Full download ebook at ebookmass.

com

Global Dance Cultures in the 1970s and 1980s:

Disco Heterotopias 1st Edition Flora Pitrolo
(Editor)

https://ebookmass.com/product/global-dance-cultures-in-
the-1970s-and-1980s-disco-heterotopias-1st-edition-flora-
pitrolo-editor/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWLOAD EBOOK

Download more ebook from https://ebookmass.com

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Sexual Violence in Australia, 1970s–1980s : Rape and

Child Sexual Abuse 1st Edition Lisa Featherstone

https://ebookmass.com/product/sexual-violence-in-
australia-1970s-1980s-rape-and-child-sexual-abuse-1st-edition-
lisa-featherstone/

World Dance Cultures: From Ritual to Spectacle 1st

Edition – Ebook PDF Version

https://ebookmass.com/product/world-dance-cultures-from-ritual-
to-spectacle-1st-edition-ebook-pdf-version/

Global Cultures of Contestation: Mobility,

Sustainability, Aesthetics & Connectivity 1st Edition
Esther Peeren

https://ebookmass.com/product/global-cultures-of-contestation-
mobility-sustainability-aesthetics-connectivity-1st-edition-
esther-peeren/

Banks, Exchanges, and Regulators: Global Financial

Markets from the 1970s Ranald C. Michie

https://ebookmass.com/product/banks-exchanges-and-regulators-
global-financial-markets-from-the-1970s-ranald-c-michie/
Different Global Journalisms. Cultures and Contexts
Saba Bebawi

https://ebookmass.com/product/different-global-journalisms-
cultures-and-contexts-saba-bebawi/

American Missionaries in Iran during the 1960s and

1970s 1st ed. Edition Philip O. Hopkins

https://ebookmass.com/product/american-missionaries-in-iran-
during-the-1960s-and-1970s-1st-ed-edition-philip-o-hopkins/

The Anatomy of Dance Discourse: Literary and

Philosophical Approaches to Dance in the Later Graeco-
Roman World 1st Edition Karin Schlapbach

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-anatomy-of-dance-discourse-
literary-and-philosophical-approaches-to-dance-in-the-later-
graeco-roman-world-1st-edition-karin-schlapbach/

Labor and Aesthetics in European Contemporary Dance :

Dancing Precarity 1st ed. Edition Annelies Van Assche

https://ebookmass.com/product/labor-and-aesthetics-in-european-
contemporary-dance-dancing-precarity-1st-ed-edition-annelies-van-
assche/

Scribal Practice and the Global Cultures of Colophons,

1400–1800 Christopher D. Bahl

https://ebookmass.com/product/scribal-practice-and-the-global-
cultures-of-colophons-1400-1800-christopher-d-bahl/
Palgrave Studies in the History of Subcultures
and Popular Music

Series Editors
Keith Gildart
University of Wolverhampton
Wolverhampton, UK

Anna Gough-Yates
University of Roehampton
London, UK

Sian Lincoln
Liverpool John Moores University
Liverpool, UK

Bill Osgerby
London Metropolitan University
London, UK

Lucy Robinson
University of Sussex
Brighton, UK

John Street
University of East Anglia
Norwich, UK

Peter Webb
University of the West of England
Bristol, UK

Matthew Worley
University of Reading
Reading, UK
From 1940s zoot-suiters and hepcats through 1950s rock ‘n’ rollers,
­beatniks and Teddy boys; 1960s surfers, rude boys, mods, hippies and
­bikers; 1970s skinheads, soul boys, rastas, glam rockers, funksters and
punks; on to the heavy metal, hip-hop, casual, goth, rave and clubber
styles of the 1980s, 90s, noughties and beyond, distinctive blends of fashion
and music have become a defining feature of the cultural landscape. The
Subcultures Network series is international in scope and designed to
explore the social and political implications of subcultural forms. Youth
and subcultures will be located in their historical, socio-economic and
cultural context; the motivations and meanings applied to the aesthetics,
actions and manifestations of youth and subculture will be assessed. The
objective is to facilitate a genuinely cross-disciplinary and transnational
outlet for a burgeoning area of academic study.

More information about this series at

https://link.springer.com/bookseries/14579
 Flora Pitrolo • Marko Zubak
Editors

Global Dance
Cultures in the 1970s
and 1980s
Disco Heterotopias
Editors
Flora Pitrolo Marko Zubak
Department of English, Theatre and Department of Contemporary History
Creative Writing Croatian Institute of History
Birkbeck, University of London Zagreb, Croatia
London, UK

ISSN 2730-9517     ISSN 2730-9525 (electronic)

Palgrave Studies in the History of Subcultures and Popular Music
ISBN 978-3-030-91994-8    ISBN 978-3-030-91995-5 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91995-5

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole
or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical
way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer
software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the
­publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to
the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
­institutional affiliations.

Cover illustration: Roman Stetsyk / Alamy Stock Photo

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 Acknowledgements

This book has been a long time in the making and has acquired the
support of friends and allies through stratified conversations, debates,
listening sessions and parties with more people than we can thank here.
We would like to thank our colleagues from the disciplines and institu-
tions we work within, and Marko Zubak expressly wishes to thank the
Croatian Institute of History and Cost Action NEP4DISSENT for giving
him the freedom to research.
Some of the people who have helped us shape ideas related to this book
in its very early stages are Franco Fabbri, Rachel Haworth, Paul Long,
Ewa Mazierska, Goffredo Plastino and Gábor Vályi, aka DJ Shuriken. Our
gratitude goes to them for having given us both intellectual stimulus and
more public stages to begin to work on the ideas that eventually crystal-
lised in this volume.
We would like to thank Arabella Stanger, Mimi Haddon and Michael
Lawrence for giving this book a platform at the Brighton Disco! Conference
in June 2018 when we were still in the heat of working through this edito-
rial project, and to all the attendees of that conference for their generous
input, enlightened comments and enthusiasm for this book when it was
just beginning to take shape.
We wish to acknowledge generous help and input from Lucia
Udvardyova and Marysia Lewandowska; Colin Cumming’s eagle-eyed
work was invaluable in helping us move through the final throes of preparing
these texts and we want to thank him for his professionalism and interest
in our work.

v
vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Our deepest thanks to the series editors of Palgrave Studies in the

History of Subcultures and Popular Music, and in particular to Matthew
Worley for making this collaboration happen. Indeed, thanks to all the
individuals we have interacted with at Palgrave over the years for their
patience, help and guidance.
This collection couldn’t have happened without the unwavering sup-
port and love of our partners Robert Jack and Jelena Gluhak Zubak (and
Maša and Jura). Thank you for everything.
Finally, we wish to thank the authors whose chapters make up this col-
lection. It is a huge honour and pleasure to be able to host your work.
 Contents


Introduction: Disco Heterotopias—Other Places, Other
Spaces, Other Lives  1
Flora Pitrolo and Marko Zubak


Montreal, Funkytown: Two Decades of Disco History 29
Will Straw


Dancin’ Days: Disco Flashes in 1970s Brazil 51
Ivan Paolo de Paris Fontanari

Gimmick! Italo Disco, Copy and Consumption 75

Flora Pitrolo


Japanese Disco as Pseudo-International Music101
Yusuke Wajima


Disco, Dancing, Globalization and Class in 1980s Hindi
Cinema127
Gregory D. Booth


Dancing Desire, Dancing Revolution: Sexuality and the
Politics of Disco in China Since the 1980s151
Qian Wang

vii
viii Contents

Non-stop, I Want to Live Non-stop: The Role of Disco in Late

Socialist Czechoslovakia173
Jakub Machek


Yugoslav Disco: The Forgotten Sound of Late Socialism195
Marko Zubak


The Lebanese Music Experiment: Disco and Nightlife During
the Civil War223
Natalie Shooter and Ernesto Chahoud


Disco and Discontent in Nigeria: A Conversation251
Uchenna C. Ikonne, Flora Pitrolo, and Marko Zubak


Outer Space, Futurism, and the Quest for Disco Utopia281
Ken McLeod


Epilogue: Decolonising Disco—Counterculture, Postindustrial
Creativity, the 1970s Dance Floor and Disco303
Tim Lawrence

Index339
 Notes on Contributors

Gregory D. Booth is Professor of Ethnomusicology at the University of

Auckland and has been engaged in the study of Indian music and culture
for more than 30 years. He has published numerous articles and chapters
on music, film, industry and culture in South Asia, and is the author of
Behind the Curtain: Making Music in Mumbai’s Film Studios (2008) and
Brass Baja: Stories from the World of Indian Wedding Bands (2005).
Ernesto Chahoud A philosophy postgraduate, Ernesto Chahoud is a DJ,
compiler and radio host who has been working in music for over 20 years.
In 2009 he founded The Beirut Groove Collective, which evolved into a
weekly clubnight with an international reputation playing obscure records
from the 1960s and 1970s from around the world. As a DJ, Chahoud has
toured the world and hosts monthly radio shows on NTS, Totally Wired
Radio and Radio Alhara. Specialising in Arabic and Ethiopian music, his
discography includes two electro-acoustic albums, Taitu, a double compi-
lation of Ethiopian music from the 1970s, and a series of reissues of
groundbreaking Lebanese music under the series ‘Middle Eastern Heavens’.
Ivan Paolo de Paris Fontanari is Professor of Anthropology and coordi-
nator of the Anthropology, Youth and Youthfulness Research Group at
Federal University of Fronteira Sul, Chapeco, SC, Brazil. He writes on
issues concerning youth and expressive culture in contemporary Brazil. He
is the author of The DJs from Periferia: Electronic Dance Music, Trajectories
and Cultural Mediations in Sao Paulo (Editora Sulina, 2013), published in
Portuguese, based on his award-winning doctoral dissertation.

