Today is a rather painful day in American history – the day the first three accused women were brought before the court in the Salem Witch Trials. As we know today, some of the measures taken to “prove” a person’s guilt or innocence were absolutely ludicrous. But in case you’d like to employ some of them for yourself, here are 10 ways to identify a witch according to those running the Salem Witch Trials.
1. Make a witch cake. What’s a witch cake, you ask? Unlike the gorgeous cake in the picture, it’s definitely something you don’t want to eat. You take the urine of the people who are thought to be under the spell of the witch in question, mix it with rye meal and make a little patty. Then you feed the patty to a dog. Because some of the powers the witch used to cast a spell on the afflicted people were in their urine, when the dog eats the cake, it will hurt the witch and she’ll cry out in agony.
2. Weigh them against a stack of Bibles. If the suspected witch is heavier or lighter than the stack of Bibles, then clearly she’s guilty of evil-doing. If the scales balance out, she’s in the clear. You can imagine that a perfect balance doesn’t happen often.
3. Check for moles, birthmarks, scars, or extra nipples – they’re marks of the Devil. That’s a sure sign right there, but if you need even more proof, try pricking the Devil’s Mark with a blade. If it doesn’t bleed or hurt when it’s pricked, you’ve definitely got a witch on your hands. During the Salem Witch Trials, some unscrupulous witch-hunters actually used knives with retractable blades, so of course when they appeared to puncture the Mark, nothing happened.
4. Observe them talking to themselves. During the Witch Trials, one accused woman, Sarah Good, was partially damned based on the fact that she was sometimes seen muttering to herself, and sometimes this even happened when she was leaving people’s houses. Her accusers knew she was casting spells on people, even though Sarah claimed she was just reciting the commandments or a particular psalm. Her claims weren’t enough to save her, because she was hanged on July 19, 1692.
5. See if they can say the Lord’s Prayer. If they don’t, they’re guilty. If they do, they’re guilty too. George Burroughs, the only minister to be executed during the Trials, ran across this problem. He was standing at the gallows to be executed when he recited the Lord’s Prayer to prove his innocence – it was believed that a witch (or warlock, in this case) would be unable to utter the holy words. People were momentarily convinced that the jury had wronged him until a minister named Cotton Mather told the crowd that the Devil allowed George Burroughs to say that prayer to make it seem as if he was innocent. Ahhh, of course. With Satan himself apparently working right through him, Burroughs’ fate was sealed and he was hanged moments later.
6. Ask a hard-of-hearing elderly woman if she’s guilty while her good ear is turned the other way. If she doesn’t respond, she’s definitely a witch. This happened to 71-year-old Rebecca Nurse. She was known to be a very pious woman and most people in the community were hesitant to accuse her or believe the pointing fingers that were. In fact, she was found not guilty during her first trial. But when there were more outbursts from young girls who said they were being tormented by a witch, Nurse was reconsidered. When another prisoner claimed that “she was one of us” during the trial and Nurse failed to respond, she was immediately assumed guilty and hanged.
7. Observe the number of pets she has. A woman who has pets – or says hello to the neighbor’s cat – is surely using that animal as a familiar. In fact, if a fly or a rat entered a woman’s cell while she was awaiting trial, it was assumed that the witch had used her powers to summon a familiar to do her bidding.
8. Take their sarcastic comments seriously. John Willard was the constable in Salem responsible for bring the accused to court. After bringing in so many people, including those who were known for their church-going ways and elderly woman who barely understood what they were being accused of, Willard began to doubt how real these accusations really were. In May 1692, he finally put his foot down and declared that he would no longer take part in any arrests, sarcastically saying, “Hang them all, they’re all witches.” Wouldn’t you know, Willard was immediately accused of witchcraft himself, stood trial, was found guilty, and was executed just three months after his sarcastic comment.
