Celebrate genealogy and ancestral connections to Salem, Massachusetts, during a weekend of lectures, tours, and research
November 8, 2019, Salem, MA. Residents and visitors are invited to celebrate their ancestral and immigrant connections to Salem, Massachusetts, during the first annual Salem Ancestry Days celebration, which will be held May 1-4, 2020. The weekend will feature lectures, tours, research opportunities, and information on the people who connect us all to Salem.
Whether one is considering the Salem Witch Trials, author Nathaniel Hawthorne, abolitionist Charlotte Forten, navigator Nathaniel Bowditch, architect Samuel McIntire, or one of the families that left their mark on Salem’s maritime history, there are remarkable connections to be made to the people who created the Salem story. Event organizers also hope connections are made to the native persons, the Naumkeag, who lived on the land prior to the arrival of Roger Conant and the Dorchester Company, and the enslaved or indentured persons who were not in Salem by choice.
In the early 20th century the Great Salem Fire changed the landscape of downtown Salem and gave rise to new neighborhoods of French Canadian, Polish, and eastern European immigrants. Today Salem is home to communities of Latinx and Hispanic heritage that can and should be celebrated through Salem Ancestry Days.
For centuries, Salem has been a destination for emigrants, immigrants, and travelers. The community is a landing point and a starting point for families who are starting their American journey or changing their family’s trajectory. Through collaboration with the Phillips Library at the Peabody Essex Museum, Essex National Heritage Commission, American Ancestors and New England Historic Genealogical Society, and the City of Salem, the Ancestry Days celebration intends to be a gathering point for descendants of Salem’s families as well as a research opportunity for people who want to learn more about their family history.
About Salem: Salem, Massachusetts, is a destination recognized around the world for its rich history, which includes the tragic Salem Witch Trials of 1692, the glorious maritime era that left its indelible mark on Salem through architecture, museums, and artifacts, and for its month-long celebration of Halloween.
About Destination Salem: As the destination marketing organization for the City of Salem, Destination Salem cooperatively markets Salem as one of Massachusetts’ best destinations for families, couples, domestic, and international travelers who are seeking an authentic New England experience, cultural enrichment, American history, fine dining, unique shopping, and fun. For more information, visit Salem.org.
Once part of acreage owned by Giles and Martha Corey of Salem Farms (now Peabody), Crystal Lake filled with sediment over time.
Neglected and overgrown, the property was revitalized through a multi-year project completed in November 2018. The city of Peabody dredged the lake, installed a large fountain, and added two docks, a gazebo, and picnic tables.
The finishing touches were returning the Giles and Martha Corey memorial stones to the park, along with new signage telling their stories.
Though the location of their burials is unknown, the citizens of Peabody placed two granite markers at the site on September 22, 1992, to commemorate the Coreys and their deaths during the Salem witch trials 300 years before. Thanks to the Peabody Historical Society, the new sign between the two memorials gives details about the couple and the trials they faced.
Outspoken to a Fault
Giles Corey did not agree to a trial by jury. For his defiance of the court, he “died under the torture of stone weights at age 81” on September 19, 1692.
During her trial, Martha declared, “I am an innocent person. never had to do with witchcraft since I was born. I am a Gospel woman.” The Court of Oyer and Terminer, however, found her guilty of witchcraft.
Martha Corey, aged 60, was hanged at Proctor’s Ledge on September 22, 1692. She died with seven other “firebrands of hell.” Their deaths marked the end of the executions.
Crystal Lake is off Lowell Street, near the Big Y Market (637 Lowell St.), in West Peabody, Massachusetts. A bikeway connects Crystal Lake to Peabody’s green spaces. Recreation includes fishing, paddleboats, and canoeing.
In 1892, Salem—which basked in its architectural splendor, its rich maritime history, and its scientific and educational pursuits—wanted to bury its dark past. But as the 200th anniversary of the Salem Witch Trials approached, publishers and businessmen stirred up the pot by producing newspaper articles, travelogues, books, pamphlets, photographic prints, and even witch spoons. Taking advantage of the renewed interest, many of these printed items relied on town histories, Charles W. Upham’s Salem Witchcraft (Vol. 1 and Vol. 2), Nathaniel Hawthorne’s fiction, and unsubstantiated traditions.