ix
x NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Uchenna C. Ikonne is an author, DJ and historian specialising in the

field of Nigerian popular music. As the head of the Comb & Razor Sound
record label, he has curated collections of vintage recordings such as Wake
Up You! The Rise and Fall of Nigerian Rock 1972–1977 (released by Now
Again Records in 2016). He has written extensively about music and pop-
ular culture for a variety of outlets, and is working on a four-volume his-
tory of Nigerian music.
Tim Lawrence is Professor of Cultural Studies at the University of East
London. He is the author of Love Saves the Day: A History of American
Dance Music Culture, 1970–79, Hold On to Your Dreams: Arthur Russell
and the Downtown Music Scene, 1973–92, and Life and Death on the
New York Dance Floor, 1980–83. He is a co-founder of Lucky Cloud Sound
System, which has been staging Loft parties in London since 2003.
Jakub Machek is a popular culture historian. He lectures in the
Department of Media Studies at the Metropolitan University Prague. His
research covers Czech popular culture from the end of the nineteenth
century, throughout socialism until the present day. He is the author of
the monograph The Emergence of Popular Culture in the Czech Lands
(2017) and has co-edited several collections of essays. His latest research
is focused on the function of music in Czech society, from brass band
music to disco.
Ken McLeod is Associate Professor of Music History at the University of
Toronto. He has published widely on identity politics in popular music;
the intersections between technology, science fiction, and hip hop; and
popular music appropriations of art music. He is the author of We Are the
Champions: The Politics of Sports and Popular Music (2011) and Driving
Identities: At the Intersection of Popular Music and Automotive Culture
(2020). He is researching issues of colonisation, racism and spirituality in
the nexus of popular music, science fiction and the space industry.
Flora Pitrolo lectures on theatre, performance and media studies at
Birkbeck, University of London and Syracuse University London. Her
work investigates alternative European performance and music cultures of
the 1980s, with a special focus on Italy. She publishes both as a scholar and
as a journalist, and is active as a DJ and producer in various archival and
experimental music scenes.received her PhD in Drama, Theatre and
Performance Studies in 2014. She teaches courses on Performance and
 NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS xi

Media Studies at Birkbeck, University of London and Syracuse University

London, and works independently as a curator and as a consultant for
cultural projects in the UK and in Italy. Her work investigates alternative
European performance and music cultures of the 1980s, with a special
focus on Italy. She has published both as a scholar (Theatre Journal, About
Performance, Studies in Theatre and Performance) and as a journalist (she
was Editor of Archival and Reissues for leading UK electronic music portal
JunoPlus between 2014 and 2016, and broadcasts since 2011 on London’s
Resonance FM and on Skopje’s Kanal 103). Her most recent large edito-
rial project is the archive book Syxty Sorriso & Altre Storie (2017) on per-
formance art in early 1980s Milan.
Natalie Shooter Based between Beirut and the UK, Natalie Shooter is an
editor, writer and researcher with a focus on music from the South West
Asian/North African (SWANA) region. She has worked as editor of sev-
eral magazines, and her writing has been published in The Guardian,
Pin-Up, Al Jazeera and Middle East Eye. She has also curated and pro-
duced many concerts, clubnights and festivals in Beirut and beyond, such
as the outdoor festival series The Shoreline Sessions and Hiya Live, a digi-
tal festival focused on progressive female artists from the Arabic-speaking
world, founded in 2020. She co-runs The Beirut Groove Collective, a
vinyl DJ collective and clubnight in Beirut that has been running for the
past 12 years.
Will Straw is James McGill Professor of Urban Media Studies at McGill
University in Montreal, where he teaches within the Department of Art
History and Communications Studies. He is the author of Cyanide and
Sin: Visualizing Crime in 50s America (2006) and co-­editor of several
volumes, including The Cambridge Companion to Rock and Pop (with
Simon Frith and John Street, 2001), Circulation and the City: Essays on
Urban Culture (with Alexandra Boutros, 2010), Formes Urbaines (with
Anouk Bélanger and Annie Gérin, 2014) and The Oxford Handbook of
Canadian Cinema (with Janine Marchessault, 2019). He is the author of
over 160 articles on music, cinema and urban culture.
Yusuke Wajima is Professor of Musicology at Osaka University. He has
published on the history of Japanese popular music, authoring Tsukurareta
‘Nihon-no-kokoro’ Shinwa (2010), which won the 2011 IASPM Book
Prize and the Suntory Prize. Its English translation, Creating Enka: The
‘Soul of Japan’ in the Postwar Era, was published in 2018. He contributed
xii NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

a book chapter, titled ‘The Birth of Enka’, for Made in Japan: Studies in
Popular Music (2014). His recent book, Odoru Showa Kayou (Dance
Music in the Showa Period (1926–1989), 2015), focuses on dance music in
modern Japan.
Qian Wang is Professor of Sociology at Yibin University. His research is
mainly focused on music sociology, cultural studies and gender studies in
the context of Chinese popular music. He examines the sophisticated
interaction between popular music and social transformation since the
economic reform and writes on issues such as gender and queer. He is the
author of Rock Crises: Research on Chinese Rock Music in the 1990s and the
co-author of Research on New Media and Urban Children (forthcoming).
Marko Zubak is a researcher at the Croatian Institute of History in
Zagreb, specialising in popular culture in socialist Eastern Europe. Recent
publications include the monograph The Yugoslav Youth Press (1968–1980)
(2018). He has curated the exhibitions ‘Yugoslav Youth Press as
Underground Press’ and ‘Stayin’ Alive: Socialist Disco Culture’, which
travelled across the region.holds a PhD in History from the Central
European University in Budapest. He is a research associate at the Croatian
Institute of History in Zagreb, focusing on popular, alternative and youth
cultures and media in the second half of the twentieth century in Eastern
Europe, on which he taught at several universities (Zagreb, Budapest,
Klagenfurt). He published on these topics, including a monograph The
Yugoslav Youth Press (1968–1980): Student Movements, Youth Subcultures
and Alternative Communist Media (2018). His recent interest focuses on
popular music and club cultures. He has curated two exhibitions (‘Yugoslav
Youth Press as Underground Press: 1968–1972’, ‘Stayin’ Alive: Socialist
Disco Culture’) that have travelled around the region and collaborated on
many others, most recently on ‘Restless Youth: 70 Years of Growing up in
Europe, 1945 to Now’ at the House of European History in Brussels.
 Introduction: Disco Heterotopias—Other
Places, Other Spaces, Other Lives

Flora Pitrolo and Marko Zubak

The purpose of this collection is to shed light on disco’s global journey

between the mid-1970s and mid-1980s, investigating the whys and hows
of its evolution across ideological, social, political, economical and linguis-
tic contexts other to the one in which it originated. The chapters compiled
here look at how disco acquired different forms, meanings and functions
as it was adopted and re-imagined outside of its Anglophone manifesta-
tions; they analyse the cultural and economic infrastructures disco trav-
elled through, the musical forms, styles and traditions it adopted, the
various ways it located itself on cultural mainstreams or undergrounds, its
links to parallel artistic phenomena, to distinct sexual and racial politics, to
the lifestyles of particular groups, subcultures and to specific spaces of the
social city and of the built environment. While scholars have increasingly

F. Pitrolo (*)
Department of English, Theatre and Creative Writing, Birkbeck, University of
London, London, UK
M. Zubak
Department of Contemporary History, Croatian Institute of History,
Zagreb, Croatia

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 1

F. Pitrolo, M. Zubak (eds.), Global Dance Cultures in the 1970s and
1980s, Palgrave Studies in the History of Subcultures and Popular
Music, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91995-5_1
2 F. PITROLO AND M. ZUBAK

taken disco seriously over the past two decades, examining both its under-
ground roots and its more conventional aspects (Lawrence 2003; Flatley
and Kronengold 2008; Echols 2011; Lawrence 2016), the genre’s capac-
ity to be absorbed and remodelled across a wider geographical range has
not thus far been chartered, and disco’s other lives in local, marginal and
peripheral scenes remain mostly under-appreciated. But as it exploded,
atomised and travelled, disco served a number of different agendas: its
aesthetic rootedness in ideas of pleasure, transgression and escapism and
its formal malleability, constructed around a four-on-the-floor beat,
allowed it to permeate a number of local scenes for whom the meaning of
disco shifted, sometimes in unexpected and radical ways.
This volume seeks to go some of the way in opening up a terrain for the
global study of disco as a musical genre, as a dance culture and as a wider
cultural phenomenon. Across these chapters, our authors capture the vari-
ety of scenes, contexts and reasons for which disco took on diverse dimen-
sions in its global journey, acting as generous interpreters between
English-language scholarship and geo-political, ideological and sociologi-
cal landscapes that fall outside of its more well-trodden narratives. From
oil boom Nigeria to post-Invasion Czechoslovakia, from post-colonial
India to war-torn Lebanon, our aim here is to increase the visibility of
scenes that have hitherto been under-represented and to make some criti-
cal interventions in how to tackle the ideology of derivative musics and
‘glocal’ and ‘non-local’ music- and nightlife-related cultures. How can we
balance representation and appropriation in a globalised world? How can
we complicate the discourse between centre and periphery? How do dif-
ference and sameness play out in the complex travelling of global cultural
phenomena?
The book you hold in your hands is intended as a set of guided tours—
which may be a starting point for your own historical research and musical
discoveries, or an ulterior step of the way in debates you are already
embedded within—which can serve as tools of comparison and differen-
tiation. It contains rich historical and geo-political backgrounds, expert
analysis and much discographic detail. It is the result of deep reading, deep
listening, oral histories and personal discoveries; it is made by writers and
scholars who are also diggers, collectors, DJs, label bosses, cultural agita-
tors and people of the night, and targets the music lover as much as the
academic reader. Indeed, our curation of writers, contributions and inves-
tigative angles here seeks to establish a crucial connection between ‘scene’
and ‘field’, because there are important differences in the kinds of
 INTRODUCTION: DISCO HETEROTOPIAS—OTHER PLACES, OTHER SPACES… 3

knowledge the two produce and in the ways in which that knowledge
circulates. Allowing these to overlap and cross-pollinate is crucial to enrich
our work from both sides, taking disco seriously as an object of analysis
without sacrificing its effects on lived experience.

