Anthony Comstock, Women’s Health and Family Planning: The Effect one Man had On the Future of Women’s Healthcare

In 1873, the United States was in a period of reconstruction. The Civil War, that had torn the country apart, had ended only eight years earlier. President Ulysses S. Grant was beginning his second term as president, having defeated Horace Greeley with 55.6% of the vote. The United States had just passed the Coinage Act of 1873, placing America on the gold standard. The day before Grant began his second term, the United States Congress passed the Comstock Act on March 3, 1873. This act sought to censor and make it illegal to send mail that included anything deemed, obscene, lewd or lascivious. The historical significance of the Comstock Act on the history of women’s healthcare is profound. Once the Comstock Act was passed, it limited the accessibility of information about contraceptives, abortifacients and anything else obscene, including the specifics of childbirth. The aim of the act was to prevent these items from being sent by the United States Postal Service.

For many, these did not have any immediate effects, but as the twentieth century began, women wanted access to birth control options. At the turn of the century, children began to live longer, many more of children began to reach adulthood and this created a problem for mothers who felt their families were growing too quickly. Advances in healthcare made it possible for children to survive to adulthood, which presented an unexpected issue for family planning. The United States saw a jump between 1880 and 1900 in the life expectancy, as more than ten million United States citizens had lived past the age of 40.[1] In 1910, the birth rate per 1000 births was 30.1, by the beginning of World War II, this number had dropped to 19.4. When the decision of Roe v. Wade was handed down by the Supreme Court in 1973, a full century after the Comstock Act had passed, the birth rate had dropped to 18.4 and by 2012 the birthrate was a mere 12.6 per 1000 births.[2]

In 1873, Congress passed the Comstock Act. This made it illegal to use United States mail services to send any books, pamphlets, letters or packages that could be deemed obscene. J.C. Ruppenthal, a former district court judge, stated that, “In the United States, laws relating to birth control seem to have been developed since about 1870.”[3]  This meant that women, in a time where they needed access to information about family planning and birth control methods, were not going to get it, especially after the Comstock Act passed. Unfortunately for many women, this also meant that any information about family planning and contraceptives was now very difficult to come by. The Comstock Act accounted for many issues in women’s healthcare, simply because information about a woman’s body and how best to prevent pregnancy was not seen as a fundamental right or an educational right. The access to information about contraceptives was not there, because Comstock believed that contraceptives would lead to a lack of consequences for lewd actions.[4] The historical significance of Anthony Comstock on the future of women’s healthcare is a strange one, but the evidence suggests he negatively impacted the ability women had to access the information that they needed for the purposes of family planning and accosted and arrested many men and women who were disseminating any material he saw as obscene, which included information about birth control and family planning. Comstock believed that contraception would have a negative impact because it would allow for people to avoid the consequences of their “immoral” behavior.

There were many women who sought to do the opposite of what Comstock was doing. These women wanted to educate women about their bodies, family planning and contraception. Two names that continue to recur in studying the history of women’s healthcare, as well as adversaries of Anthony Comstock are Mary Ware Dennett and Margaret Sanger. Sanger is perhaps best remembered for her creation of Planned Parenthood, but despite what the organization has become, it was created to give women access to information about family planning, birth control and to prevent what Sanger called, “back alley abortions.”[5] Sanger, much like Mary Ware Dennett, knew that they would be in flagrant disregard to the Comstock Act, but regardless of the consequences, both women felt it was more important to provide information to women.[6] This is something she briefly touches on in her autobiography. By the mid-1910s, Sanger had published her pamphlet on Family Limitation and had opened the first birth control clinic in the United States. This led to her arrest in 1916, under the Comstock Act.[7] For Mary Dennett Ware, her problems with Comstock also began in the 1900s. She published her pamphlet, The Sex Side of Life: An Explanation for Young People, in 1915. It was a 24-page, self-published work, that aimed to provide answers for young men about sex, pregnancy and birth control. She was angered that the limited books her children had access to were inaccurate and wanted to make sure that she shared her knowledge and understanding of sex to help further early sex education and family planning initiatives.[8] By the time she was arrested in 1928, her pamphlet had been published in many medical journals and reviews. Anthony Comstock had passed away thirteen years prior, but this did not stop her from continuing to disseminate the information.[9]