One such book, Witchcraft Illustrated, Witchcraft to be Understood: Facts, Theories and Incidents with a Glance at Old and New Salem and its Historical Resources, includes images of Salem and Danvers interspersed between stories of witchcraft near and far. One curious photograph, identified as “The House Where Witchcraft Started, Now Danvers, Mass.,” also appears on Wikipedia and Find a Grave, but not in the many witch-hunt history books that have been published. The photo caption clearly is referring to the parsonage, home of Reverend Samuel Parris (1653-1720) when his daughter Betty Parris and niece Abigail Williams showed symptoms of being “under an Evil hand” in 1692. This same photo is featured on postcards captioned “the Old Parris House,” of which a colorized version, available at CardCow.com, is postmarked 1914.
from Henrietta D. Kimball’s Witchcraft Illustrated
What a find! But, wait. If this is “the parsonage in Salem Village as photographed in the late 19th century” (as labeled on Wikipedia), why didn’t historians include the image in their books?
The Parsonage
The first minister of Salem Village, Rev. James Bayley (1650-1707), kept his own house, though the village promised a few times to build a parsonage. It wasn’t completed until after the second minister, George Burroughs (1650-1692), arrived, for in February 1681, the town voted: “We will Build a House for the Ministry and provid convenient Land For that end: the Dementions of the House are as followeth: 42 foot long twenty foot Broad: thirteen foot stude: fouer chimleis no gable ends” (“Salem Village Book of Records 1672-1697,” SWP No. d1e711).
According to the plaque at the parsonage site, “The house faced south and included a half-cellar on its west side which was composed of dry-laid fieldstones, and which was entered by means of a stairway from the porch (front entry). The east side of the house did not include a cellar, the house sills resting on ground stones. The first floor consisted of two rooms separated by the front entry and a massive brick chimney structure. Two bed chambers were located on the second floor. Each of the house’s four rooms included a fireplace. By 1692 a saltbox lean-to was attached to the rear of the house, and used as a kitchen.”
Addition and Demolition
Rev. Peter Clark (1696-1768), who served as the Salem Village minister from 1717 to 1768, had the town build an addition to the original building. In January 1734, “it was then voted that ‘we will demollesh all ye Lenture behind ye parsonage house, and will build a new house of three and twenty feet long and eighteen feet broad and fifteen feet stud with a seller [cellar] under it and set it behind the west room of our parsonage house.’ This new addition was two and one-half stories high, included a side door which faced the west and a roof which ran perpendicular to the 1681 parsonage. The cellar foundation was composed of cut and faced stones and included a jog for a chimney” (from 1734 Addition marker).
Over the ensuing decades, the parsonage continued its decline, but the townspeople could not afford to build a new parsonage nor repair the old one. In 1784, Rev. Benjamin Wadsworth (1750-1826) was given “an acre of land, bordering upon the road, for a house-lot. And upon this lot, the bounds of which may now be traced, he built for himself, about twenty rods west of the old site, the spacious house which is still standing” (Proceedings at the Celebration of the Two Hundredth Anniversary of the First Parish at Salem Village: Now Danvers, October 8, 1872, p. 91). Afterwards, the original 1681 parsonage was demolished and the 1734 addition was moved to Sylvan Street.
By 1872, Charles Baker Rice describes the 1734 addition on Sylvan Street “in a condition next to ruinous, and occupied by hay, squashes, old barrels, and pigs” (p. 91). Rice continues, “It will thus be seen that this building, contrary to the report that has had some currency, was not in reality any part of the original parsonage, and was never occupied by Mr. Parris or any of his witches. It was not in existence until nearly forty years after he had left the place; and it has no other flavor of witchcraft upon it than what it may have absorbed in standing for half a century in contact with the older and once infected building” (p. 92).
Righting a Wrong
In his footnote, Rice refers to mistakes in J.W. Hanson’s History of the Town of Danvers, from its Early Settlement to 1848 (a sketch on p. 276) and John W. Proctor’s Centennial Celebration at Danvers, Mass., June 16, 1852 (on p. 13). Rice says: “Mr. Hanson has given, in his history, a view of the building now standing as of ‘a portion of the old Parris house.’ John W. Proctor also was misled in the same manner, though he speaks less confidently, and only as from report. But the measurements are conclusive. The present building corresponds to the dimensions of the addition of 1734, while it bears no likeness to the original house of 1681, or to any practicable section of it. The difference in height to the plates, for one item, is three feet. Due inquiry would have shown, too, that the more trustworthy tradition does not identify the buildings; while the fact of the removal of the present structure from the old site will readily account for the mistaken notion of some concerning it” (p. 92).