Other Places: The Global, The Local,

The Glocal World
This volume comes into a critical panorama in which debates on cultural
imperialism—and concepts of local and global, centre and periphery,
hybridisation, colonisation, decolonisation and self-colonisation—have
undergone and are still undergoing a huge, and hugely generative, process
of complication. Current movements in popular music studies, and indeed
in the studies of all cultural phenomena, are undoing structures and
assumptions that have tainted our disciplines since their inception. In her
introduction to the collection Relocating Popular Music, Ewa Mazierska
notes that

[m]usic travels practically as long as it exists, but some routes are more fre-
quented than others. (…) In the twentieth century, music is used less in
open acts of colonisation and missionisation (not least because they were
replaced by subtler forms of dominance), yet its production and consump-
tion reflects well on the imbalances of power between different regions and
countries. (Mazierska in Gregory and Mazierska 2015, 8)

We are conscious that the terms ‘local’, ‘global’ and ‘glocal’ have to be
productively redefined at each turn, and indeed these and other terms
appear in this volume in multifarious ways which not only speak back to
ongoing debates in Anglophone scholarship but also reflect the cultural
and discursive positionalities of each author. This collection seeks to join a
protean move towards analytical differentiation in an interdisciplinary field
already marked by work such as that performed by Gregory and Mazierska
and many others (see, e.g., Mitchell 1996; Fairley 2001; Connell and
Gibson 2003; White 2012; Guerra and Quintela 2020), as well as single-­
regional focus work (such as the volumes making up the Routledge
Popular Music Studies Made In series, as well as texts in the same series as
this book such as Marsh 2016, Lohman 2017, and Tosoni and Zuccalà
2020), work invested in both demolishing and rebuilding the critical and
racial palimpsests that still bury our understanding of many popular musics
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
for the said persons to come together to the meeting house in
Andover, the afflicted persons being there. After Mr. Barnard had
been at prayer, we were blindfolded, and our hands were laid upon
the afflicted persons, they being in their fits and falling into their fits
at our coming into their presence, as they said; and some led us and
laid our hands upon them, and then they said they were well, and
that we were guilty of afflicting of them; whereupon we were all
seized, as prisoners, by a warrant from the justice of the peace, and
forthwith carried to Salem. And by reason of that sudden surprisal,
we knowing ourselves altogether innocent of that crime, we were all
exceedingly astonished and amazed, and consternated and
affrighted even out of our reason; and our nearest and dearest
relations, seeing us in that dreadful condition, and knowing our
great danger, apprehending that there was no other way to save our
lives, as the case was then circumstanced, but by our confessing
ourselves to be such and such persons as the afflicted represented
us to be, they, out of tender love and pity, persuaded us to confess
what we did confess. And indeed that confession, that it is said we
made, was no other than what was suggested to us by some
gentlemen, they telling us that we were witches, and they knew it,
and we knew it, and they knew that we knew it, which made us
think that it was so; and our understanding, our reason, our faculties
almost gone, we were not capable of judging our condition; as also
the hard measures they used with us rendered us incapable of
making our defence, but said any thing and every thing which they
desired, and most of what we said was but in effect a consenting to
what they said. Some time after, when we were better composed,
they telling us of what we had confessed, we did profess that we
were innocent and ignorant of such things; and we hearing that
Samuel Wardwell had renounced his confession, and quickly after
condemned and executed, some of us were told that we were going
after Wardwell.
“Mary Osgood, Deliverance Dane, Sarah Wilson,
Mary Tiler, Abigail Barker, Hannah Tiler.”
 These unhappy people were not only in the manner which has
been related, brought to confession, but also obliged to swear to the
truth of it. At the Superior Court in January they all abode by their
confessions. They could not tell what the disposition of the court and
juries would be, and the temptation was the same as at the first
examination. But there was one Margaret Jacobs, who had more
courage than the rest. She had been brought not only to accuse
herself, but Mr. Burroughs, the minister, and even her own
grandfather. Before their execution, she was struck with horror, and
begged forgiveness of Burroughs, who readily forgave her, and
prayed with her, and for her. An imposthume in her head prevented
her trial at the court of Oyer and Terminer. At the Superior Court in
January she delivered a writing in the words following:—
“The humble declaration of Margaret Jacobs unto the honoured
court now sitting at Salem, sheweth,
“That whereas your poor and humble declarant being closely
confined here in Salem jail for the crime of witchcraft, which crime,
thanks be to the Lord, I am altogether ignorant of, as will appear at
the great day of judgment. May it please the honoured court, I was
cried out upon by some of the possessed persons, as afflicting of
them; whereupon I was brought to my examination, which persons
at the sight of me fell down, which did very much startle and affright
me. The Lord above knows I knew nothing, in the least measure,
how or who afflicted them; they told me, without doubt I did, or else
they would not fall down at me; they told me if I would not confess,
I should be put down into the dungeon and would be hanged, but if
I would confess I should have my life; the which did so affright me,
with my own vile wicked heart, to save my life made me make the
confession I did, which confession, may it please the honoured
court, is altogether false and untrue. The very first night after I had
made my confession, I was in such horror of conscience that I could
not sleep, for fear the Devil should carry me away for telling such
horrid lies. I was, may it please the honoured court, sworn to my
confession, as I understand since, but then, at that time, was
ignorant of it, not knowing what an oath did mean. The Lord, I
hope, in whom I trust, out of the abundance of his mercy, will
forgive me my false forswearing myself. What I said was altogether
false, against my grandfather, and Mr. Burroughs, which I did to save
my life and to have my liberty; but the Lord, charging it to my
conscience made me in so much horror, that I could not contain
myself before I had denied my confession, which I did, though I saw
nothing but death before me, choosing rather death with a quiet
conscience, than to live in such horror, which I could not suffer.
Whereupon my denying my confession, I was committed to close
prison, where I have enjoyed more felicity in spirit a thousand times
than I did before in my enlargement.
“And now, may it please your honours, your poor and humble
declarant having, in part, given your honours a description of my
condition, do leave it to your honours pious and judicious discretions
to take pity and compassion on my young and tender years; to act
and do with me as the Lord above and your honours shall see good,
having no friend but the Lord to plead my cause for me; not being
guilty in the least measure of the crime of witchcraft, nor any other
sin that deserves death from man; and your poor and humble
declarant shall forever pray, as she is bound in duty, for your
honours’ happiness in this life, and eternal felicity in the world to
come. So prays your honours declarant.
Margaret Jacobs.”
I shall now proceed in the relation of facts. The accusers having
charged a great number in the county of Essex, I find in the
examinations frequent mention of strangers whose shapes or
specters were unknown to the afflicted, and now and then the
names of a person at Boston and other distant places. Several some
time after mention Mr. Dean, one of the ministers of Andover, but
touch him more tenderly, somewhat as Mrs. Osgood in her
confession, than they do Burroughs. Mr. Dean probably was better
known and esteemed than the other, or he would have stood a bad
chance.
 Mr. Nathaniel Cary,[56] a gentleman of figure in the town of
Charlestown, hearing that some at Salem had complained of his wife
for afflicting them, they went to Salem together out of curiosity to
see whether the afflicted knew her. They happened to arrive just as
the justices were going into the meeting house, where they held the
court, to examine prisoners. All that were brought in were accused,
and the girls fell into fits as usual, but no notice was taken of Mrs.
Cary except that one or two of the afflicted came to her and asked
her name. After the examination her husband went into a tavern,
having encouragement that he should have an opportunity of
discoursing with the girl who had accused his wife. There he met
with John the afflicted Indian, who attended as a servant in the
house. He had been there but a short time before the girls came in
and tumbled about the floor, and cried out Cary, and a warrant from
the justices was immediately sent to apprehend her. Two of the girls
accused her, neither of whom she had ever heard of before, and
soon after the Indian joined them. The justices, by her husband’s
account, used her very roughly, and it was to no purpose to make
any defence or to offer any bail, but she was committed to prison in
Boston and removed from thence by habeas corpus to Cambridge
and there laid in irons. When the trials at Salem came on her
husband went there, and finding how things were managed, thought
it high time to contrive her escape. They fled to New-York, where
Gov. Fletcher received them courteously. They petitioned for a trial in
the county where they lived. If the judges supposed it necessary to
try the offence where it was committed, her body being in Middlesex
and her specter in Essex, it is probable they were under doubt.
About a week after, viz. the latter end of May, some of the afflicted
accused Capt. John Alden,[57] of Boston. He had been many years
master of a sloop in the country service employed between Boston
and the eastern country, to supply the garrisons, &c.; and the
justices allowed had always had the character of an honest man,
though one of them, Gedney, told him at his examination he then
saw cause to think otherwise. Alden, in the account he gives, says
that the accuser pointed first to another man and said nothing, but
that upon the man who held her his stooping down to her ear, she
cried out Alden, Alden, &c. All were ordered into the street and a
ring made, and then she cried out, There stands Alden, a bold fellow
with his hat on, sells powder and shot to the Indians, lies with the
squaws and has papooses. He was immediately taken into custody
of the marshal [George Herrick] and required to deliver up his
sword. A further examination was had in the meeting house, his
hands held open by the officer that he might not pinch the afflicted,
and upon their being struck down at the sight of him and making
their usual cries he was committed to the jail in Boston, where he
lay fifteen weeks, and then was prevailed on by his friends to make
his escape, and to absent himself until the consternation of the
people was a little abated, and they had recovered their senses.
By this time about one hundred persons were in the several
prisons[58] charged with witchcraft. The court of Oyer and Terminer
began at Salem the first week in June [June 2d]. Only one of the
accused, viz. Bridget Bishop,[59] alias Oliver, was brought upon trial.
She had been charged with witchcraft twenty years before, by a
person who acknowledged his guilt in accusing her upon his death-
bed; but being a fractious old woman the losses the neighbors met
with in their cattle and poultry, or by oversetting their carts, &c.,
were ascribed to her, and now given in evidence. This, together with
the hearsay from the specters sworn to in court by the afflicted and
confessing confederates, and an excrescence found some where
upon her which was called a teat, was thought by court and jury
plenary proof, and she was convicted, and on the 10th of June
executed.
The court adjourned to the 30th of June, and in the mean time
the Governor and Council desired the opinion of several ministers
upon the state of things as they then stood, which was given as
follows:—
“The return of several ministers consulted by his excellency and
the honourable council upon the present witchcraft in Salem village.
 Boston, June 15th, 1692.
“1. The afflicted state of our poor neighbours, that are now
suffering by molestations from the invisible world, we apprehend so
deplorable, that we think their condition calls for the utmost help of
all persons in their several capacities.
“2. We cannot but, with all thankfulness, acknowledge the success
which the merciful God has given unto the sedulous and assiduous
endeavours of our honourable rulers, to detect the abominable
witchcrafts which have been committed in the country, humbly
praying, that the discovery of those mysterious and mischievous
wickednesses may be perfected.
“3. We judge that, in the prosecution of these and all such
witchcrafts, there is need of a very critical and exquisite caution, lest
by too much credulity for things received only upon the Devil’s
authority, there be a door opened for a long train of miserable
consequences, and Satan get an advantage over us; for we should
not be ignorant of his devices.
“4. As in complaints upon witchcrafts, there may be matters of
inquiry which do not amount unto matters of presumption, and there
may be matters of presumption which yet may not be matters of
conviction, so it is necessary, that all proceedings thereabout be
managed with an exceeding tenderness towards those that may be
complained of, especially if they have been persons formerly of an
unblemished reputation.
“5. When the first inquiry is made into the circumstances of such
as may lie under the just suspicion of witchcrafts, we could wish that
there may be admitted as little as is possible of such noise, company
and openness as may too hastily expose them that are examined,
and that there may no thing be used as a test for the trial of the
suspected, the lawfulness whereof may be doubted among the
people of God; but that the directions given by such judicious writers
as Perkins and Bernard [be consulted in such a case].
 “6. Presumptions whereupon persons may be committed, and,
much more, convictions whereupon persons may be condemned as
guilty of witchcrafts, ought certainly to be more considerable than
barely the accused person’s being represented by a specter unto the
afflicted; inasmuch as it is an undoubted and notorious thing, that a
demon may, by God’s permission, appear, even to ill purposes, in the
shape of an innocent, yea, and a virtuous man. Nor can we esteem
alterations made in the sufferers, by a look or touch of the accused,
to be an infallible evidence of guilt, but frequently liable to be
abused by the Devil’s legerdemains.
“7. We know not whether some remarkable affronts given to the
Devils by our disbelieving those testimonies whose whole force and
strength is from them alone, may not put a period unto the progress
of the dreadful calamity begun upon us, in the accusations of so
many persons, whereof some, we hope, are yet clear from the great
transgression laid unto their charge.
“8. Nevertheless, we cannot but humbly recommend unto the
government, the speedy and vigorous prosecution of such as have
rendered themselves obnoxious, according to the direction given in
the laws of God, and the wholesome statutes of the English nation,
for the detection of witchcrafts.”[60]
The two first and the last sections of this advice took away the
force of all the others, and the prosecutions went on with more vigor
than before. The exquisite caution in separating the evidence upon
the Devil’s authority from the rest, in the third section, and the
disbelieving those testimonies whose whole force is from the Devil
alone in the seventh section, must have puzzled the judges, and
they had need of some further authorities to guide them than
Perkins or Bernard,[61] or any other books they were furnished with.
[62]