In 1926, Mary Ware Dennett published again, this time she was discussing the laws that pertained to birth control and family limitation. She made sure to include many facts and medically accurate information, as she had done in her previous pamphlets, but her 1926 work, Birth Control Laws: Shall We Keep Them, Change Them or Abolish Them, also included its fair share of opinions.[10] At the time that this was published, the Comstock Laws had been on the books for forty-three years. Anthony Comstock had passed away in 1915, but that would not limit his reach. Both Mary Ware Dennett and Margaret Sanger were negatively impacted by the Comstock Act. They both had the mission to educate young people about sex and family planning, but were both arrested and tried under the Comstock Act for their obscene writings and for using the United States Postal Service to send them.[11] This was a strange new time for young women in America, who had just been freshly politcally franchised, and the years that would follow would show the desire women had to be educated about their bodies and their desire for knowledge on family planning and limitation. In a 2012 article, Laura Weinrib, a professor of Law at the University of Chicago, discusses the policy changes that took place in the 1920s, as the ACLU was fighting the Comstock Act. She believes that people were being punished for their political identity, under the act, rather than for what they did. She also reasons that because women had been recently given the right to vote, that targeting women under the Comstock Act was an attempt to limit their voting rights.[12]

            During the 1920s and 1930s, birth control was being confiscated by the government under the Comstock Act. Women had been trying to get access to items such as sponges, condoms and pessaries, and the best way to get them was to have them discreetly mailed via the United States Postal Service, despite it being against the law. In a 1937 edition of the Columbia Law Review, they discussed how the Comstock Act was affecting access to birth control. The article looked at whether shipping these items was actually a violation, as the items were not labeled. The article sought to shape the legality of how these items were shipped, confiscated and whether the confiscated items were admissible in court.[13] It did not change the law, but it was a big deal that lawyers were finally taking an interest in the effect of the Comstock Act, even if it had taken them twenty-two years after his death to do so. The Comstock Act was not the first of its kind, but it was the first to gain major publicity, however, The Harvard Law Review had published an article in 1932 entitled, “Some Legislative Aspects of the Birth-Control Problem."[14] In this article, they argued that obscene mail had been outlawed in 1865, and that the Comstock Act itself was directly affecting women and women’s healthcare, because the results of the act seemed targeted at family planning, almost exclusively. This seemed to be the case when Sarah Chase was arrested in May of 1878. Chase was found in violation of the Comstock Act on many occasions, but she continued to sell contraceptives and provide information on family planning, which she had done for years.[15] Comstock went after her many times, but she was one of the women who didn’t allow this to affect her conviction that it was imporant to desiminate the information, and the contraceptives themselves. This was the foucs of an article by Andrea Tone, in 2000. She is a professor of history at the Georgia Institute of Technology, and her article on Black Market Birth Control, looked at birth control in the gilded age and the arrest record of Ohio native, Sarah Chase.

In her book, Understanding the Victorians: Politics, Culture and Society in Nineteenth-Century Britain, Susie Steinbach, a professor of history at Hamline University who has written about gender and focuses on Victorian history, looks at the English equivalent to the Comstock Act in the nineteeth century. Comstock had used English law as the basis for his crusade, and when the laws were being shaped, the Englsih law was consulted as well. Comstock personally believed that the the English law was superior, however, in one chapter of her book, Steinbach discusses the correlation between culture and sexuality.[16] One interesting thing to note, is that some of the women who had been arrested under the Comstock Act, would flee or spend time hiding in England to escapte punishment in the United States, all of this despite Comstocks belief that England was morally superior. Nicola Beisel, an Associate Professor Emeritus at Northwestern University, focused her 1997 work, Imperiled Innocents: Anthony Comstock and Family Reproduction in Victorian America, on the American Victorian period. She really examines the Comstock Act within the context of Anthony Comstock’s life and the efforts made by Comstock and the YMCA to censor obscenity. She also provides an indepth look at NYSSV, which was the New York Society for the Suppression of Vice, a censorship society directly resulting from the passage of the Comstock Act and the efforts made by Anthony Comstock and the YMCA. She argues that NYSSV had a lasting impact on access to family planning sources and birth control information within the state of New York that led to more stringent laws around the country, following suit.[17]

            By the time the Comstock Act was taken off of the United States law books in the 1970s, the United States had seen the “baby boom,” in the wake of World War II. In the report given by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare in 1968, it was concluded that there had been an increase in birth rate as well as a decline in child mortality rate and maternal mortality rate.[18] The United States would go on to pass many new laws regarding family planning and birth control in the years after the repeal, but the Comstock Act had already made its impact on American women. It is important to remember the effect that Comstock had and that men have on the history of women’s healthcare. Monica Green, a professor of history, gender studies and the history of medicine wrote about this in a 2008 article. She warns that as historians continue to examine the changes of women’s healthcare, that it is important to remember that men had a profound effect as well. It can be very easy to forget this, because women’s healthcare seems to focus on women, and forgets about male midwives and men like Anthony Comstock, who also made an impact.[19]

Amy Werbel, a professor of history and gender studies, wrote a book about the life of Anthony Comstock and what led him on his crusade against obscenity. She believes that Comstock did not intend for the limitation of family planning services for women, but that despite that it was still not an unwelcomed side effect, as Comstock believed that access to birth control and family planning services would ultimately allow people to escape the consequences of their immoral actions. In Werbel’s words in Lust on Trial, “Every win in this attempt, however, was accompanied by uncontrollable contradictory results. In pushing back against censorship, Americans developed a much more muscular view of civil liberties. And despite Comstock’s best efforts, American lust did not diminish.”[20] When Anthony Comstock began his crusade after the Civil War ended, he wanted to prevent the spread of lustful and obscene materials and wanted to make sure that people were held responsible for their actions, but what happened, was an impact felt mostly by women in terms of family planning, sex education and access to birth control. 