Richard B. Trask, town archivist at the Danvers Archival Center, also says the 1734 addition moved to Sylvan Street “acquired an incorrect but much touted witchcraft connection during the 19th century” (Postcard History Series: Danvers, p. 20). That mistaken belief persisted long after the 1734 addition was torn down in the 1870s, and now has cropped up again, thanks to digital reproductions of the photo, postcards, and old books.
Recovering the Past
1681 Salem Village parsonage site
In time, the parsonage cellar hole filled in and by 1898 only “a rough stone on the slight elevation in the field off the street…helps to identify the place where the Parris house stood,” Edwin Monroe Bacon writes in Historic Pilgrimages in New England. After all, he explains, “Upham says there was a ‘general desire to obliterate the memory of the calamity’” (p. 178).
The place where the witchcraft outbreak started was almost lost to history until 1970, when Trask, then a history student, asked the property owners about excavating the land. Today, visitors can see the stone outline of the original parsonage, with a few interpretive markers adding context. Artifacts from the archaeological dig are located at the Danvers Archival Center.
Thanks to Pie Ball and others who replied on my Facebook page, for helping me resolve this photo identification—once again.
On Perley’s map, Bridget Bishop’s lot highlighted in yellow
As mentioned in a previous blog post, Which Bishop? The one who got away, Sarah (Wildes) Bishop and her husband Edward ran an unlicensed tavern in Salem Village near the Beverly line. Bridget Bishop, wife of Edward the sawyer, lived in Salem Town. Unfortunately, during the Salem witch trials, some afflicted accusers mistook one Goody Bishop for the other, heaping more accusations on one than she deserved. In 1981, David L. Greene solved the problem of mistaken identities in The American Genealogist (157:130), though people today continue to mix up the Bishop women’s lives.
Bridget Bishop lived in Salem Town
Sidney Perley’s “Salem in 1700” series mentioned past and post-1700 owners of property, including Thomas Oliver who married the widow Bridget (Playfer) Wasselbe in 1666:
“Benjamin Ropes House. Thomas Oliver owned this lot and the small house upon it as early as 1661. He died possessed of the estate in 1679. It was then appraised at 45 pounds. His widow Bridget Oliver continued to live there until 1681, and married Edward Bishop, being hanged as a witch in 1692. In the distribution of Mr. Oliver’s estate, in 1693, this house and lot were assigned to his grandson Job Hilliard of Boston, cordwainer, it being valued at that time at 38 pounds. Mr. Hilliard, for 65 pounds, conveyed the house and lot to Benjamin Ropes of Salem, cordwainer, January. 22, 1694/5” (Essex Antiquarian, 8:35-36).
After the death of her second husband, Bridget was granted administration on the Oliver estate on 24 June 1679. Instead of receiving the typical widow’s third, Bridget was ordered to pay 20 shillings each to two stepsons and her daughter. In return, the court gave “the estate to be for the use of the widow … and to have liberty to sell the 10-acre lot by advice of the selectmen of Salem, towards paying the debts and her present supply, and as need be, any other part of the estate” (Early Probate Records, 1635-1681, 3:319).
“Good fences make good neighbors”
Burdened with her dead husband’s debts, Bridget was in dire straits. Fortunately, in January 1679/1680, the selectmen allowed her to sell 10 acres of Salem land in the north field to John Blevin for 45 pounds (Essex deeds book, 5:274-276). In June 1681, she sold a narrow strip of land to schoolmaster Daniel Epes. It’s described as about two poles wide bounded by the street on the west (now Washington Street), with the length being the border between Epes’ land on the north and Oliver land on the south. In return, Bridget received 35 shillings in hand, plus a newly built fence 8 poles long and 5 feet high dividing the two properties—installed and paid for by Epes. This parcel, “lying on the back side of her house,” eventually became Church Street (Essex deeds book, 6:352-355).
Sometime after this date, Bridget married Edward Bishop. Contrary to Perley’s comment above, Bridget did not move out in 1681. The 1679 probate gave her rights to the Oliver estate until her death, not until remarriage. Edward, who had no property to call his own, moved into the Oliver house. According to Marilynne K. Roach, about 1685 Bridget and Edward Bishop built a second house on the Oliver lot (American Ancestors magazine, 14.4:45-47). As a sawyer (literally, someone who saws wood), it’s likely Edward used lumber from the old Oliver house to build the new structure.
Following the evidence
After the Bishop home was completed, John Bly Sr. was hired to tear down the cellar wall of the old Oliver house. In testimony given at Bridget’s witch trial in 1692, Bly claimed during demolition 7 years before, he found several poppets made with rags and hog bristles with headless pins stuck in them in the cellar wall.