I was at a loss until I met with this return, by what law they
proceeded.[63] The old constitution was dissolved; no laws of the
colony were in force, witchcraft is no offence by the common law of
England. The statute of James I. was indeed more ancient than the
colony charter, but no statute had ever been adopted here. The
General Assembly had not then met, and there could have been no
provision made by a Province law, but it seems by the eighth section
that the English statutes were made the rule upon this extraordinary
occasion. But what authority the court had to change the sentence
from burning to hanging, I cannot conceive. Before the other trials
the law against witchcraft under the first charter was established
with the other Colony laws. The authority by which the court sat
may as well be called in question. No authority is given by the
Province charter to any powers short of the whole General Court to
constitute courts of justice. The Governor indeed, with the consent
of the Council, appoints judges, commissioners of Oyer and
Terminer, and all officers belonging to the courts. It is strange they
did not tarry until the Assembly met. A judge shall not be punished
for mere error of judgment, but it certainly behooves him, in a trial
for life especially, to consider well by what authority he acts.
The court was held again by adjournment at Salem, June 30. Six
[five] women were brought upon trial, Sarah Good, Rebecca Nurse,
Susannah Martin, Elizabeth Howe, and Sarah Wildes.[64] The court
and jury seemed to have had no difficulty with any but Nurse. She
was a church member, and probably her good character caused the
jury to bring in a verdict not guilty; but the accusers making a very
great clamor and the court expressing their dissatisfaction with the
verdict, the jury desired to go out again, and then brought her in
guilty. The foreman of the jury gave the following certificate to
satisfy her relations what induced an alteration of the verdict.
“July 4th, 1692.
“I Thomas Fisk, the subscriber hereof, being one of
them that were of the jury the last week at Salem court,
upon the trial of Rebekah Nurse, &c. being desired, by
some of the relations, to give a reason why the jury
brought her in guilty, after the verdict not guilty; I do
hereby give my reasons to be as follows, viz.:
 “When the verdict, not guilty, was [given], the
honoured court was pleased to object against it, saying to
them, that they think they let slip the words which the
prisoner at the bar spake against herself, which were
spoken in reply to Goodwife Hobbs and her daughter, who
had been faulty in setting their hands to the Devil’s book,
as they had confessed formerly; the words were, ‘What do
these persons give in evidence against me now? they used
to come among us?’ After the honoured court had
manifested their dissatisfaction of the verdict, several of
the jury declared themselves desirous to go out again,
and thereupon the honoured court gave leave; but when
we came to consider the case, I could not tell how to take
her words as an evidence against her, till she had a further
opportunity to put her sense upon them, if she would take
it; and then going into court, I mentioned the words
aforesaid, which by one of the court were affirmed to
have been spoken by her, she being then at the bar, but
made no reply nor interpretation of them; whereupon,
these words were to me a principal evidence against her.
Thomas Fisk.”
Nurse, being informed of the use which had been made of her
words, gave in a declaration to the court, that “when she said Hobbs
and her daughter were of her company, she meant no more than
that they were prisoners as well as herself; and that, being hard of
hearing, she did not know what the foreman of the jury said.” But
her declaration had no effect.
The minister of Salem Mr. [Nicholas] Noyes was over zealous in
these prosecutions. He excommunicated this honest old woman after
her condemnation. One part of the form seems to have been
unnecessary, delivering her over to Satan. He supposed she had
delivered herself up to him long before. But her life and conversation
had been such, of which many testimonies were given, that the
remembrance of it, as soon as the people returned to the use of
their reason, must have wiped off all the reproach which had been
occasioned by the manner of her death.
Calef, who when he wrote was generally supposed to be under
unreasonable prejudice against the country, which lessened the
credit of his narrative, says that at the trial of Sarah Good, one of
the afflicted fell into a fit, and after recovery cried out that the
prisoner had stabbed her and broke the knife in doing it, and a piece
of the knife was found upon the afflicted person; but a young man
declared that the day before he broke that very knife and threw
away a piece of it, this afflicted person being then present; and adds
that the court bid her tell no more lies, but went on notwithstanding
this fraud to improve her as a witness against other prisoners.[65]
This account, if true, would give me a more unfavorable opinion
even of the integrity of the court, if I had not met with something
not unlike to it in the trials before Sir Matthew Hale. The afflicted
children in their fits upon the least touch from Rose Cullender, one of
the supposed witches, would shriek out, which they would not do
when touched by any other person. Lest there should be any fraud,
Lord Cornwallis, Sir Edmund Bacon, Sergeant Keeling and other
gentlemen attended one of the girls whilst she was in her fits at
another part of the hall, and one of the witches was brought, and an
apron put before the girl’s eyes, but instead of the witch’s hand
another person’s hand was taken to touch the girl, who thereupon
shrieked out as she used to do. The gentlemen returned and
declared to the court they believed the whole was an imposture. The
witch was found guilty notwithstanding, and the judge and all the
court were fully satisfied with the verdict and awarded sentence
accordingly.
Susannah Martin had been suspected, ever since 1669, so that a
great number of witch stories were told of her, and many of them
given in evidence. One of the other being told by the minister at the
place of execution, that he knew she was a witch, and therefore
advised her to confess, she replied that he lied, and that she was no
more a witch than he was a wizard, and if he took away her life, God
would give him blood to drink.
At one of these trials it is said that one of the accusers charged
Mr. Willard, a minister of Boston, and that she was sent out of court,
and afterwards a report spread that she was mistaken in the person.
[66] It is more probable that she intended [John] Willard, who was
then in prison, and that it was given out that the audience were
mistaken.
At the next adjournment, Aug. 5th, George Burroughs, John
Proctor and Elizabeth his wife, John Willard, George Jacobs and
Martha Carrier were all found guilty, condemned, and all executed
the 19th of August, except Elizabeth Proctor, who escaped by
pleading her belly.
Burroughs had preached some years before, but it seems not to
acceptance, at Salem village. Afterward he preached at Wells in the
Province of Maine. As a specimen of the proceedings in all the trials
we shall be a little more particular in relating his.
The indictment was as follows.
Anno Regis et Reginæ, &c. quarto.
Essex ss. The jurors for our sovereign lord and lady the king and
queen present, that George Burroughs, late of Falmouth in the
province of Massachusetts Bay, clerk, the ninth day of May, in the
fourth year of the reign of our sovereign lord and lady William and
Mary, by the grace of God of England, Scotland, France and Ireland,
king and queen, defenders of the faith, &c. and divers other days
and times, as well before as after, certain detestable arts called
witchcrafts and sorceries, wickedly and feloniously hath used,
practised and exercised, at and within the township of Salem, in the
county of Essex aforesaid, in, upon and against one Mary Walcot, of
Salem village, in the county of Essex, single woman; by which said
wicked arts, the said Mary Walcot, the ninth day of May in the fourth
year abovesaid, and divers other days and times as well before as
after, was and is tortured, afflicted, pined, consumed, wasted and
tormented, against the peace of our sovereign lord and lady the king
and queen, and against the form of the statute in that case made
and provided. Endorsed Billa vera. Three other bills were found for
the like upon other persons, to all which he pleaded not guilty, and
put himself upon trial, &c.
The afflicted and confessing witches were first examined, for
although, by the advice of the elders, this kind of evidence was not