9. Ask if they’ve had dreams about Native Americans. Sarah Osborne, one of the original three to be accused on March 1, denied all witchcraft accusations that were thrown her way. Her downfall was when she admitted she had recurring dreams that an Indian would seize her by the hair and drag her out of her house. Apparently that was enough to convince the village she was likely casting spells on them. However, Osborne ended up dying while being held captive and never stood trial for her “crimes.”
10. Check to see how many times they’ve been married. At least a couple of the women tried for witchcraft were married two or more times and were accused of killing their former husbands (“bewitching” them to death) or evilly seducing them.
Comments (40)
Comment
- subscribe /
- give a gift /
- terms of service /
- about /
- contact us /
- write for us /
- ad info /
- subscriber services /
- press /
- privacy policy /
- rss /
© 2012 Mental Floss Inc. All Rights Reserved. Mental Floss is a registered trademark owned by Felix Dennis. mentalfloss.com is a trademark owned by Felix Dennis.
Disclaimer: All submissions made to mental_floss become the property of Mental Floss Inc and may be used without further permission by the submitter and without compensation to the submitter. If you do not agree to these terms, please do not submit anything to mental_floss.
You forgot if she burns like wood, which floats like a duck. So if she weighs as much as a duck, she’s a witch!
posted by James on 3-1-2010 at 3:26 pm
And an addition for the most obvious – You weigh her against a duck… then burn her!
(someone had to do it, although I do realize it has nothing to do with the Salem trials.)
posted by Justin L on 3-1-2010 at 3:27 pm
well, I’ll be damned! :)
posted by Helenann on 3-1-2010 at 3:27 pm
Sir Bedevere: There are ways of telling whether she is a witch.
Peasant 1: Are there? Oh well, tell us.
Sir Bedevere: Tell me. What do you do with witches?
Peasant 1: Burn them.
Sir Bedevere: And what do you burn, apart from witches?
Peasant 1: More witches.
Peasant 2: Wood.
Sir Bedevere: Good. Now, why do witches burn?
Peasant 3: …because they’re made of… wood?
Sir Bedevere: Good. So how do you tell whether she is made of wood?
Peasant 1: Build a bridge out of her.
Sir Bedevere: But can you not also build bridges out of stone?
Peasant 1: Oh yeah.
Sir Bedevere: Does wood sink in water?
Peasant 1: No, no, it floats!… It floats! Throw her into the pond!
Sir Bedevere: No, no. What else floats in water?
Peasant 1: Bread.
Peasant 2: Apples.
Peasant 3: Very small rocks.
Peasant 1: Cider.
Peasant 2: Gravy.
Peasant 3: Cherries.
Peasant 1: Mud.
Peasant 2: Churches.
Peasant 3: Lead! Lead!
King Arthur: A Duck.
Sir Bedevere: …Exactly. So, logically…
Peasant 1: If she weighed the same as a duck… she’s made of wood.
Sir Bedevere: And therefore…
Peasant 2: …A witch!
posted by Nate the Great on 3-1-2010 at 3:31 pm
Silly Puritans, the only scientific way to identify a witch is to weigh them against a duck…
posted by Josh on 3-1-2010 at 3:32 pm
Great minds think alike!
The first thing that came to mind was “weigh her against a duck.”
posted by AHI on 3-1-2010 at 3:39 pm
Ha Ha…first thing that came to mind when I saw the article was Monty Python. Glad to see I wasn’t the only one.
posted by David on 3-1-2010 at 3:52 pm
And let’s not forget that witches have long noses that closely resemble “carrots”…
posted by bonebacker on 3-1-2010 at 4:09 pm
Captcha: growing goofiest
I love this place.
posted by Lex on 3-1-2010 at 4:12 pm
Read ‘The Crucible’ by Arthur Miller, if you haven’t. It’s a short play, and it’s great; it has some of the people mentioned here (Nurse, Good, Osbourne)
posted by EP on 3-1-2010 at 4:16 pm
“She turned me into a newt! I got better…”
recaptcha: broilers which. Awesome.
posted by Kpop on 3-1-2010 at 4:35 pm
I thought that back then male witches were referred to as wizards not warlocks.