John Louder also testified that 7 or 8 years prior, when he was living with John Gedney Sr. (d. 1688), owner of the Ship Tavern, the Gedneys were having troubles with Bridget Bishop’s fowl escaping her property. One night, Louder experienced sleep paralysis, and in his hallucinations, he thought it was Bridget sitting on his stomach and choking him. The next day, he and Mistress Susannah Gedney were in their orchard when Susannah confronted Bridget—in the next adjoining orchard—about her supposed nighttime travels.
Another time, Louder opened Gedney’s back door and walked toward the house end when he spied Bridget in her orchard going toward her house. In fear, he froze in place, unable to move, and saw the devilish shapeshifting creature he’d seen before fly over the apple trees. He claimed he was struck dumb for three days afterward. At her trial, Bridget denied knowing Louder but admitted having some differences with the Gedneys before, whose orchard adjoined hers (Records of the Salem Witch-Hunt, pp. 368-371).
Placing Bridget on the map
From probate records and trial testimony, we know Bridget’s second home was situated near the town house, with her garden “by the northwest corner of her house” and orchard bordering the former John Gedney Sr. property (shown on Perley’s 1700 map as estate of Deliverance Parkman). Today, a bank building at 71 Washington Street is the approximate site of the Bishop house while the old Lyceum Hall at 43 Church Street covers land previously occupied by Bridget’s orchard.
Bridget’s trial for witchcraft in 1692 was held in the town house only steps from her home. One block in the opposite direction and a few blocks north stood the old wooden 1684 jail (now corner of Federal and St. Peter streets), from which Bridget was carted to Proctor’s Ledge (7 Pope Street) and unjustly hanged for witchcraft on 10 June 1692.
A month after Bridget’s death, Job Hilliard was appointed administrator of his grandfather Thomas Oliver’s estate. In August 1693, the Oliver lot with orchard and garden was appraised for 20 pounds, and the house on it at 18 pounds (Essex Probate #20009).
FOR SALE: “A dwelling house, orchards, and garden containing about three-quarters of an acre of land butted and bounded as followeth: on the land of Mr. Daniel Epes northerly, on the land of John Preist easterly, on the land of Coles. Gedney & John Ropes southerly, & on the lane or Towne House street westerly, to have and to hold the said dwelling house & grounds together with all the trees, fences, ways, easements, waters, water courses, & all the privileges and appurtenances hereunto.”
After selling the property to Benjamin Ropes, Hilliard paid 9 pounds to widower Edward Bishop for building the house on the Oliver lot (Essex deeds, 10:112). According to Perley, Bridget’s house was torn down by 1768.
Special thanks to Emerson W. Baker, author of A Storm of Witchcraft. During lunch at History Camp Boston 2018, he drew a map for me showing Bridget’s orchard adjoining Gedney’s property, then wiped his mouth with the napkin before I could grab it.
Dorcas Hoar made her mark on history and in the court records. Known for telling fortunes and being the center of a crime family, you’d think she would be easy to convict of being a witch. And she was. Yet an 11th hour confession and the pleadings of several ministers asking for a 30-day reprieve prevented her imminent execution. The timing was perfect, for her at least. The next day, September 22, 1692, eight victims of the Salem witch trials were hanged at Proctor’s Ledge on the edge of town. They were the last to suffer that fate.
#WDYTYA
On Monday’s hit TV show Who Do You Think You Are, actress Jean Smart learns that she is a descendant of the notorious Dorcas Hoar. She’s ably guided through the story by Professor Emerson W. Baker of Salem State University, author of A Storm of Witchcraft, and Margo Burns, project manager, Records of the Salem Witch-Hunt.
Dig deeper
If you’re curious about Dorcas Hoar’s story, check out my blog post, Dorcas Hoar Really Was a Witch. You also may want to take a roadtrip to Beverly. You can peek into the bedroom where 19-year-old David Balch, on his deathbed, claimed Dorcas Hoar was one of the witches tormenting him. Rev. John Hale, who played a major part in her story, wrote his book, A Modest Inquiry into the Nature of Witchcraft, at his farm there. Both homes, owned by the Beverly Historical Society, are open to visitors.
Although Dorcas’ house no longer exists, it was located at what is now the Central Cemetery at 60 Hale Street. Rev. Hale and his wife Sarah, who was accused but not formally charged as a witch, are buried at the Ancient Burial Ground at 15 Abbott Street.
