executors and administrators firmely by

these p[rese]nte

The date clause gives 6 December in Elizabeth's thirty-sixth regnal year and also writes 1593. Hichmough signs his name. The execution formula is substantially Latin—Signat et deliberat in p[rese]ncia—but the following witness area is obscured. At the foot, another hand writes:

The holle Som cometh to ix^li xiij^s iiij^d

Full diplomatic text and image-status notes are in the Doc 22j D EN F6 1 3.

Why this is a bill obligatory, not a transaction explanation

The document has the structure of a simple bill obligatory: acknowledgment of a debt, named creditor, sum, demand clause, binding of the debtor and his personal representatives, subscription and seal. It does not contain the separate defeasance or condition expected in a penal bond and does not say that money was lent.

William West's 1598 Symboleography prints a closely matching precedent:

Be it knowne vnto all men by these presents, that I T. K. of D. in the

countie of S. yeoman, do owe vnto I. S. ... one hundred pounds ... to be

paid ... for which payment well and truely to bee made, I binde me and mine

heires firmely by these presents.

West separately supplies A bill for money lent, which expressly recites that the debtor received money by way of free loane. Hichmough's obligation has no such recital. It may memorialize a loan, but it could instead settle wages, goods, an account balance, entrusted money, damages, or another consideration. The form proves debt, not origin.

Public text: West, *The First Part of Symboleography* (1598), EEBO-TCP `A14963`.

my master: a relationship requiring records

The phrase is direct:

unto my m[aste]r M[aste]r Richard Washington

The first abbreviation expresses Hichmough's relationship; the second is Washington's honorific. It establishes acknowledged hierarchy but does not identify its institutional form. A yeoman could call an employer, household head, occupational superior or former master my master; the wording does not automatically make Hichmough an apprentice or domestic servant.

The most productive search is therefore not a generic surname hunt. Windsor borough freedom and apprenticeship registers, chamberlain's accounts, parish records, household lists and court books should be searched together for the two names. If a service or apprenticeship entry survives, it may also explain why a debt was settled on demand rather than at a fixed term.

Richard Washington in Windsor government

Tighe and Davis transcribed substantial portions of the Windsor borough archives in Annals of Windsor. Their account of James I's 1604 charter names Richard Washington among the men then being aldermen or chief benchers of the borough. The passage has been checked on printed p. 54 in the Archive.org page image.

Their corporation-account extract on printed p. 68 records:

5 Jac. To Mr. Washington Maior for his fee this yeare ... 30 0 0

The modern Windsor mayoral list assigns Richard Washington four mayoralties: 1596, 1600, 1606 and 1613. The 1593 obligation predates the first by about three years. The shared full name, residence and honorific make identification with this civic officer highly probable. Still, the obligation itself calls him neither alderman nor mayor and supplies no trade.

The Archive page-number JSON suggested leaves n74 and n88. Direct visual inspection showed those were printed pp. 55 and 69; the correct image witnesses are n73 and n87. This offset correction is retained so later work does not cite the wrong images.

The sum and the second hand

£9 13s. 4d equals 29 units of 6s. 8d and 14½ marks. Those equivalences are arithmetical, not an explanation. The obligation contains no word mark, noble, wage, loan, interest, account, or arrears.

The separate holle Som line is more useful than denomination speculation. It repeats the precise amount in a different hand and looks like a verification or accounting note. That could mean that £9 13s. 4d was the aggregate balance of earlier dealings, but only the underlying account or consideration clause can show this. The note may also help identify the hand among other Neville-file calculations.

Why the obligation is in the Neville file

The CALMView parent is Miscellaneous correspondence, of Sir Henry Neville, a nineteen-document file spanning 1592-1615. The physical /3 appears only as a modern pencil reference on the verso; the public catalogue does not expose a separate /3 description.

Several mechanisms could explain survival:

  1. Washington assigned or delivered the debt to Neville.
  2. Neville or an officer collected it for Washington.
  3. Hichmough entered Neville service or estate business after execution.
  4. The leaf accompanied a Windsor administrative matter.
  5. Later sorting joined an unrelated Windsor obligation to Neville papers.

The photographed document contains no assignment, receipt, Neville name or historical verso docket that selects among them. Archive adjacency alone cannot convert third-party debt into a Neville financial transaction.

Windsor dramatic context: useful but limited

The corrected bond documents a real Windsor world in which a yeoman owed money to a man he called master and that creditor later occupied civic office. The Merry Wives of Windsor likewise places titled householders and an innkeeper inside local mediation. In the Folger text, Sir Hugh proposes:

SIR HUGH Peace, I pray you. Now let us understand;

there is three umpires in this matter, as I understand:

that is, Master Page (fidelicet Master Page);

and there is myself (fidelicet myself); and the three

party is, lastly and finally, mine Host of the Garter.

PAGE We three to hear it and end it between them.

—*The Merry Wives of Windsor* 1.1, Folger Shakespeare Library

Falstaff separately calls:

FALSTAFF Mine Host of the Garter!

HOST What says my bullyrook? Speak scholarly and

wisely.

—*The Merry Wives of Windsor* 1.3, Folger Shakespeare Library

The value of the obligation is contextual: it adds a newly recovered creditor, master-debtor relationship and future mayor to the documented social economy of Windsor. It does not show that Washington, Hichmough or this debt supplied a dramatic character or episode, and it is not authorship evidence by itself.

Research programme

  1. Search surviving Windsor borough court, chamberlain, freedom and

    2. apprenticeship records for both names from 1585 to 1615.

  2. Search Windsor parish registers and churchwardens' accounts for Henry

    3. Hichmough and spelling variants Hichmoughe, Hitchmough, Higmough and Hichemough.

  3. Locate Richard Washington's will, inventory, property transactions and

    4. occupational records; distinguish him from contemporary Washington families before building genealogy.

  4. Inspect neighboring physical units /1, /2, /4, /5 and /6 for the

    5. same holle Som hand, assignments, account totals or Washington references.

  5. Search debt actions in the Windsor borough court for £9 13s. 4d, Hichmough

    6. as defendant, or Washington as plaintiff.

  6. Re-photograph the execution area under raking or multispectral light if

    7. available; the present image cannot support a witness identity.

  7. Ask RBA whether bundle-order notes or accession history explain why the

    8. third-party obligation was placed in Neville's miscellaneous file.

Verified sourced facts

Quoted source passages

The manuscript, West, Tighe and Davis, and the two Folger passages are quoted above with their source boundaries kept separate. Manuscript text is diplomatic and bracket-expands abbreviations; printed text follows the cited witness.

Notes on access

The two RBA photographs are local primary-image controls and are not publicly hosted by RBA. The public catalogue link describes the parent file, not this individual leaf. Archive.org provides public page images for the printed Windsor controls; EEBO-TCP provides West's searchable public text. The witness area remains unresolved because neither enhancement nor an independent record supplies a defensible name.

Sources