The ultimate way that they’d “prove” that some one was a witch was to torture them (using dunking stools, pressing, stretching, etc) until they “confessed” and gave up the names of other “witches”.
Nice group those, Puritans.
posted by Nerak on 3-1-2010 at 5:25 pm
WOW. I guess, in a world without tools like Wikipedia and Google, one could easily believe all of this….Nowadays though, I ALWAYS consult at least one trusted web source before accusing anyone of being a witch.
Why did no one think to put on trial the person who came up with all these ways to tell a witch? Takes one to know one, right?
posted by Shash on 3-1-2010 at 5:40 pm
scary and sad.
posted by germone on 3-1-2010 at 6:15 pm
When I see someone talking to themselves, it usually means they have Bluetooth.
posted by plantlady on 3-1-2010 at 6:46 pm
Since I have moles, pets and frequently talk to myself, I am extremely grateful not to have lived during that period or in a place that still persecutes “witches”.
posted by ginac on 3-1-2010 at 7:23 pm
Very small rocks!
Interesting article over at How Stuff Works about a possible cause of the “witchy” behavior that prompted the Salem Witch trials. Link is in my name.
posted by Lynley on 3-1-2010 at 7:58 pm
um i am a witch and the only reson why the girls were killed in salm was bc they were sick and btw being a witch has nothing to do with the devil its has to do with healing and love
posted by ravenheart on 3-1-2010 at 9:31 pm
ravenheart, the kind of witch you’re talking about is not the kind of witch that the Salem witch trials were about. The main difference is that the kind they were looking for did not actually exist.
The men and women accused of witchcraft were generally accused not because thay actually had done anything wrong but for personal reasons. At the height of the witch-hunting craze, it was an easy way to get revenge on someone (though hazardous; there’d always be the danger they’d turn and accuse you). The craze did not last long, fortunately. Benjamin Franklin wrote some entertaining pieces under a pseudonym about the few witch trials still underway during his time. (He was arguing against him, via parody.)
posted by Calli Arcale on 3-1-2010 at 10:38 pm
Occurring in 1692, could the Salem Witch Trials be considered a “painful day in _American_ history”? Sounds like British history to me. Unless you’re on some sort of American History witch hunt . . .
posted by Weirdbeard on 3-1-2010 at 10:53 pm
They twitch their noses and strange things happen
posted by PartiallyDeflected on 3-1-2010 at 11:38 pm
@Weirdbeard
Salem witch trials happened in Essex, Suffolk, and Middlesex counties of colonial Massachusetts, between February 1692 and May 1693.
Read: America
Thou hast Wikipedia at your command, so why not useth it?
posted by Simon on 3-2-2010 at 2:25 am
The used to also throw them in a body of water – if they float – witch. If they drown – not a witch, but dead, so it was a moot point.
recaptcha: invasion coroner – so appropriate!
posted by jen on 3-2-2010 at 8:41 am
The Puritans were neither British nor American. They were religious ex-pats in a new homeland.
They just happened to be living in what is now a US state.
posted by Tracie on 3-2-2010 at 8:58 am
Tracie – both the Separatists in the Plymouth colony and the Puritans based in the Boston colony swore allegiance to England in their charters. They were British. Most people would consider this American history because we generally put all colonial activities under the USH umbrella.
posted by AHI on 3-2-2010 at 9:28 am
I’ve learned a lot about Rebecca Nurse after finding out that she is my ninth-great-grandmother. She was examined by midwives for witches’ marks, but none were found. Over 40 people signed a petition in her defense stating that the accusations were baseless. She was even found innocent but the histrionics of the girls reversed the decision. The court had this 70 year old ‘godly woman’ dragged from her cell – where she had been held for four months – to be excommunicated before the congregation two weeks before they killed her and dumped her body in a grave so shallow her hand was left visible. (Though some suggest that was done out of pity so that her relatives could find and rebury her properly, which they did that night in secret.) Clearly, the intent of the church and court was to inflict physical, mental and spiritual pain as well as death. Why her? She and her husband owned property desired by, oh so coincidentally, the family of one of the so called bewitched girls. Also, Rebecca’s husband was at odds with the local clergy. Though having been on the committee to bring in a man named Parris to head the church he later saw Parris working more for his own benefit than for the people. And lastly, he and his wife stopped attending services when Parris continued to allow the bewitched girls to disrupt them. That Rebecca’s mother had long-before been accused of witchcraft just made the whole money and power-based charade easier to pull off.
