WILL OF HUMPHREY FROGOTE of MAYFIELD, 1594 (died 1595)

This is my transcription of the will of Humphrey Frogote, made on 12^th February 1594. The original document is held at Lichfield Joint Record Office. From examination of a very bad fiche copy of the Mayfield parish register, I believe Humphrey was buried in April 1595 (certainly the inventory of his goods was taken on 30^th April, 1595). Bearing in mind the new year in those days started on 25^th March, this means he lived for approximately two months after executing this will.

I have done my best to interpret the handwriting. A few of the words have defeated my limited deciphering skills of 16^th century Secretary hand! But most of the meaning is clear.

Humphrey's name was spelt homfrye (with lower case 'h'), and the surname was spelt Frogote (sometimes upper case 'F' (written as 'ff') and sometimes lower case). The name of his son Richard is hard to decipher, being written as Ryc^d, the 'R' being very unlike what we would write today. Note that the names of his other children are written as homfrye (Humphrey), dorythye (Dorothy) and Izabell (Isabel).

The document does not bear Humphrey's signature or mark, and the names of the witnesses are written in the same hand as the will itself, not as signatures or marks. I therefore conclude that this is actually a copy of the original will, though (given the handwriting) probably prepared contemporaneously. The Inventory, which also survives (and which I am in the process of transcribing) could have been written in the same hand (though rather more untidily), which raises the possibility that the will was copied, perhaps by the overseer, George Ley, as part of the probate process.

A Robert Froget was witness to the execution of the will. We don't know who this Robert was, but he could have been the Robert of Mayfield who died in 1600. We therefore don't know what relation he was to Humphrey. One is tempted to think he would have been a close relation, but it is interesting that his surname was spelt differently (Froget vs. Frogote), even though the whole document was written in the same hand. This may not be significant though, if whoever copied the will simply copied the signatures as they were written on the original - it is generally very dangerous to attach any significance to the spelling of surnames in those days.

Humphrey appoints his children, Humphrey, Dorothy and Isabel (but not Richard) as his executors. These three and not Richard also get the residue of the estate, though Richard gets some specific legacies. One can only wonder why Richard was treated differently. Although he does get a number of legacies, these do not include any cattle or sheep which, based on the inventory taken after his death, comprised the majority of the value of the estate. A George Ley is appointed overseer of the probate. One is naturally curious as to why an overseer was considered necessary. Could it have been because his children were too young to be depended upon to carry out the duties of executor without some assistance? Or maybe it was just felt that a "referee" was required to ensure the residual beneficiaries divided the estate fairly (perhaps there was some family strife?).

I have inserted letters in square parentheses where, following common practice of the times, the words have been deliberately abbreviated. Otherwise I have not intentionally amended the spelling of the original document to correct what we today would regard as misspellings.

The inventory of his goods also survives. I am in the process of transcribing this, but have not yet finished. By my calculation (no total is shown on the document itself), the total value of his estate was £58-10s.

The text of the will is as follows (the superscript numbers refer to my footnotes of explanation below):

In the name of god Ame[n] the xij^th daye of Februarye and

in the yere of ou[r] lorde god 1594. I homfrye Frogote beinge

Sicke in bodye, but of a good and p[er]fecte reme[m]bra[n]ce

make this my last wyll and testame[n]t. In manore and

forme folowinge. first I bequeth my soule to god

almightye, and my bodye to bee buried In Church yard

of mathfield¹ neere to my wyff.

Ite[m]. I geve and bequethe to my Son[n]e Ryc[har]d frogote my best

plowe² w[i]th Cowter³ and share⁴ tow⁵ landed yokes⁶ one Iron

teame⁷ the worste wenne⁸, one harowe⁹, the elder beadstyde¹⁰

Staning¹¹ in the lower chamber, one great arke¹²

Staning¹¹ In the barne. the litell table, one mattoke¹³

one nasse¹⁴, one great nagore¹⁵ and the second best broche¹⁶.

Ite[m]. my wyll ys that my sayd Son[n]e Ryc[har]d shall have

soe manye otes¹⁷ as wyll sowe his seednes¹⁸ this next lent

and viij¹⁹ strike²⁰ of rye at mychelmas²¹ next and if th[a]t²²

yt shall please god to take mee the sayd homfrye to

his mercye before the sayd seednes¹⁸ be made

but and yf at any tyme after the sayd seednes¹⁸ ys

finished yt doe happen th[a]t²² god then call for me and th[a]t²²

before the feast of St. mychelle y[e] archa[n]gell²³ next

that the my Sayd sone Ryc[har]d shall have but the

forth parte of the rye nowe growinge apon the

gronde and not any otes.

Ite[m]. I geve to Jone Askrick²⁴ my goddoughter - vj^d

to e[ach] one of my god childere[n]²⁵ - iiij^d

Ite[m]. I geve towardes the reparinge of the Church of

mathfield aforesayd - iii^s iiij^d

Ite[m]. I geve to Jone okes my Sarvant one yewe and

A lame²⁶

It[em]. I geve and bequeth to Izabell Frogot my doughter (over

and above her childes parte) one fetherbead²⁷ one

matris²⁸, one boulster, tow coverlides²⁹, one blowe bead

hillynge³⁰ tow blanketes tow sheetes and the best panne³¹.

Ite[m]. I geve to homfrye my sonne one browne heffer

over and above his childes parte.

The rest of my goodes not bequethed, my dettes³² payd

and I honestlye brought whome³³. I geve and bequethe

to homfrye my son[n]e aforesayd and to dorythye and

Izabell my doughters to be Equalye divided amo[n]geste

them - and I doe make the sayd homfrye, dorythye

and Izabell my trew and lawfull executors

of this my last wyll and testame[n]t. and for

the good and best p[er]forma[n]ce of the same I

doe orday[n]e and co[n]stitute george ley over syere³⁴

These beinge wytnes

george ley Robt. froget

wm. Chalcrosse and

Thurston³⁵ lister