WitchesMassBay: In 2015, you spent the month of October in Salem. If you could distill one moment in time that captures your month-long adventure in a nutshell, what would it be?
J.W. Ocker: That’s a real soul-searcher, that one. I’m tempted to go small, like sitting in the living room of the mid-19th century house I was renting and watching Halloween masks file by outside my window. Or big, like standing out on the common on Halloween watching a massive witch’s circle being cast while hordes of trick-or-treaters flowed by. But really, I think it was my late-night weeknight walks in the city. Most of the crowds were gone. You could hear the leaves scratch across the cobblestones. See tour groups from afar, each member holding a candle as they walked. I would duck into bars decorated for Halloween and have an autumn-themed cocktail or two and then head back out into the night, walking under the dark silhouette of the House of the Seven Gables, past the sparkly blackness of Salem Harbor, the spookiness of the Old Burial Ground, through the wisps of fake fog off the Haunted Neighborhood, my way lighted by the Halloween decorations glowing in every window. At that time of night in October, you can really feel the weight of the city’s history and the strangeness of its present.
WitchesMassBay: What are your favorite haunts in Massachusetts Bay?
J.W. Ocker: Let’s see, sticking as close to the coast as I can and leaving out Salem and Boston, it would be: The Edward Gorey House in Yarmouth Port, Hammond Castle in Gloucester, and Dogtown in Cape Ann. The house of a macabre artist, the castle of a wealthy eccentric, and a preachy ghost town. It’s a cool place, this Massachusetts Bay.
WitchesMassBay: In your book, you explain the dichotomy between the lovers and the haters of anything witchy in Salem. How can Salemites reconcile the past and embrace the future?
J.W. Ocker: Honestly, I’m not sure if they can. And I’m also not sure that I want them to. That friction between past and present, between art and kitsch, between the different types of tourism—all of it keeps this city interesting and energetic and oddball. Gives it a soul. Keeps it from being any other city. And everybody has something to prove there, whether it’s the witches or the historians or the art museum or the residents or the tour guides or the churches. That leads to some bad moments, sure, but in the end leads to a thriving, ever-changing, continually fascinating city character. It’s like people. Show me somebody who has figured him- or herself out and I will show you a boring person.
Thomas O’Brien Vallor has been sharing his knowledge of the 1692 witch hunts with countless tourists for the last 15 years. Unlike ghost tours and campy attractions, Tom tells the Salem story in a way that is respectful, inclusive, and educational. And his perspective is just a little different from your average tour guide.
WitchesMassBay: With so many tours in Salem, what makes your tour different?
Thomas O’Brien Vallor: My tour is unique in that I talk about witch-hunt history from a practicing witch‘s perspective and witchcraft from a historian’s perspective. Magic is a cultural phenomenon that exists in all societies and its influence on the Salem witch trials is very interesting.
WitchesMassBay: How would you define a modern-day witch compared to what people were accused of in 1692?
Thomas O’Brien Vallor: To put it simply, a witch today is someone who practices magic; the people of 1692 were not practicing magic. Of course, there‘s a bit more nuance to it than that.
WitchesMassBay: Tourists flock to Salem looking for telltale signs of the witch hunts, but very little physically remains that has ties to 1692. Do you have any suggestions of where to go or what to do next (after taking your tour, of course!)?
Thomas O’Brien Vallor: Because I feel such a strong connection to history, I think the important sites in Salem still hold the most power even if today they’ve been replaced by office buildings or intersections. I think that if I were a tourist visiting Salem, I really would just like to walk around the city and soak everything in.
WitchesMassBay: What’s something that tourists repeatedly ask you?
Thomas O’Brien Vallor: One common question we get is: “Where were the witches burned?” They weren’t witches and they weren’t burned. It’s frustrating that people still believe that.
WitchesMassBay: Even though people on your tour sign up for a witch walk, do some tourists expect something else?
Thomas O’Brien Vallor: What‘s annoying is when people think witchcraft is all hocus pocus and magic tricks and then expect me to perform for them. If I‘m teaching someone about witchcraft, sometimes all they want to do is wind me up like a toy and watch me do tricks.
WitchesMassBay: What’s your experience been like as a tour guide?
Thomas O’Brien Vallor: I can‘t even begin to get into all the ways that being a part of the magic of Salem has changed my life for the better. Just being able to help educate people has given me a fulfilling and happy life at such a young age, especially when I see so many people around me searching for meaning in their lives.
Updated 29 May 2019 after Tom started his own Satanic Salem Walking Tours, which regularly receive great reviews at TripAdvisor.