to be deemed infallible; yet it was presumptive, and, with other
circumstances, sufficient proof. It would be tedious to recite the
whole of this evidence, especially as it was of the same sort with
what has been already related in the confessions. The most material
circumstance which distinguished him [Burroughs] from the rest,
was, that he was to be a king in Satan’s empire.
The other evidence was that being a little man he had performed
feats beyond the strength of a giant; particularly that he would take
a gun of seven feet barrel behind the lock and hold it out with one
hand; that he would take up a barrel of molasses or cider and carry
them in a disadvantageous place and posture from a canoe to the
shore; and when in his vindication he urged that an Indian which
was there held out the gun as he did, the witnesses not seeing or
not remembering any Indian, it was supposed it must be the black
man or the devil, who, the witnesses swore, looks like an Indian.
Besides this it was sworn that he had treated his wives, having
been twice married, very harshly, and would pretend, when he had
been absent from home, that he could tell what had been said to
them, and that he persuaded them to swear, and to oblige
themselves by a writing, which in the printed account of the trial is
called “a Covenant,” not to reveal his secrets, and that they had
privately complained to the neighbors that their house was haunted
by spirits. One of his wife’s brothers also swore that going out after
strawberries they rode very softly—slowly, I suppose—two or three
miles, when Burroughs went into the bushes, after which they rode
back a quick pace, and when they came near home, to their
astonishment found him on foot with them, and that he fell to
chiding his wife for talking with her brother about him, and said he
knew their thoughts, which his brother intimated was more than the
Devil knew, but Burroughs replied his god told him.
The prisoner said, in his defence, a man was with him when his
brother left him, which was also supposed to be the black man.
This was the sum of the evidence. He is said to have used many
twistings and turnings, and to have contradicted himself in making
his defence. At his execution he concluded his prayer with the Lord’s
prayer, probably to show his innocence, for it was generally received
that a witch could not say the Lord’s prayer, and it was used as a
test at the examinations when several of the old women, as children
often do, blundered at give and forgive in the fourth and fifth
petitions, and it was improved against them.
September 9th, Martha Corey, Mary Esty, Alice Parker, Ann
Pudcator, Dorcas Hoar and Mary Bradbury were tried; and Sept. 17
Margaret Scott, Wilmot Read, Samuel Wardwell, Mary Parker, Abigail
Faulkner, Rebekah Eames, Mary Lacey, Ann Foster, Abigail Hobbs,
and all received sentence of death. Those in italics were executed
September 22d.
Mary Esty, who was sister to Nurse, put into the court a petition in
which she tells them that, although she was conscious of her own
innocence, yet she did not ask her own life, but prayed them before
they condemned any more they would examine some of the
confessing witches, who she knew had belied themselves and
others, which she was sure would appear in the world to which she
was going, if it did not in this world.
Those that were not executed probably confessed their guilt. All
whose examinations remain on the files, of which there are three or
four, did so. Wardwell had confessed, but recanted and suffered. His
own wife, as well as his daughter, accused him and saved
themselves. There are a great number of instances of children and
parents accusing each other. I have met with no other than this of
husbands or wives, and surely this one ought not to have been
suffered.
Giles Corey was the only person, besides what have been named,
who suffered death. He, seeing the fate of those who had put
themselves upon trial, refused to plead to the indictment; but the
judges who were not careful enough in observing the rules of law in
favor of the prisoners, took care to do it against this unhappy man,
and he was pressed to death; the only instance I have ever heard of
in any of the English colonies.[67] History furnishes us perhaps with
as many instances of cruelty proceeding from superstition, as from
the most savage barbarous temper of mind.
Besides the irregularities which I have already mentioned in these
trials, the court admitted evidence to be given of facts, not laid in
the indictments, to prove witchcraft eight, ten or fifteen years
before; indeed, no other sort of evidence was offered to prove facts
in the indictments but the spectral evidence, which, in the opinion of
the divines, was not sufficient. It would have been well if they had
consulted lawyers[68] also, who would have told them that evidence
ought not to be admitted even against the general character of
persons charged criminally unless they offer evidence in favor of it,
much less ought their whole lives to be arraigned and no opportunity
given them of making defence.
This court of Oyer and Terminer, happily for the country, sat no
more. Nineteen persons had been executed; but the eyes of the
country in general were not yet opened. The prison at Salem was so
full that some were obliged to be removed, and many were in other
prisons reserved for trial. The General Court which sat in October,
although they had revived the old colony law which was in these
words, “If any man or woman be a witch, that is, hath or consulteth
with a familiar spirit, they shall be put to death”—yet this not being
explicit enough, they enacted another in the words of the statute of
King James, which continued in force until the trials were over, but
both were afterwards disallowed by the crown.[69] Another act was
passed, constituting a Supreme Court,[70] which was to be held at
Salem in January; but before that time many who had been forward
in these prosecutions became sensible of their error. Time for
consideration seems to be reason enough to be assigned for it; but
another reason has been given. Ordinarily persons of the lowest
rank, the dregs of the people, have had the misfortune of being
charged with witchcraft; and although this was the case in many
instances here, yet there were a number of women of as reputable
families as any in the towns where they lived, who were charged
and imprisoned, and several persons of still superior rank were
hinted at by the pretended bewitched or the confessing witches. The
latter had no other way of saving themselves. Some of the persons
were publicly named. Dudley Bradstreet, a justice of the peace, who
had been appointed one of President Dudley’s council, thought it
necessary to abscond; so did his brother John Bradstreet, sons of
the late Governor Bradstreet. Calef says it was intimated that Sir
William Phips’s lady was accused.[71] One at Boston complained of
being afflicted by the secretary of Connecticut colony.[72]
At the Superior Court held at Salem in January, the grand jury
found bills against about fifty persons, all but one or two women,
who either were in prison, or under bonds for their appearance.
They were all but three acquitted by the petty jury, and those three
were pardoned by the Governor. Divers others were brought upon
trial soon after at Charlestown in the county of Middlesex, and all
acquitted. The juries changed sooner than the judges. The opinion
which the latter had of their own superior understanding and
judgment probably made them more backward in owning or
discovering their errors. One of them, however, Mr. Sewall, who
always had the character of great integrity, at a public fast sometime
after gave in a bill, or note, to the minister, acknowledging his errors
and desiring to humble himself in the sight of God and his people,
and stood up while the note was reading.[73] It is said that the chief
justice Mr. Stoughton being informed of this act of one of his
brethren, remarked upon it, that for himself, when he sat in
judgment he had the fear of God before his eyes, and gave his
opinion according to the best of his understanding, and although it
might appear afterwards that he had been in an error, he saw no
necessity of a public acknowledgment of it. One of the ministers,
who in the time of it approved of the court’s proceeding, remarked
in his diary soon after that many were of opinion innocent blood had
been shed. The afflicted were never brought to trial for their
imposture. Many of them are said to have proved profligate,
abandoned people, and others to have passed the remainder of their
lives in a state of obscurity and contempt.[74]
Erratum.—The reference, in the text, to Note 49, should
have been placed after the word “proceeded,” at the end
of the first sentence of the paragraph.
p.