 Bibliography

Beisel, Nicola. Imperiled Innocents: Anthony Comstock and Family Reproduction in Victorian America. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.

Columbia Law Review Association, Inc. "Comstock Act. Admissibility of Contraceptive Devices." Columbia Law Review, 1937: 854-856.

Dennett, Mary Ware. Birth Control Laws: Shall We Keep Them, Change Them or Abolish Them. New York : Grafton Press, 1926.

—. The Sex Side of Life: An Explanation for Young People. New York: Mrs. Mary Ware Dennett, 1919.

Division for Vital Records and Health Statistics. Live Births and Crude Birth Rates Michigan and United States Residents, Selected Years 1900 to 2017. June 2018. https://www.mdch.state.mi.us/osr/natality/tab1.1.asp (accessed May 30, 2019).

Green, Monica H. "Gendering the History of Women's Healthcare." Gender & History, 2008: 487-518.

Hetzel, Robert D. Grove Ph.D. and Alice M. Vital Statistics Rates in the United States 1940-1960. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, 1968.

M.D, John S. Billings. Report on Vital and Social Statistics in the United States at the Eleventh Census: 1890. Washington D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1896.

Ruppenthal, J.C. "Criminal Statutes on Birth Control ." Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 1919 : 48-61.

Sanger, Margaret. "Family Limitation." Michigan State University Libraries Archive. 1917. https://archive.lib.msu.edu/DMC/AmRad/familylimitations.pdf (accessed May 23, 2019).

Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography . New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1938.

Steinbach, Susie L. Understanding the Victorians: Politics, Culture and Society in Nineteenth-Century Britain. New York: Routledge, 2017.

The Harvard Law Review Association. "Some Legislative Aspects of the Birth-Control Problem." Havard Law Review, 1932: 723-729.

Tone, Andrea. "Black Market Birth Control: Contraceptive Entrepreneurship and Criminality in the Gilded Age." The Journal of American History, 2000: 435-459.

Weinrib, Laura M. "The Sex Side of Civil Liberties: United States v. Dennett and the Changing Face of Free Speech." Law and History Review, 2012: 325-386.

Werbel, Amy. Lust On Trial. New York: Columbia University Press, 2018.

---

[1] Billings, John S. Report on Vital and Social Statistics in the United States at the Eleventh Census: 1890. Washington D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1896.

[2] Division for Vital Records and Health Statistics. Live Births and Crude Birth Rates Michigan and United States Residents, Selected Years 1900 to 2017. June 2018. https://www.mdch.state.mi.us/osr/natality/tab1.1.asp (accessed May 30, 2019).

[3] Ruppenthal, J.C. "Criminal Statutes on Birth Control ." Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 1919 : 48.

[4] Werbel, Amy. Lust On Trial. New York: Columbia University Press, 2018.

[5] Sanger, Margaret. "Family Limitation." Michigan State University Libraries Archive. 1917. https://archive.lib.msu.edu/DMC/AmRad/familylimitations.pdf (accessed May 23, 2019).

[6] Sanger, Margaret. Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography . New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1938.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Dennett, Mary Ware. The Sex Side of Life: An Explanation for Young People. New York: Mrs. Mary Ware Dennett, 1919. 

[9] Ibid.

[10] Dennett, Mary Ware. Birth Control Laws: Shall We Keep Them, Change Them or Abolish Them. New York : Grafton Press, 1926.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Weinrib, Laura M. "The Sex Side of Civil Liberties: United States v. Dennett and the Changing Face of Free Speech." Law and History Review, 2012: 325-386.

[13] Columbia Law Review Association, Inc. "Comstock Act. Admissibility of Contraceptive Devices." Columbia Law Review, 1937: 854-856.

[14] The Harvard Law Review Association. "Some Legislative Aspects of the Birth-Control Problem." Havard Law Review, 1932: 723-729.

[15] Tone, Andrea. "Black Market Birth Control: Contraceptive Entrepreneurship and Criminality in the Gilded Age." The Journal of American History, 2000: 435-459.

[16] Steinbach, Susie L. Understanding the Victorians: Politics, Culture and Society in Nineteenth-Century Britain. New York: Routledge, 2017.

