Andover Bewitched: Andover's Accused (Part II)
Andover Bewitched: Andover's Accused (Part II)
Suspicion of witchcraft spread across families, bringing distant relatives into the frightening hysteria.
This week, I’ll continue our list of Andover accused with the hope of adding to and expanding on the list of all those accused of witchcraft in Andover and their stories. Check out Part I, featuring 18 members of the Barker, Carrier, Dane, and Johnson families. Plus, if you’re just joining us now, the first entry of “Andover Bewitched” provides an introduction to the trials!
These accused families were frequently related to each other; even as distinctive family units were accused, their relatives could easily be drawn into suspicion too. This growing list also shows us the frightening ways that the courts brought children and relatives into trials to add pressure to people targeted for supposedly practicing witchcraft.
Though the hysteria of the witch trials began in Salem, it spread to Andover. After the first accusations in Andover in May came down against Martha Carrier, it grew worse and worse. By August and September, whole families were brought under suspicion and accusations flew left and right. No one was safe!
Mary Bridges and her daughters were accused...
The Bridges and the Tylers (see next section) were connected by marriage. After the Mary Tyler Bridges was accused in July, her two daughters were next brought to trial, and then her extended family too.
Mary Tyler Post Bridges Sr. was accused of afflicting Timothy Swan on July 28, 1692. Andover Constable John Ballard arrested her and brought her to Salem.1 Mary confessed to witchcraft, though she almost immediately regretted it, claiming coercion (which was likely). Many people were pressured into confessing to practicing witchcraft out of fear -- they were far more likely to survive if they confessed than if they continued to claim innocence.
Unfortunately for Mary, her trial encouraged accusations against her daughters -- Mary Bridges Jr., Hannah Post, and Sarah Post, and her two stepdaughters, Sarah Bridges and Mary Post in the month following her arrest.
In January 1693, after much of the hysteria had faded, Mary went to trial, was declared innocent, and was finally released from prison.
Mary Bridges Sr.’s 13-year old daughter, Mary Bridges Jr., was arrested in August 1692, about a month after her mother. She was accused of afflicting Rose Foster and Martha Sprague, and of covenanting with the devil. Mary was imprisoned in Salem for about ten months before her release in May 1693, after a trial declared her innocent.2
Sarah Bridges, Mary’s stepdaughter, was also accused of witchcraft with young Mary. At only 17 years old, she was brought to trial where the accusers claimed she had been led astray by young Richard Carrier (another Andover accused).
At first, Sarah denied the claims. But she could not hold out against the grueling investigation of the trials, and she eventually confessed, indicting her sister, Hannah Post, along with herself.3 Sarah Bridges went to trial in January 1693, where she was declared not guilty and released.
Hannah Post, Mary Bridges’ daughter from her first marriage, was accused of witchcraft in August during her step sister Sarah Bridges’ testimony. She was brought to trial in Salem and eventually confessed. Hannah had been involved in Mary Parker’s trial, when she accused Mary Parker of witchcraft -- only to have the accusation turned back on her later. Hannah was released from prison in January 1693 with her sisters.
Mary Post, not to be confused with Mary Bridges Jr. or Mary Bridges Sr., was also swept into the fray. Mary, age 28, was Hannah Post’s sister. When Mary Sr. was accused, Mary Post was cast into suspicion. Timothy Swan, Ann Putnam, and Mary Walcott accused Mary Post of practicing witchcraft. She was arrested and brought to trial, and eventually released in 1693.4
Finally, Susannah Post, age 31, was also arrested. She was Mary Bridges Sr’s stepdaughter, Mary Bridges Jr.’s sister. When Elizabeth Johnson was brought to trial, she added to the hysteria around the Post-Bridges family, accusing Susannah, Mary, and Hannah of practicing witchcraft. Though Susannah was arrested and imprisoned, she was not tried until January 1693. Then, like her sisters and her stepmother, she was released from prison.
The Tylers went under suspicion too…
But of course, the accusations didn’t stop there. Mary’s extended family, the Tylers, were also brought into the fold. They had already been caught up in accusations of witchcraft; you can read the story of Job Tyler and John Godfrey, Andover’s first accused witch, in a previous “Andover Bewitched” entry.
Moses Tyler, the family patriarch, encouraged his stepdaughter, Martha Sprague, to make accusations against Andover residents. Sprague accused many people, including Mary Bridges Sr. Martha Sprague’s infamy probably helped open the family up to accusations.
On about September 7, Andover hosted a massive “touch test,” an examination intended to find possible witches. The courts believed that when an afflicted person was touched by a witch, their affliction would go away; they could find witches by forcing accused people to lay their hands upon afflicted victims.
Members of the Tyler family were accused of witchcraft during the “touch test.” Hannah Tyler, age 14, Joannah Tyler, age 11, and Martha Tyler, age 11 were all arrested with their mother, Mary Lovett Tyler in early September 1692.5
Mary was accused of afflicting Ralph Farnum and Hannah Foster. At first, she refused to confess, but her brother, John Bridges, encouraged it. In her book on the trials, Marilynne Roach writes:
“Once in Salem, Goodwife Mary Tyler found herself flanked by John Bridges and Mr. John Emerson, a schoolmaster from Charlestown… Both were utterly convinced of her guilt and both were quick to contradict any denial.”6
Mary Tyler eventually confessed to practicing witchcraft under duress of the horrible trial conditions. The Tylers remained in prison until January 1693, when they were all declared innocent and released.
Next up: Mary Parker and her daughter, relatives of the Tylers…
Before the trials, Mary Ayer Parker was a wealthy widow with a lot of land holdings. She was also descended from John Ayer, an original settler in the Ipswich and Haverhill area, so she was well-known and well-respected before the trials began.