posted by elagie on 3-2-2010 at 11:32 am
This is so sad. And scary too–if I lived then, I’d definately be screwed–I talk to myself, own cats (especially black cats) and employ sarcasm. Yep, screwed.
posted by Heather on 3-2-2010 at 11:38 am
Thanks, I’m going to use this in fanfiction.
posted by Sara in AL on 3-2-2010 at 12:47 pm
All you have to do to enter our giveaway is leave us a comment on THIS blog post, with the answer to this question: Do you fold or bunch your tp? Make sure you comment with a working emailadress. To see the rest of this, see bathroomreader.com.
posted by Sara in AL on 3-2-2010 at 12:53 pm
Following Uncle John’s Bathroom Reader on Twitter!-Sopphy
posted by Sara in AL on 3-2-2010 at 12:57 pm
It’s sad… But witch hunts continue to this day. The West Memphis 3 were convicted and condemned with about the same amount of evidence.
That said, even as a Christian, I’ve never thought of witchcraft (or wiccanism or what-have-you) as the devil at work. Even the most pious should recognize the devil isn’t a creator, and can’t give anyone any “special powers.”
posted by Chicago ExPat on 3-2-2010 at 1:19 pm
Raven hair and ruby lips?
posted by Will on 3-2-2010 at 2:14 pm
Most Christians would agree that posing the WWJD question here would render the answer “not what was done”.
posted by shirleyfeeney on 3-2-2010 at 2:33 pm
Very sadly accusations of witchcraft are still very prevalent in many African Nations. Some accuse Elderly men and women of being witches and drive them from villages. It is believed that they do this to end the cost of housing, feeding, etc. that person.
Also, many children are being accused of witchcraft which their parents either have to pay to “cure” or they are driven from their homes and forced to live in the streets where they often fall prey to human trafficking.
Very sad indeed.
posted by Brit on 3-2-2010 at 3:09 pm
I’m getting really good at determining who wrote what story just by the topic.
10 ways to identify a witch…let me see…was it David Israel? Nope. um…Miss Cellania? nope. oh i know! Stacy!!!!!!
of course!
posted by xanderjones on 3-2-2010 at 5:38 pm
How ironic. Last night, my wife and I began watching the 2004 movie “The Crucible”. I’m planning on finishing it in a few minutes. I had no idea this was an anniversary event.
posted by B-Doc on 3-2-2010 at 9:55 pm
I’m screwed all the way around, since I am a fifth generation witch. I have two furbabies I talk to all the time. I float but haven’t had wood in a long time, obviuosly an old witch problem. Oh well.
Blessed Be.
posted by Witchrayc on 3-5-2010 at 12:43 pm
Actually, to all you duck people (yes I get the Monty Python reference), one of the things that judges DID do was throw an accused witch in the water. If she sank, she was innocent (but possibly drowned), and if she floated, she was guilty. Also, women who could swim were seen as suspicious. Sad, no?
posted by Megan on 3-5-2010 at 1:31 pm
She hangs out with Jack Nicholson?
posted by Germus on 3-5-2010 at 10:15 pm
So the trick is to have them try floating you in a large body of water and having learned to free-dive and able to hold your breath a really long time, swim for freedom! Unfortunately, women couldn’t go free in those days, they were not persons and any man could take them if they weren’t attached to a man, etc. Thank you, Suffragettes.
posted by anarkissed on 3-7-2010 at 2:18 pm