[17] Beisel, Nicola. Imperiled Innocents: Anthony Comstock and Family Reproduction in Victorian America. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.

[18] Hetzel, Robert D. Grove Ph.D. and Alice M. Vital Statistics Rates in the United States 1940-1960. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, 1968.

[19] Green, Monica H. "Gendering the History of Women's Healthcare." Gender & History, 2008: 487-518.

[20] Werbel, Amy. Lust On Trial. New York: Columbia UniversityPress, 2018. 13.

The Salem Witch Trials

 

            The Salem Witch Trials took place between February 1692 and May of 1693. They took place in colonial Massachusetts in a time where many lived in fear of what witches could mean and what they could do. In the end, there were over two hundred people accused of witchcraft and of those, thirty were found guilty and nineteen of them were executed. Of those who were executed the majority were women. At the time, witchcraft was considered a capital crime. This would not change for some time. In England in 1735, the Witchcraft Act of 1735 was passed by Parliament and it made it a crime to accuse or claim that any human being had magical powers or abilities or was guilty of practicing witchcraft. From 1735 onward, this essentially put to rest the accused, trials and executions of witches, at least from a legal standpoint. The penalty for accusing someone of witchcraft under the Act was one year in prison, and that was the maximum sentence. This seems a little unfair to the men and women accused of witchcraft whose punishment was death. By in large those accused of witchcraft were women, and some historians have found evidence that some of the women accused had some sort of property that the government wanted, despite coverture laws, or the idea of hysteria as a cause. Largely it seems that witches have been associated with women, and in many cases, women who were seen as powerful or as a threat in some way. The Salem Witch Trials are a powerful reminder of what can happen when we allow ourselves to get out of control and throw accusations without basis, as well as allowing our imaginations to run wild.

            There are many great primary sources about the trials. Despite having happened over three-hundred years ago, there are still copies of letters and testimonies about what was witnessed in Salem as well as letters written by those who thought the trials were being handled unfairly and that evidence was either being fabricated or ignored. The trials were also the subject of a lot of religious objection and fear of the unknown.

            The accused tended to be women, some with money, who had been falsely accused. There were also women accused who had no money whatsoever, like Tituba, who was an enslaved woman and the first to be accused of witchcraft during the Salem Witch Trials. After being accused of witchcraft and confession to the charge, Tituba played a role in accusing Sarah Good and Sarah Osborne in witchcraft as well. In her confession, she managed to convince officials that “the devil had infiltrated their society.”[1] Elaine Breslaw, a retired history professor, notes in her article that, “Her [Tituba] importance for the ensuing events lies not in the occult activities that she supposedly inspired before 1692 but in the content and impact of her confession in March of that year.”[2] Of these women, Sarah Good was examined and denied the accusations of witchcraft. Sarah Good was a thirty-nine-year-old housewife who was accused of participating in witchcraft. Children had accused her of witchcraft and when being questioned she denied any association with the devil, she denied hurting the children or having anyone do so, she was asked who she served and she said God, when asked what God her response was, “the God that made heaven and earth.”[3] She also stated that of the neither she nor Sarah Osborne had done anything to harm the children. Betty Parris, who had become ill accused the women of making her sick and Tituba happened to be a slave for the family. The other two women, Sarah Good and Sarah Osborne were social outcasts. Of the three women, Osborne was the only one who had any kind of money, and prior to this, Osborne had been sick and unable to attend church, which made her suspicious to the people at the trials. Sarah Osborne was accused by several men, “…for afflicting Ann Putnam, Jr., Betty Parris, Abigail Williams, and Elizabeth Hubbard. Unlike the other two women accused with her, Tituba and Sarah Good, Osborne never confessed to witchcraft nor attempted to accuse anyone else.”[4] Sarah Osborne would go on to die in prison at the age of forty-nine, never having stood trial. She is also noted to be the first defendant to assert that the devil could take on the shape of another being without their being willing to comply. One of the questions historians had for her is why she was accused at all. Many have come to believe that it had more to do with her reputation in Salem, than for any other reason.[5] This was true of many of the women accused of witchcraft in Salem, their reputations had more to do with them being accused than anything else.