FOOTNOTES:
[1] The council met on the 16th, 17th, 20th, 24th and 27th of
May, 1692. On the 27th the appointments named (of sixty-seven
justices, eight sheriffs, and two coroners) were made. The
twenty-eight councillors were also authorized to act as justices in
their own localities. This injury to the manuscript was occasioned
by its being thrown into the street during the stamp-act riot on
the evening of August 26, 1765, when Gov. Hutchinson’s house
was sacked. In his subsequent draft, as the date was missing, he
did not supply it, but said “At the first general council,” &c. This
paragraph commences on page 8 of the manuscript.
p.

[2] The date named for the beginning of the Springfield

troubles is probably three or four years too early. Gov. Hutchinson
relied for the date of what he supposed to be the earliest witch
case in the Massachusetts Colony, on Johnson’s Wonder Working
Providence, p. 199, where the date 1645 stands at the head of
the page. As I have explained in my reprint of Johnson (pp. xiii.-
xv.), these headings are unreliable, and, quite likely, were as
often inserted by the printer as by the author. The date in the
heading may be true as to some incident recorded on the page
and erroneous as to other incidents. Keeping in mind the date
when the work was written—from 1649 to 1651—the statement
in the text involves no error. This portion was written in 1651. The
author says, “There hath of late been more than one or two in
this town [Springfield] greatly suspected of witchcraft; yet have
they used much dilligence, both in finding them out, and for the
Lords assisting them against their witchery, yet have they, as is
supposed, bewitched not a few persons, among whom two of the
reverend Elders children.” The cases came to examination and
trial the same year the narrative was written, 1651, and the
testimony offered covers the two previous years.
p.

[3] Johnson.
h.

[4] The name of this woman was not Mary Oliver, but Mary
Parsons. She was tried in Boston, May 13, 1651, on the charge of
witchcraft and for murdering her own child. She was convicted on
the latter charge on her own confession, and sentenced to be
hanged. She was reprieved till May 29 (Mass. Rec. iv. p. i. p. 47).
In Judd’s History of Hadley (p. 234), it appears that Mary Parsons
was again tried for witchcraft in 1661, and discharged. This is
doubtless an error in copying or printing 1661 for 1651, when the
trial already named took place; for in both instances she was
charged with bewitching the children of Mr. Moxon the minister.
Mr. Moxon returned to England in 1652.
Hugh Parsons, her husband, had previously been tried and
convicted of witchcraft; and the most damaging charges against
him had been brought by his wife. Among these were the
following:—1. Mrs. P. had an intimate friend Mrs. Smith, to whom
she freely expressed her mind. Now Mrs. Smith was a person who
went little abroad, and Mrs. P. was sure she would not speak of
the secrets committed to her trust; and yet her husband knew all
about their conversation. 2. He would be out late nights; and half
an hour before he came home, she would hear strange noises
about the house. 3. He would come home in a distempered mind,
put out the fire, pull off the bed clothes, and throw peas about
the house. 4. He would gabble in his sleep, have strange dreams,
and say he had been fighting the Devil. The jury found him guilty.
The magistrates set aside the verdict, and the case came before
the General Court at Boston, May 31, 1652, when he was
acquitted (Ibid. p. 96). The numerous and very curious
depositions in the Springfield cases may be seen in the Appendix
of Drake’s Annals of Witchcraft, 1869, pp. 219-258. Hutchinson
(in note, vol. i. p. 165) mentions the case of Hugh Parsons, but
not that of his wife. He mentions it again (vol. ii. p. 22), and does
not seem to be aware that his Mary Oliver case was that of
Parsons’s wife. My references to Hutchinson are to the edition of
1795.
p.

[5] Vol. i. p. 150. [Hutchinson’s references to his earlier vol. are

to the ed. of 1764.]
h.

[6] Margaret Jones was executed June 4, 1648, and was

therefore by more than two years, so far as now appears, the
first case of conviction and execution for witchcraft in the
Massachusetts Colony. The case is reported in Winthrop’s Journal,
ii. p. 326, and Hale’s Modest Inquiry concerning Witchcraft, p. 17.
Mr. Hale relates incidents not recorded by Winthrop. On the day
of her execution, he, then twelve years of age, went to her cell,
“in company with some neighbors who took great pains to bring
her to confession and repentance; but she constantly professed
herself innocent of that crime.”
p.

[7] No writer on this subject seems hitherto to have given the

name of the person who suffered at Dorchester. Mr. John Hale, in
Modest Inquiry, 1697, p. 17, thus alludes to the matter: “Another
that suffered on that account sometime after was a Dorchester
woman. And upon the day of her execution Mr. Thompson [Wm.
Tompson], minister of Brantry and J. P. her former minister took
pains with her to bring her to repentance. And she utterly denyed
her guilt of witchcraft, for she had when a single woman played
the harlot, and being with child, used means to destroy the fruit
of her body to conceal her sin and shame; and although she did
not effect it, yet she was a murderer in the sight of God for her
endeavors, and shewed great penitency for that sin; but owned
nothing of the crime laid to her charge.” Mr. Drake in his Annals of
Witchcraft, and the History of Dorchester, make no mention of
this case.
 I think I have found a clue to the name of this Dorchester
woman. Increase Mather, in his Remarkable Providences, 1684,
gave some of the cases of witchcraft which had occurred in New-
England. He sent a copy of this book to his brother Nathaniel, a
minister in Dublin. In a letter, dated Dec. 31, 1684, Nathaniel
Mather acknowledged the receipt of the book, and says: “Why did
you not put in the story of Mrs. Hibbins witchcrafts and the
discovery thereof; and also of H. Lake’s wife, of Dorchester,
whom as I have heard the Devil drew in by appearing to her in
the likeness, and acting the part of a child of hers then lately
dead on whom her heart was much set; as also another of a girl
in Connecticut, who was judged to die a real convert, though she
died for the same crime?—stories, as I have heard them as
remarkable for some circumstances as most I have read.” (Mather
Papers, Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. xxxviii. p. 58.) Mr. Mather probably
heard these stories before he went abroad. The precise date of
his departure does not appear. It was, however, before March 23,
1650-51, when he writes from London. There was a Henry Lake
residing in Dorchester in 1678, who, with his children, was named
as the residuary legatees in the will of Thomas Lake, a prominent
citizen of the town, who died Oct. 27, 1678 (History of
Dorchester, p. 125). Mr. Savage (Geneal. Dict.) says there was a
Henry Lake, currier, in Salem, in 1649, “who may have been the
Henry Lake of Dorchester”; but he makes no mention of his wife
being executed for witchcraft.
The details of the case as related by Mr. Mather are quite unlike
those related by Mr. Hale. One or both of the statements must be
incorrect. The error I think must be in that of Mr. Hale. Mr. Mather
was a resident of Dorchester, and a graduate of the college in
1647. He gives the name of the person accused, and was so
situated as to be familiar with all the incidents. Mr. Hale was a
resident of Charlestown, and in 1650 was but fourteen years of
age. He did not know the name of the person, and gives the
same incidents to a Springfield case. He says, p. 19: “There was
another executed of Boston anno 1656 [Mrs. Hibbins] for that
crime; and two or three of Springfield, one of which confessed,
and said the occasion of her familiarity with Satan was this: She
had lost a child, and was exceedingly discontented at it, and
longed Oh that she might see her child again! And at last the
Devil in likeness of her child came to her bed-side and talked with
her, and asked to come into the bed to her that night and several
nights after, and so entered into covenant with Satan and became
a witch. This was the only confessor in those times in this
government.” If any person, other than Mary Parsons, was
executed at Springfield for witchcraft, no details have come down
to us. Increase Mather probably omitted to mention the cases of
Mrs. Hibbins and Mrs. Lake, with which he must have been
familiar, in deference to the feelings of their friends then living.
p.

[8] This was the case of Mrs. Kendal, of Cambridge, who was
executed for bewitching to death a child of Goodman Genings, of
Watertown. The principal evidence was that of a Watertown
nurse, who testified that the said Kendal did make much of the
child, and then the child was well, but quickly changed in color
and died a few hours after. The court took this evidence without
calling the parents of the child. After the execution the parents
denied that their child was bewitched, and stated that it died
from imprudent exposure to cold by the nurse the night before.
The nurse soon after was put in prison for adultery, and there
died, and so the matter was not further inquired into. Hale’s
Modest Inquiry, p. 18.
Rev. Lucius R. Paige, of Cambridgeport, has recently found in
the Middlesex court records, 1660, another alleged case of
witchcraft in Cambridge, which was tried that year. Winifred
Holman, an aged widow, was accused by her neighbors, John
Gibson and wife, their son John Gibson, Jr., and their daughter
Rebecca, wife of Charles Stearns. Actions of defamation were
commenced against these parties, and on the trial, they, by way
of justification, presented their supposed proofs of witchcraft,
some details of which may be seen in Hist. and Geneal. Register,
vol. xxiv. p. 59. Probably other cases were tried in the courts of
that period, of which nothing is now known. John Dunton, in
1683, said there had been twenty cases of witchcraft recently
tried in the colony. (Letters, p. 72.)
p.

[9] Vol. i. p. 187.

h.

[10] See Mass. Rec., vol. iv. pt. 1, p. 269. Joshua Scottow’s
representation, dated March 7, 1655-6, that he did not intend to
oppose the proceedings of the court in the case of Ann Hibbins, is
in Mass. Archives, vol. cxxxv. fol. 1. She was executed June 19,
1656.
 p.

[11] Magnalia.
h.

[12] The case of Ann Cole was fully reported in a letter by Mr.
John Whiting, minister at Hartford, under whose observation it
occurred, to Increase Mather, dated Dec. 10, 1682. The document
is one of the Mather Papers, and is printed in Mass. Hist. Soc.
Coll., vol. xxxviii. pp. 466-469. An abstract of the case is in
Increase Mather’s Remarkable Providences, chap. v. pp. 96-99,
London ed. 1856, and Cotton Mather’s Magnalia, Hartford ed.
1855, vol. ii. p. 448. Several of the incidents are not correctly
stated by Hutchinson, either in the manuscript or printed text.
Ann Cole did not live next door to a Dutch family. The name of
the woman executed, Greensmith, appears in both abstracts by
the Mathers, but not in Mr. Whiting’s original statement. The
woman and her husband were both executed.
p.

