James Hind
English highwayman
James Hind (sometimes referred to as John Hind; baptised 1616, died 1652) was a 17th-century highwayman and Royalist rabble-rouser during the English Civil War.
He came from the town of Chipping Norton, Oxfordshire. He fought in the English Civil War for the Royalist cause. Some reports tell of him assisting the escape of King Charles II after his defeat at the Battle of Worcester. After the war, he took up highway robbery against the Commonwealth forces with his exploits both real and embellished printed in numerous pamphlets that made him into a Royalist folk hero of the Robin Hood mould. His partner Thomas Allen was captured when they attempted but failed to rob Oliver Cromwell. Hind also robbed John Bradshaw, President of the High Court of Justice for the trial of King Charles I. He refused to rob Cavaliers and even gave money to poor Royalists.
He was finally caught during the Protectorate when one of his associates revealed him to the authorities. However, Hind was charged with treason rather than highway robbery because of his expressed Royalist loyalty and was hanged, drawn and quartered in 1652 at Worcester. He was the subject of a biography The English Gusman by George Fidge (London 1652), and 16 pamphlets detailing his exploits.
“James Hind” enters the record as english highwayman. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what James, Hind and English can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“James Hind” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, James, Hind and English provides the most credible route into that argument.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 22, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q6136075. VIAF identifies the subject as 62930927. The Library of Congress control number is n83212350. 3 of 3 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1616 and 1652.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “James Hind”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow James Hind primary sources, James Hind archive and James research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “James Hind”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “James Hind” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.