            Sarah Osborne made the claim that the devil could take on any form and take over any being, and this didn’t particularly help matters, and the argument could be made that this idea helped to prolong the accusations and trials. Of the three women initially accused, Sarah Osborne was the only one who did not confess to performing witchcraft. Sarah Osborne seems to have been targeted for her social standing. She was in the process of attempting to gain full ownership of her late husband’s property when she was accused of witchcraft by the Putnam family. This went against the social norms at the time, as in doing so, she was perverting the social order and denying her own sons’ wealth and position in society. There were many who saw her as greedy and the Putnam’s, in particular, were threatened by her desire to gain economic stability, as it would threaten their own wealth.[6] It would have also set a precedent to potentially overturn coverture laws that had been upheld in both England and to that time in the Colonies of the New World. The Putnam’s seem to have been the source of many of the accusations, because at some point or another, every member of the Putnam family claimed to be afflicted by witchcraft, and usually this was to the benefit of social and economic gains for the family.[7]

            Women were the targets of the accusations of witchcraft, and the book, Servants of Satan: The Age of the Witch Hunts, written by Joseph Klaits asks some questions that create a desire to probe further into the reason why women were the focus, and why suddenly, after hundreds of years, did witches become more dangerous in the eyes of the people casting accusations. Interestingly, Klaits expands on research done by other historians that suggests that during the 1550s, people being accused of witchcraft were criminals and people who were being accused of sexual acts and sexual slavery with the devil.[8] At the time, sexual matters were not discussed in Europe, and as the Puritans came to America, this remained the standard. There was a preoccupation with sex, and this became a component of witchcraft, which was one of the major changes in how witchcraft charges changed from Europe in the 1500s to American in the 1690s. Women were the target of these accusations, and as Klatis puts it, “The witch craze often has been described as one of the most terrible instances of man's inhumanity to man. But more accurate is a formulation by gender, not genus: witch trials exemplify men's inhumanity to women.”[9] The beginnings of this idea of women as the primary culprits of witchcraft began in Europe in the 1400s. In 1486 a treatise was written entitled, Malleus Maleficarum, which has been translated to Hammer of Witches. This perpetuated the idea that witches were women, and that all of these women needed to be exterminated. It was the first time that witchcraft was made a criminal offense and the book advocated for a death sentence.[10] Theologians almost immediately condemned the book because they believed it advocated for illegal and unethical practices, in the killing of women over an unproveable allegation and it was largely inconsistent with the way the Catholic church handled demonology. Despite the church refusing to endorse the text, the association between women, the devil, sexual deviance and witchcraft had already been laid, and this idea continued to prevail for several hundred years.

            The crime of witchcraft was considered a crime against God in Europe, but in England, whose laws, mixed with Old Testament understanding, governed the Salem Witch Trials, the crime was a social crime. This was certainly not the case in 1692 when the Salem Witch Trials began. As in England, charges of witchcraft had to follow a specific set of steps. “It began with a formal complaint presented by members of the community, a preliminary hearing to investigate the charges, the presentation of an indictment against the accused, and finally trial by a jury of freeholders of that county.”[11] This was the same system that was followed in Salem, with one key difference. Those who were being accused, could confess and accuse others in order to save themselves. This created panic and hysteria in Salem, and lots of accusations flew. The accusations of two-hundred people lead to trials and executions of twenty. In the case of Tituba, who has been saddled with a lot of the blame of the witch trials, she admitted to participating in witchcraft because she believed that her master, Mr. Parris, would allow her to go free and be satisfied if she merely admitted to participating. She likely did not know that Parris had ulterior motives in asking her about witchcraft, and for her, the matter did not simply end with a confession.[12] Much of the information that was used in the accusations of the other women was obtained from Tituba. Parris questioned her about the practices and what she had learned in Barbados. Though, later research has shown that Tituba may not have even come from Barbados, despite the widely held belief that she did. When Tituba admitted to making a witchcake, she didn’t believe that she was admitting to witchcraft, because to her, the cake had no mal intent. To Tituba, witchcraft and consorting with the devil meant an association with evil, and in her heart, she did not believe that what she did was evil or that she had done anything wrong. She was reluctant to admit what had happened, and her confession was the basis from which the other accusations would be built. The aim of the courts, and what they were charged with, was to determine who among them was using specters to torment the girls casting the accusations.[13]

            In Bryce Traister’s book,  Female Piety and the Invention of American Puritanism, there is a case made that in some ways, the trails were an attempt to be closer to God, within the Puritan faith. The Church has and had patriarchal structure, and the idea that Traister had is that in the witch trials, it gave women a voice. He writes, “The accusatory voices— mostly those of adolescent women, many of whom were not even full members of the Salem Village church— drove the juggernaut of the trials, ably assisted by the corroborative claims of the ever increasing cadre of the so called confessing witches. Their uncanny ability to peer into the otherwise hidden world of God’s invisible domain superseded their ostensibly powerless position within the patriarchal organization of the visible world. This loudly articulated power re radicalized the “feminization of piety,” and brought that power into the public spaces of religious and civil experience.”[14] This is certainly an interesting idea and in some ways a reframing of what the witch trials were about. Others have also looked at the Salem Witch Trials through a new lens with new perspective. Despite the fact that the majority of the two hundred accused of witchcraft were women, there were still four men hanged and one man pressed to death for the crime of witchcraft. The other fourteen executions were women who were hanged, and there were at least five other deaths of people who were imprisoned.[15]