[13] This woman was one of the victims hanged for witchcraft
at Salem, in 1692. The evidence offered at her examination is in
Mather’s Wonders, pp. 70-76; Calef’s More Wonders, pp. 125-132,
and Woodward’s Records of Salem Witchcraft, vol. i. pp. 193-233.
She bore the reputation of a witch for many years, and her suits
at law frequently brought her name into the General Court
records.—Mass. Rec. iv. pt. 2, pp. 540-555; v. pp. 6, 26.
p.

[14] To a person interested in the psychological inquiries

pertaining to the witchcraft manifestations of the seventeenth
century, the case of Elizabeth Knap is one of the most interesting
that occurred in New-England. It took place twenty-one years
before the great outbreak at Salem, and under circumstances
which gave opportunity for calm observation. Samuel Willard,
afterwards pastor of the Old South Church, in Boston, and who
distinguished himself by his prudent conduct in 1692, was the
pastor of the church in Groton at the time, and was the daily
attendant and spiritual adviser of the family. He wrote a full
account of the case, which fortunately has been preserved, and is
now printed in the Mather Papers, pp. 555-571. In this paper he
has calmly discussed the question whether her distemper was
real or counterfeit. At first he was inclined to the latter opinion,
and at times she confessed as much; but in view of all the facts
he was of the opinion that there was something preternatural in
the case. Increase Mather has an abstract of Mr. Willard’s account
in Remarkable Providences, p. 99. See also Magnalia, vol. ii. p.
449.
p.

[15] Rebeckah Nurse.

h.

[16] Complaints against Eunice Cole for being a witch were

made as early as 1656, and were continued till 1680, when she
was up before the Quarter Court at Hampton, and committed on
suspicion of being a witch. During most of this period she was a
town pauper. Thirty-five depositions and other original papers
relating to Eunice Cole’s case, from Sept. 4, 1656 to Jan. 7, 1673-
4, are in Mass. Archives, vol. cxxxv. fol. 2-15. See also Drake’s
Annals of Witchcraft, pp. 99-103.
p.

[17] In the printed text Gov. Hutchinson gives but four lines to
the Morse case. Fuller details may be found in Remarkable
Providences, pp. 101-111; Magnalia, vol. ii. pp. 450-452, and
Drake’s Annals, pp. 144-150. In his Appendix (pp. 258-296), Mr.
Drake has given depositions and other papers connected with the
proceedings against Mrs. Morse. Other depositions, with a
petition of Wm. Morse in behalf of his wife, are in Mass. Archives,
vol. cxxxv. fol. 11-19.
Mrs. Morse was convicted 20 May, 1680, and sentenced to be
hanged. June 1, she was reprieved till the next session of the
court. “Nov. 3. The deputies, on perusal of the acts of the
honored court of assistants relating to the woman condemned for
witchcraft, do not understand the reason why execution of the
sentence given against her by the court is not executed, and that
her second reprieval seems to us to be beyond what the law will
allow, and do therefore judge meet to declare ourselves against
it, with reference to the concurrence of the honored magistrates
hereto.” This action was “not consented to by the magistrates.”
(MS. memoranda in Mass. Archives, vol. cxxxv. fol. 18.) The
deputies subsequently voted to give her a new trial; but the
magistrates refused. Between this disagreement of the deputies
and magistrates she escaped punishment. She was released from
prison, but never acquitted or pardoned.
 p.

[18] Caleb Powel was the name of the person implicated.

p.

[19] Magnalia.
h.

[20] John Russell, minister of Hadley (in whose house the

regicides Whalley and Goff were long concealed), communicated
this case to Increase Mather under date of August 2, 1683. It
occurred the year before at Hartford. An abstract is in Remarkable
Providences, pp. 112-114, and Magnalia, vol. ii. p. 452. The
original account is printed in Mather Papers, pp. 86-88.
p.

[21] An account of the Walton case was furnished to Increase

Mather by Joshua Moody, then minister at Portsmouth. (Mather
Papers, p. 361.) The paper is given in Remarkable Providences,
pp. 114-116, and Magnalia, vol. ii. p. 453.
A long and circumstantial account of the disturbance in George
Walton’s house is the subject-matter of a tract, printed in London,
1698, 15 pp. 4to., a copy of which is in the Dowse Library
belonging to the Massachusetts Historical Society. The title of the
tract is “Lithobolia; or the Stone Throwing Devil. Being an exact
and true Account of the various actions of Infernal Spirits, or
(Devils Incarnate) Witches, or both; and the great Disturbance
and Amazement they gave to George Walton’s family, at a place
called Great Island, in the Province of New-Hampshire in New-
England.... By R. C. who was a sojourner in the same family the
whole time, and an ocular witness of these Diabolic Inventions;
the contents thereof being manifestly known to the inhabitants of
that Province, and the persons of other provinces, and is upon
record in his Majesty’s Council Court held in that Province.”
The writer says, “Some time ago being in America, in his
Majesty’s service, I was lodged in the said George Walton’s
house, a planter there.”
The following names appear as attestants of the truth of the
narrative: “Samuel Jennings, Governor of West-Jarsey; Walter
Clark, Deputy-Governor of Road-Island; Arthur Cook; Matt.
Borden of Road-Island; Oliver Hooton of Barbadoes, Merchant; T.
Maul of Salem in N. E. merchant; Capt. Walter Barefoot; John
Hussey and John Hussey’s wife.” The narrative treats of throwing
about, by an invisible power, stones, brick-bats, hammers, mauls,
crow-bars, spits and other domestic utensils, for the period of
three months.
“R. C.,” the author of the tract, I have no doubt, was Richard
Chamberlayne, Secretary of the Province of New-Hampshire in
1682. That he resided at Great Island appears by his signature to
several depositions printed in New-Hampshire Hist. Coll., vols. ii.
and viii. Chamberlayne and Barefoot were among the prosecutors
of Joshua Moody at Portsmouth the next year for not conducting
his services according to the English Prayer Book, and occasioned
his imprisonment for three months. It appears that Increase
Mather was aware that Secretary Chamberlayne had prepared an
account of the Walton case, and he wrote to Mr. Moody to
procure it, together with a narrative of the Hortando case. Mr.
Moody, July 14, 1683, writes to Mr. Mather: “About that at G.
Walton’s, because my interest runs low with the Secretary, I have
desired Mr. Woodbridge to endeavor the obtaining it; and if he
can get it, shall send it by the first; though if there should be any
difficulty thereabout, you may do pretty well with what you have
already.” (Mather Papers, p. 359.) Mr. Moody writes again, August
23: “My endeavors also have not been a-wanting to obtain the
other [the Walton case], but find it difficult. If more may be
gotten, you may expect [it] when I come, or else must take up
with what you had from me at first, which was the sum of what
was then worthy of notice, only many other particular actings of
like nature had been then and since. It began on a Lord’s day,
June 11, 1682, and so continued for a long time, only there was
some respite now and then. The last thing [printed sight] I have
heard of was the carrying away of several axes in the night,
notwithstanding they were laid up, yea locked up very safe, as
the owner thought at least, which was done this spring.
[Postscript.] Before sealing of my letter came accidentally to my
hand this enclosed that I had from William Morse of Newbury
concerning the troubles at his house in 1679. If it may be of use
to me, you may please to peruse and return it.” (Ibid. 360.)
The Secretary doubtless declined to furnish the unlovely
Puritans at the Bay with his narrative, and, on returning to
England, he printed it in London in 1698. The tract shows that
Church-of-England men were quite as observant of signs and
wonders as the Puritans. “Who that peruses these preternatural
occurrences,” asks the writer, “can possibly be so much of an
enemy to his own soul and irrefutable reason, as obstinately to
oppose himself to, or confusedly fluctuate in, the opinion and
doctrine of demons or spirits, and witches?”
The tract is reprinted in Historical Magazine (N.Y., vol. v. pp.
321-327), and is followed (vol. vi. p. 159) with a statement, by
Rev. Lucius Alden, on the persons and localities mentioned
therein. Brewster’s Rambles about Portsmouth, 2d series, 1869,
has a chapter on the subject (pp. 343-351), with Mr. Alden’s
statement; but none of these writers seem to be aware that
Richard Chamberlayne was the author of Lithobolia. Since writing
the above I find the tract under the name of Richard Chamberlain
in British Museum Catalogue, 1814, and the title was so copied
into Watt and Lowndes.
p.

[22] This was the Hortando case, a brief narrative of which,

“sent in by an intelligent person,” is given in Remarkable
Providences, pp. 116-118, and Magnalia, vol. ii. p. 453.
“The enclosed I transcribed from Mr. Tho. Broughton, who read
to me what he took from the mouth of the woman and her
husband, and judge it credible; though it be not the half of what
is to be gotten. I expect from him a fuller and further account
before I come down to the Commencement.” (Mr. Moody to Mr.
Mather, August 23, 1683. Mather Papers, p. 360.) The date, place
and attending circumstances make it clear that this was “the
narrative sent in by an intelligent person,” which Mr. Mather
printed.
p.

[23] Gov. Hutchinson found this case reported in Magnalia, vol.

ii. p. 454.
p.

[24] Increase Mather’s Remarkable Providences is the work

here alluded to; but the date should have been 1684 and not
1685. The book was issued in the Spring of 1684. Nathaniel
Mather, in a letter to the author, dated Dec. 31, 1684,
acknowledges receiving a copy on which “was written in your
hand 7 ber 16.” (Mather Papers, p. 58.) John Bishop
acknowledges the receipt of a copy, in a letter dated June 10,
1684. (Ibid. p. 312.) This erroneous date, and a typographical
error in the Magnalia, vol. ii. p. 473, have led some writers to
suppose that Cotton Mather wrote his first book on witchcraft in
1685. He was then twenty-two years of age. Before 1686 he
published no works except Elegy on Rev. Nath. Collins, 1685, and
The Boston Ephemeris, an Almanac for 1683, neither of which are
in the printed list of his works. His first writing on witchcraft was
issued in 1689.
p.