On September 2, Mary Parker was accused of witchcraft. Hannah Bixby, Sarah Phelps, and Martha Sprague testified against her, claiming:
“[Mary Parker practiced] certaine detestable Arts called Witchcraft and Sorceries Wickedly Maliciously and feloniously hath used Practised and Exercised at and in the Towne of Salem in the County of Essex…”7
Mary’s daughter Sarah Parker, age 22, was also brought to trial, probably around the time of Susannah Post’s confession. She was arrested and remained in prison for 17 weeks, but seems to have been found not guilty.8
Mercy Wardwell, also of Andover, joined the voices of accusation, probably hoping to save her father Samuel. It wasn’t enough to save Samuel, but it was enough to indict Mary.
On September 17, along with six others, Samuel Wardwell and Mary Parker were condemned to death for practicing witchcraft. Mary and Samuel were executed on September 22, 1692, the last execution for witchcraft carried out during the trials.
The accusations spread across Andover to the Wardwells…
I shared an article about Samuel Wardwell several weeks ago, so you can learn even more about his story here. He was accused of witchcraft in August 1692 and brought to trial. At first, he confessed to witchcraft. Later, Samuel tried to recant, claiming that he had been coerced by the courts. If he had stuck with his confession, his life might have been spared, but it was too important to him to tell the truth.9 Samuel was executed for practicing witchcraft in September 1692.
William Barker began the accusations against the Wardwells, claiming that the family’s specter had attacked him. During his trial, Samuel Wardwell’s two daughters and his wife were also accused of witchcraft.
Mercy Wardwell was 19 when she was arrested. She confessed to practicing witchcraft and joined others in accusing Mary Parker and Mary Lacey. Her stepsister, Sarah Hawkes Jr. was also arrested. Like Mercy, Sarah Hawkes confessed to witchcraft, claiming that they had “danced at Mr Tyler’s house” and joined in the Devil’s bacchanal.10
While these confessions and accusations seem like they would have made Sarah and Mercy seem more guilty, their confessions probably saved their lives. By participating with the court, they remained in prison, escaping the suspicion cast on their parents. Their participation, of course, came at a high cost: they accused others and could have been responsible for others’ deaths.
In January 1693, Mercy and Sarah were brought to trial and pronounced not guilty.
Sarah Hooper Wardwell, Samuel’s wife, was arrested on September 1. She remained in prison until January 1693. Unlike many others whose trials occurred after the end of the special courts in Salem, Sarah Wardwell was still found guilty. She was condemned to death for practicing witchcraft and covenanting with the Devil.
As the date of Sarah’s execution loomed, Governor Phips stepped in. He ordered pardons for Sarah and the seven other people condemned in January 1693, saving their lives and finally ending the hysteria of the trials for good.
This week’s list (continued from “Part I”):
Mary Tyler Post Bridges Sr., (age 48), confessed, found not guilty
Mary Bridges Jr., (age 13), confessed, found not guilty
Sarah Bridges, (age 17), confessed, found not guilty
Hannah Post, (age 26), confessed, found not guilty
Mary Post, (age 28), confessed, found not guilty
Susannah Post, (age 31), confessed, found not guilty
Mary Lovett Tyler, (age 40), confessed, found not guilty
Hannah Tyler, (age 14), confessed, found not guilty
Joannah Tyler, (age 11), confessed, found not guilty
Martha Tyler, (age 11), confessed, found not guilty
Mary Ayer Parker, (age 55), executed September 22, 1692
Sarah Parker, (age 22), apparently found not guilty
Samuel Wardwell, (age 49), executed September 22, 1692
Mercy Wardwell, (age 19), confessed, found not guilty
Sarah Hawkes Jr., (age 21), confessed, found not guilty
Sarah Hooper Hawkes Wardwell, (age 42), convicted, escaped due to Governor Phipps’ edict
Thank you for reading! Tune in two weeks from now for our next edition of Andover Bewitched for even more of this fascinating story.
I’m excited to hear from you, so if you have any questions or if there’s any aspect of the trials you’d like to learn more about, leave a comment.
Plus, click here to open a free Substack account, so you can like, share, and comment.
— Toni
Warrant for apprehension of Mary Bridges, Sr. and Officer's Return. Salem Witch Trials Documentary Archive, University of Virginia.
See also: Enders Anthony Robinson, Genealogy of Andover Witch Families, (Goose Pond Press, 2017).
Examination of Sarah Bridges, August 25, 1692. Salem Witch Trials Documentary Archive.
Examination of Susannah Post, August 25, 1692. Salem Witch Trials Documentary Archive.
See Charlotte Helen Abbott, Early Records of the Tyler Family of Andover at the Memorial Hall Library or at the Andover Center for History and Culture. Also: Bruce Tyler, The Tyler Family and The Salem Witchcraft Trials. See PDF here.
Marilynne K. Roach, The Salem Witch Trials: A Day-by-Day Chronicle of a Community Under Siege (Taylor Trade Publishing, 2002): 334.
Petition of Sarah Parker for Restitution. January 22, 1711, Salem Witch Trials Documentary Archive.
Indictment of Mary Parker for Afflicting Hannah Bixby, Salem Witch Trials Documentary Archive.
See also Sarah Loring Bailey, Historical Sketches of Andover. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin and Co., 1880).
Examination of Sarah Hawkes, September 1, 1692. Salem Witch Trials Documentary Archive.
Why were the witchcraft charges so disproportionately directed at women? Were people then more distrustful, suspicious of women than men? Was it assumed that a witch was much more likely to be a woman than a man?
I wonder if the ancestors of these people you write about have ben impacted personally by this history. It would be interesting to hear from them. I wonder how I would react if I know this about my ancestors.