            The man in question, who was pressed to death, was Giles Corey. Corey was the husband of one of the women accused of witchcraft, Martha. He decided to testify against his wife in court, though the reason for this choice remains unknown. After giving testimony, he tried, in earnest, to recant. Upon doing so, many became suspicious of his involvement with witchcraft, because perjury was one of the crimes closely associated with witchcraft. To the court, that meant that he was guilty. Giles and Martha had been named as practitioners of witchcraft by two different sources. They were both imprisoned and because he refused to stand trial, he was sentenced to peine forte et dure. Strangely, this practice had been dubbed illegal by the government in Massachusetts, and it also was in violation of Puritan ideals that forbid this kind of punishment. Pressing, was a torture method that involved slowly crushing a person to death until they plead guilty or died.[16] Pressing was inhumane and there is a quote from a Frenchman who lived in London and witnessed the punishment of pressing. Guy Miege said, for such as stand Mute at their Trial, and refuse to answer Guilty, or Not Guilty, Pressing to Death is the proper Punishment. In such a Case the Prisoner is laid in a low dark Room in the Prison, all naked but his Privy Members, his Back upon the bare Ground his Arms and Legs stretched with Cords, and fasten'd to the several Quarters of the Room. This done, he has a great Weight of Iron and Stone laid upon him. His Diet, till he dies, is of three Morsels of Barley bread without Drink the next Day; and if he lives beyond it, he has nothing daily, but as much foul Water as he can drink three several Time, and that without any Bread: Which grievous Death some resolute Offenders have chosen, to save their Estates to their Children. But, in case of High Treason, the Criminal's Estate is forfeited to the Sovereign, as in all capital Crimes, notwithstanding his being pressed to Death.”[17] The observation of pressing and the inhumane practice itself are horrifying and Giles Corey was the only man ever pressed to death in Colonial America.

            In Salem Possessed, the authors ask the reader to focus on the witch trials, while trying to forget everything that we know about the trials from popular culture.[18] The argument being made is that all of the information that we have about the trials lead up to a foregone conclusion that they could not have resulted in any other outcome. The authors ask the reader to consider why the women who were doing the accusing weren’t accused and why were these women, bringing false accusations, being treated as innocent victims? That said, the authors, Boyer and Nissenbaum also freely admit to not consulting and revisiting every manuscript and document from the trials, which is something Margo Burns and Bernard Rosenthal also point out when saying that they do not fault them for not going through every document.[19] So why is it that the accusations came several weeks after the young women were stricken with “the affliction?” Truthfully, historians aren’t entirely sure. The idea that it gave women some form of power and recognition in the church is certainly a possibility, though many who have studied what caused the Salem Witch Trials believe that it had to do with a combination of unequal social standing and possibly some sort of illness that caused hysteria, potentially related to flooding and crops in the year before.

            The best that we can do, as historians, is to examine the evidence from the trials. For the most part, this evidence includes letters, transcripts from interviews, court transcripts and written versions of oral histories from those who witnessed the events of the Salem Witch Trials. As Burns and Rosenthal point out, “The legal records of 1692 and 1693 witchcraft prosecutions are central to the historical understanding of those events.”[20] In 2020 we have access to most of the court transcripts online, which makes it easier to track down firsthand accounts of the trails and other documents. One of these documents is a letter written by a witness to the trial. This letter was written by Thomas Brattle. Brattle was an American merchant who was mostly known for being involved in the trials and for his disputes with Cotton Mather over the way that churches should conduct themselves. While many of those involved in the trials were of Puritan backgrounds, Brattle allied himself more with the Church of England. In his letter, he accused the girls who were claiming to be afflicted of being liars. He says that, “Can they see Spectres when their eyes are shutt? I am sure they lye, at least speak falsely, if they say so; for the thing, in nature, is an utter impossibility. It is true, they may strongly fancye, or have things represented to their imagination, when their eyes are shutt; and I think this is all which ought to be allowed to these blind, nonsensical girls; and if our officers and Courts have apprehended, imprisoned, condemned, and executed our guiltlesse neighbours, certainly our errour is great, and we shall rue it in the conclusion.”[21] One thing that this goes to show is that despite the notion that we have today of everyone being involved in the hysteria, there were men and women who were observing the trials who believed, very strongly, that the imprisonment and execution of these women and men was an error and in itself a crime.