[25] This date is correct. It is singular that in his final draft the
author should be in doubt, and say, “in 1687 or 1688.”
p.

[26] The names and ages of the children were as follows:

Martha 13, John 11, Mercy 7, Benjamin 5.
p.

[27] Cotton Mather’s Memorable Providences, Boston, 1689. 2d

ed. London, 1691.
p.

[28] Cotton Mather’s. On the 4th of October, 1688, Joshua

Moody wrote a letter to Increase Mather, then in London, in which
he spoke of the Goodwin case. (Mather Papers, pp. 367-8.) He
says “We have a very strange thing among us, which we know
not what to make of, except it be witchcraft, as we think it must
needs be. Three or four children of one Goodwin, a mason, that
have been for some weeks grievously tormented, crying out of
head, eyes, tongue, teeth; breaking their neck, back, thighs,
knees, legs, feet, toes, &c.; and then they roar out, Oh my head!
Oh my neck! and from one part to another the pain runs almost
as fast as I write it. The pain is doubtless very exquisite, and the
cries most dolorous and affecting; and this is noteable, that two
or more of them cry out of the same pain in the same part, at the
same time, and as the pain shifts to another place in one, so in
the other, and thus it holds them for an hour together and more;
and when the pain is over they eat, drink, walk, play, laugh, as at
other times. They are generally well a nights. A great many good
Christians spent a day of prayer there. Mr. Morton came over, and
we each spent an hour in prayer; since which, the parents
suspecting an old woman and her daughter living hard by,
complaint was made to the justices, and compassion had so far,
that the women were committed to prison and are there now.
Yesterday I called in at the house, and was informed by the
parent that since the women were confined the children have
been well while out of the house; but as soon as any of them
come into the house, then taken as formerly; so that now all their
children keep at their neighbors’ houses. If any step home they
are immediately afflicted, and while they keep out are well. I
have been a little larger in this narrative because I know you have
studied these things. We cannot but think the Devil has a hand in
it by some instrument. It is an example, in all the parts of it, not
to be parallelled. You may inquire further of Mr. Oakes [Edward,
Jr., the bearer of the letter], whose uncle [Dr. Thomas Oakes]
administered physic to them at first, and he will probably inform
you more fully.”
We have here a motive other than curiosity or credulity, which
led Mr. Mather to take one of the Goodwin children to his own
house, where he kept her till spring and till she fully recovered.
This letter of Mr. Moody’s was prior to any writing on the subject
by Mr. Mather. An account of this case is in the Magnalia, vol. ii.
pp. 456-465. See also North American Review, vol. cviii. pp. 350-
359.
p.

[29] A friend skilled in the Indian dialects suggests that Mr.

Mather’s pronunciation of the Indian language was probably so
imperfect that the Devil was excusable for not understanding it.
p.

[30] In the year 1720, at Littleton, in the Massachusetts

Province, a family were supposed to be bewitched in much the
same manner with this of Goodwin’s. I shall give a brief account
of the affair, and the manner how the fraud came to be disclosed,
to show the similitude between the two cases, and to discourage
parents from showing the least countenance to such pranks in
their children.
One J. B. of Littleton, had three daughters of 11, 9, [and] 5
years of age. The eldest being a forward girl, and having heard
and read many strange stories, used to surprise the company
where she was with her manner of relating them. Pleased with
applause she went from stories to dreams, and from dreams to
visions, attaining the art of swooning away, and being to all
appearance breathless for some time; and upon her reviving
would tell strange stories of what she had met with in this and
other worlds. When she met with the words God, Christ or Holy
Ghost in the Bible, she would drop down with scarce any signs of
life in her. Strange noises were heard in the house, stones came
down the chimney and did great mischief. It was common to find
her in ponds of water, crying out she should be drowned,
sometimes upon the top of the house, and sometimes upon the
tops of trees, and, being asked, said she flew there; complained
of beating and pinching by invisible hands which left the marks
upon her. She complained of a woman of the town, one Mrs. D—
y, and that she appeared to her, and once her mother struck at
the place where the girl said she saw D—y, and thereupon the girl
cried out you have struck her upon the belly, and it was found
that D—y complained of a hurt in her belly about the same time.
Another time the mother struck at a place where the girl said
there was a yellow bird, and she then told her mother she had hit
the side of its head, and it turned out that D. was hurt in the side
of her head at that time.
D. being with child, when the first blow was struck, took to her
bed soon after and died, and, as soon as it was known, the girl
was well.
The next daughter, after her sister had succeeded so well,
imitated her in complaining of D. and outdid her in her feats of
running to the top of the barn where a man could not have got
without danger, and pretended she was carried in the air; but,
upon the news of D.’s death, she was well too. The youngest
though but five years old attempted the same things, and in
some instances went beyond her sisters; but she would not be
well until a considerable time after D.’s death.
The second daughter really believed the first bewitched, by her
being in ponds, upon trees, &c; but had the curiosity to try if she
could not do the same things. The third, seeing her sisters were
pitied and tenderly used, was willing to share with them. The
eldest, seeing the others following her, let them into the secret,
and then they acted in concert.
The neighbors in general agreed they were under an evil hand;
some affirmed they had seen them flying, and it was pronounced
a piece of witchcraft, as much as ever had been at Salem. Their
parents were indulgent to them, and though some of the people
were not without suspicion of fraud, yet no great pains were
taken to detect them. Physicians were employed to no purpose,
and ministers prayed over them without success.
 After the children altered their behavior, they all persisted in it
that there had been no fraud; and, although the affair lay with
great weight upon the conscience of the eldest, and she would
sometimes say to her next sister they should one time or other be
discovered and brought to shame, yet it remained a long time a
secret. The eldest, not having been baptized, desired and
obtained baptism; and being examined by the minister as to her
conduct in this affair, she persisted in her declarations of
innocency. Having removed to Medford, she offered to join to the
church there, in 1728, and gave a satisfactory account of herself
to the minister of the town, who knew nothing of the share she
had in this transaction; but, the Lord’s day before she was to be
admitted, he happened to preach from this text, “He that
speaketh lies shall not escape.” The woman supposed the sermon
to be intended for her, and went to the minister to inquire. He
informed her no body had been with him to object anything
against her; but she had then determined to make a full
confession, and disclosed the matter to him, owning the whole
and every part to be the fraud of her and her sisters, and desired
to make the most public acknowledgment of it in the face of the
church, which was done accordingly. They had gone so far in
their complaints that they found it necessary to accuse somebody,
and pitched upon this particular woman, D—, having no former
prejudice again (sic) her. The woman’s complaints, at the same
time the children pretended she was struck, proceeded from
other causes which were not properly inquired into. Once they
were in danger of being detected by their father in one instance
of their fraud; but the grounds of suspicion were overlooked or
neglected through his prejudice and credulity in favor of his
children.
h.

[31] Gov. Hutchinson condensed the above statement from a

manuscript prepared by Ebenezer Turell, minister of Medford, to
whom the confession was made, which has since been printed in
full in Mass. Hist. Coll. vol. xx. pp. 6-22. Though fully in the belief
that there were fraud and deception in the actions of the Littleton
children, Mr. Turell could not divest himself of the idea that there
was also diabolical agency manifested in these transactions. “I
make no doubt,” he says (p. 16), “but in this sinning Satan was
very officious.” Again (p. 19) he gives this excellent advice:
“Never use any of the Devil’s legerdemain tricks. You only gratify
Satan, and invite him into your company to deceive you.” Persons
who can accept the possibility of diabolical agency will find in Mr.
Turell’s narrative ample scope for the exercise of their belief.
p.

[32] Elisha Hutchinson, a merchant in Boston, and grandfather

of the author. He was the grandson of Mrs. Ann Hutchinson, who
was banished, in 1637, for her religious opinions.
p.

[33] William Perkins, 1558-1602, a Puritan divine, and Fellow of

Christ College, Cambridge. Several editions of his works, in three
volumes folio, appeared from 1605 to 1635. One of his papers
was on Witchcraft, and was a standard and, for the times, a
charitable authority.
p.

[34] Joseph Glanvil, 1636-1680. He was chaplain in ordinary to

his Majesty, and Fellow of the Royal Society. The title of the work
here mentioned is “Saducismus Triumphatus: or Full and Plain
Evidence concerning Witches and Apparitions: with a letter of Dr.
Henry More on the same subject; and an authentic but wonderful
Story of certain Swedish Witches; done into English by Anth.
Horneck, Preacher at the Savoy.” London, 1681. 8vo. 328 pp.
Several later editions were issued. The story of the Swedish
witchcrafts contained in this volume is mentioned by Increase
Mather in Remarkable Providences, 1684, p. 132, ed. 1856, and
by Cotton Mather in Wonders of the Invisible World, 1693, pp. 44,
88. Mr. C. W. Upham, supposing that C. Mather was the only
person in New England, in 1692, who knew of this case, bases an
argument upon it in Salem Witchcraft and Cotton Mather, 1869,
pp. 34-35.
p.

[35] Joseph Keble, 1632-1716, Fellow of All-Saint’s College and

a legal writer of little modern reputation.
p.

[36] Michael Dalton, 1554-1620, an English lawyer, author of

several legal works which were popular in their time.
p.

[37] Amy Duny and Rose Cullender, “two wrinkled old women,”
were tried and convicted before Sir Matthew Hale at Bury St.
Edmunds, county of Suffolk, in 1664-5. The case is reported in