            There were others who believed that the girls making the accusations were lying, but largely the observations of the trials were of the afflictions that the accusers were exhibiting. One passage says, “It was observed several times, that if she did but bite her Under lip in time of examination the persons afflicted were bitten on their armes and wrists and produced the Marks before the Magi|jestrates, Ministers and others. And being watched for that, if she did but Pinch her Fingers, or Graspe one Hand, hard in another, they were Pinched and produced the Marks before the Magistrates, and Spectators. After that, it was observed, that if she did but lean her Breast, against the Seat, in the Meeting House, (being the Barr at which she stood,) they were afflicted.”[22] There is a collection of narratives from people who witnessed what took place in the courtroom and at the trials. In each of the accounts, the “afflicted” seemed to be itchy, uncontrollable, bitten or as if they were being stabbed by pins and needles. This was largely deemed an act, and several accounts in the collection of narratives even say that witnesses began to watch for the accusers to be faking their afflictions, because that itself would have been seen as an act of perjury.

            In reading the many different accounts of what took place during the proceedings in the court, it is clear that the adults were leading the witnesses. Some of the first to come forward and point fingers of accusation were children. Ann Putnam Jr., Betty Parris and Abigail Williams were of the ages twelve, ten and eleven at the time of the trials and when they made their accusations. Ann was the member of a prominent family, and it is hard to say whether or not she was making these accusations up on her own, which seems unlikely, or if she was following what her parents, who also claimed to be afflicted, told her to do. Ann was persistent in her accusations and she went on to accuse multiple people of the crime of witchcraft.[23] It is very easy to develop a distain for the young girls that made these accusations, but I, like many others, think that it speaks more to their impressionability as young girls, rather than a desire to hurt others with false accusations. 

            Before concluding, it seems important to acknowledge two important historical sources on the Salem Witch Trials. Salem Witchcraft, was originally published in 1867. It was written by Charles W. Upham, and is regarded as one of the most painstakingly researched and comprehensive books about the Salem Witch Trials. In his book, Upham was able to show the political and economic problems being faced by the people of Salem, and he indicates that these factors set the stage for the trials because there were already seeds of discord planted in the community.[24] The other source to acknowledge is the work that was completed by the WPA, the Works Progress Administration. During the 1930s, the members of the WPA were tasked with transcribing firsthand accounts of the Salem Witch Trials, and preserving the documents in archives.[25] Had they not been tasked with the job transcribing and preservation of these documents, testimonies and sources, it is hard to say whether or not the documents and accounts of the Salem Witch Trials would have survived into the later twentieth century, as anything other than oral histories and the stuff of folklore.

            In conclusion, the Salem Witch Trials are a black mark on Colonial America. Witch trials around the world were similarly heinous, but it is hard to think about colonial American’s making these decisions. Despite this, the trials did happen, and it resulted in the death of twenty people. It is clear, in studying the Salem Witch Trials, that gender, religion and economic circumstance all played important roles in the proceedings. Fear of the unknown has always captured the interest of the people, and their imaginations. In the spring of 1692, this was no different than today. Over three-hundred years later, it is hard to imagine what it would have been like to experience the trials firsthand, as we have not seen anything quite like this in modern America. Remembering and understanding the Salem Witch Trials is important to making sure that nothing like that ever happens again.

Bibliography

 

Alvarez, Kate. Ann Putnam Jr. 2002. http://salem.lib.virginia.edu/people/#putnam_ann_jr (accessed February 26, 2020 ).

Brattle, Thomas. "Thomas Brattle’s Letter to an Unnamed Clergyman." Narratives of the Witchcraft Cases 1648-1706. Boston, October 8, 1692.

Breslaw, Elaine G. "The Reluctant Witch: Fueling Puritan Fantasies." In Tituba, Reluctant Witch of Salem: Devilish Indians and Puritan Fantasies, by Elaine G. Breslaw, 107-132. New York: NYU Press, 1996.

Breslaw, Elaine G. "Tituba's Confession: The Multicultural Dimensions of the 1692 Salem Witch-Hunt." Ethnohistory, 1997: 535-556.

Carroll, Meghan. "Sarah Osborne." Salem Witchcraft Papers. 2001. http://salem.lib.virginia.edu/people/#osbourne_sarah (accessed February 27, 2020).

Cheever, Ezekiel. "Examination of Sarah Good." Strong Net. March 1, 1692. https://www.strongnet.org/cms/lib/OH01000884/Centricity/Domain/205/Examination_Sarah_Good_Transcript.pdf (accessed February 27, 2020 ).

D., Elbert. The Death of Giles Corey. 2012. https://people.ucls.uchicago.edu/~snekros/Salem%20Journal/People/ElbertD.html (accessed February 28, 2020).

Klaits, Joseph. "Sexual Politics and Religious Reform in the Witch Craze." In Servants of Satan: The Age of the Witch Hunts, by Joseph Klaits, 48-85. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985.

Lawson, Deodat. A Brief and True Narrative of Some Remarkable Passages Relating to Sundry Persons Afflicted by Witchcraft at Salem Village. Salem: Kessinger Legacy Reprints, 1692.

Miege, Guy. The Present State of Great Britain and Ireland . London: J. Brotherton, 1758.

Nissenbaum, Paul Boyer and Stephen. "1692: Some New Perspectives." In Salem Possessed, by Paul Boyer and Stephen Nissenbaum, 22-36. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1974.

Ray, Benjamin. "Salem Witch Trials." OAH Magazine of History, 2003: 32-36.

Rosenthal, Margo Burns and Bernard. "Examination of the Records of the Salem Witch Trials." The William and Mary Quarterly, 2008: 401-422.

Snyder, Heather. Giles Corey. 2001. http://salem.lib.virginia.edu/people/gilescorey.html (accessed February 22, 2020).

Sprenger, Heinrich Kramer and Jacob. Malleus Maleficarum. Speyer, 1486.

Traister, Bryce. "Salem Witchcraft’s Defense of Faith." In Female Piety and the Invention of American Puritanism, by Bryce Traister, 166-202. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2016.

Upham, Charles Wentworth. Salem Witchcraft . Good Press, 1867.

Westerkamp, Marilyn J. Women and Religion in Early America: The Puritan and Evangelical Traditions, 1600-1820. London: Routledge, 1999.

 

---

[1] Breslaw, Elaine G. "Tituba's Confession: The Multicultural Dimensions of the 1692 Salem Witch-Hunt." Ethnohistory, 1997: 535-556.

[2] Ibid, 536.

[3] Cheever, Ezekiel. "Examination of Sarah Good." Strong Net. March 1, 1692. https://www.strongnet.org/cms/lib/OH01000884/Centricity/Domain/205/Examination_Sarah_Good_Transcript.pdf (accessed February 27, 2020 ).

[4] Carroll, Meghan. "Sarah Osborne." Salem Witchcraft Papers. 2001. http://salem.lib.virginia.edu/people/#osbourne_sarah (accessed February 27, 2020).

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Westerkamp, Marilyn J. Women and Religion in Early America: The Puritan and Evangelical Traditions, 1600-1820. London: Routledge, 1999.

[8] Klaits, Joseph. "Sexual Politics and Religious Reform in the Witch Craze." In Servants of Satan: The Age of the Witch Hunts, by Joseph Klaits, 48-85. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Sprenger, Heinrich Kramer and Jacob. Malleus Maleficarum. Speyer, 1486.

[11] Breslaw, Elaine G. "The Reluctant Witch: Fueling Puritan Fantasies." In Tituba, Reluctant Witch of Salem: Devilish Indians and Puritan Fantasies, by Elaine G. Breslaw, 107-132. New York: NYU Press, 1996.

[12] Ibid, 109.

[13] Ray, Benjamin. "Salem Witch Trials." OAH Magazine of History, 2003: 32-36.

[14] Traister, Bryce. "Salem Witchcraft’s Defense of Faith." In Female Piety and the Invention of American Puritanism, by Bryce Traister, 166-202. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2016.

[15] Snyder, Heather. Giles Corey. 2001. http://salem.lib.virginia.edu/people/gilescorey.html (accessed February 22, 2020).

[16] D., Elbert. The Death of Giles Corey. 2012. https://people.ucls.uchicago.edu/~snekros/Salem%20Journal/People/ElbertD.html (accessed February 28, 2020).

[17] Miege, Guy. The Present State of Great Britain and Ireland . London: J. Brotherton, 1758.

[18] Nissenbaum, Paul Boyer and Stephen. "1692: Some New Perspectives." In Salem Possessed, by Paul Boyer and Stephen Nissenbaum, 22-36. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1974.

[19] Rosenthal, Margo Burns and Bernard. "Examination of the Records of the Salem Witch Trials." The William and Mary Quarterly, 2008: 401-422.

[20] Ibid, 401.

[21] Brattle, Thomas. "Thomas Brattle’s Letter to an Unnamed Clergyman." Narratives of the Witchcraft Cases 1648-1706. Boston, October 8, 1692.

[22] Lawson, Deodat. A Brief and True Narrative of Some Remarkable Passages Relating to Sundry Persons Afflicted by Witchcraft at Salem Village. Salem: Kessinger Legacy Reprints, 1692.

[23] Alvarez, Kate. Ann Putnam Jr. 2002. http://salem.lib.virginia.edu/people/#putnam_ann_jr (accessed February 26, 2020 ).

[24] Upham, Charles Wentworth. Salem Witchcraft . Good Press, 1867.

[25] Rosenthal, Margo Burns and Bernard. "Examination of the Records of the Salem Witch Trials." The William and Mary Quarterly, 2008: 401-422.