In the Devil's Snare (46 page)

James Axtell, ed., “The Vengeful Women of Marblehead: James Roules’s Deposition of 1677,”
WMQ,
3d ser., 31 (1974): 647–52 (quotations 651–52).

Ibid., 652. Axtell does not suggest that frontier refugees might have participated in this incident, yet a number of Maine families (most notably that of the 1692 accuser, Sarah Churchwell) are known to have lived in Marblehead at the time. The involvement of such refugees would help to explain what might otherwise seem a disproportionate response to the taking of ships and men, especially because captured sailors were commonly released unharmed by the Indians (as Axtell notes).

William woum Wood et al. to Massachusetts leaders, 1 July 1677,
DHSM
6:177–78.

See MG&C, meeting minutes, 10 July 1677, ibid., 186–88; Brockholst to MG&C, 17 July and 18 August 1677, ibid., 189–93; Manning’s journal, 21 July 1677, ibid., 179–80; Joshua Scottow, “Narrative of the Voyage to Pemmaquid,” 3–28 August 1677, transcript, Peter Force Papers, LCMD (which summarizes the provisions of the treaty). Bourne,
Red King’s Rebellion,
briefly describes these events, 240–41.

The Rev. John Pike, a resident of Dover, summarized the Indians’ grievances; Mather included his observations in
DL,
in Lincoln,
Narratives,
186–87. This analysis agrees with that of Baker, “Trouble to Eastward,” 225–26. Nash, “Abiding Frontier,” 257–58, places greater emphasis on French influence on the Wabanakis. There is no modern, comprehensive history of King William’s War in northern New England; but see Francis Parkman,
Count Frontenac and New
France under Louis XIV (France and England in North America Part Fifth)
(reprint, Boston, 1899), and Samuel Adams Drake,
The Border Wars of New England
(reprint, Williamstown, Mass., 1973).

The rumors: Joseph Storer to Jonathan Corwin, 17 March 1681/2, box 1, fol. 8, Curwen Family Papers, PEM; and three letters written in late February– early March 1683/4 and forwarded from Maine to London, in CO 1/54, ff 274, 276, 277. The early 1688 incidents are described in depositions printed in
DHSM
6:325–28 (quotation 325), and 413–18; the Sacos’ actions in Edward Tyng to Andros, 18 August 1688, ibid., 419. On 19 August, Boston was “full of the news of 5 English persons killed at Northfield”: M. Halsey Thomas, ed.,
The Diary of
Samuel Sewall, 1674–1729
(New York, 1973), 1:175.

The quotations come from reports of the rumors that reached England: “This Account Josiah Parker of Groton Received the 17th of August of an Indian,” CO 1/65, f 157; and “An Abstract of a Letter dated Boston New England 20th Aug: 1688,” ibid., f 106. Andros’s aide Francis Nicholson recorded encountering widespread “fears of the Indians” in the environs of Boston in late August (ibid., ff 147–50). But another report, ibid., f 159, described a visit to the Pennacooks’ encampment revealing “noe preparacon for Warr.”

Dudley, Stoughton, Usher, and Shrimpton to MG&C, n.d. [October 1688?],
DHSM
6:376. See also Joseph Dudley’s statement, 5 June 1689,
MHS Colls
53 (1889): 506; and Andros to William Blathwayt, 19 October 1688, vol. 3, fol. 4, William Blathwayt Papers, CW. In January 1689/90, the councilors Thomas Hinckley, Wait Winthrop, and Bartholomew Gedney associated themselves with the decisions by defending them in a formal statement signed by Stoughton and Shrimpton as well (MA 35:191–92; another copy in Winthrop Papers, oversize box 4, MHS).

Edward Tyng to Andros, 1 October 1688,
DHSM
6:435. Andros disclosed that 16 of the 20 were women and children; see “Answer of Sir Edmund Andros to his Instructions,” n.d., received 1 July 1690, CO 5/855, f 243. Although Sylvanus Davis twice indicated that Hope Hood was among the captives (
DHSM
5:144, 6:432), another contemporary source suggested otherwise (
DHSM
6:422).

I have pieced together the story of these confusing events from four retrospective accounts and the relevant contemporary correspondence in September 1688 as printed in
DHSM
6:420–34 passim. The summaries are Tyng to Andros, 1 October 1688, ibid., 435–37; “Declaration of Silvanus Davis,” n.d. [after 15 October 1690],
DHSM
5:142–43; Andros to William Blathwayt, 19 October 1688, vol. 3, fol. 4, Blathwayt Papers, CW; “Answer of Sir Edmund Andros to his Instructions,” n.d., received 1 July 1690, CO 5/855, f 243. Quotations:
DHSM
6:441, 444, 446. See Mather,
DL,
in Lincoln,
Narratives,
190–92. For biographical information on Tyng, see Bodge,
Soldiers in King Philip’s War,
169–70.

See
DHSM
5:143–44;
DHSM
6:346–47, 376, 437; Andros to William Blathwayt, 19 October 1688, vol. 3, fol. 4, Blathwayt Papers, CW (also the source of the quotation).

Edward Randolph to Lords of Trade, 8 October 1688, CO 5/905, f 23; Andros to William Blathwayt, 19 October 1688, vol. 3, fol. 4, Blathwayt Papers, CW. Andros’s letters to subordinates have not survived, but their shaken responses reveal what his tone must have been (
DHSM
6:438–39). Several councilors later declared that Andros had threatened to charge them as “high Offenders” for their actions in his absence; see William Stoughton et al., Grievances against Governor Andros, 27 January 1689/90, MA 35:191–92.

Andros to William Blathwayt, 19 October 1688, vol. 3, fol. 4, Blathwayt Papers, CW. Two copies of his proclamation of 20 October are in CO 1/65, ff 331, 332. Andros sent special orders to Falmouth to free the remaining captive held there; see
DHSM
5:144.

“Answer of Sir Edmund Andros to his Instructions,” n.d., received 1 July 1690, CO 5/855, f 244; John West to Fitz-John Winthrop, 23 February 1688/9,
MHS Colls
53 (1889): 496–97; William Stoughton et al., Grievances against Governor Andros, 27 January 1689/90, MA 35:191–92. The councilors compiled evidence to support their contention that Andros’s raid on Pentagoet had instigated the conflict (
DHSM
5:38; MA 35:259). See also the statement on Andros’s winter campaign prepared by the colony’s agents in England, 30 May 1690, HM 1654, HL, printed in
DHSM
5:120–24.

“Declaration of Silvanus Davis,” n.d. [after 15 October 1690],
DHSM
5:144; “Brief Relation” (1689), in “Hutchinson Papers,”
MHS Colls
21 (1825): 100; William Stoughton et al., Grievances against Governor Andros, 27 January 1689/90, MA 35:191. See the materials in next two footnotes for some of the rumors that circulated about the governor.

Statement of Joseph Graves et al., 3 January 1688/9,
DHSM
4:446–47; Statement of Thomas Browne, et al., 22 March 1688/9, ibid., 448; List of Evidence against Sir Edmund Andros, n.d., MA 35:257. See also
DHSM
6:472; MA 35:256.

List of Evidence against Sir Edmund Andros, n.d., MA 35:260 (quotation);
DHSM
9:31. Another deposition dated in December 1689 accused Andros of having sent food and rum to Castine at Pentagoet during the winter of 1688–1689 (
DHSM
5:22).

On northern Indians and firearms, see Patrick M. Malone,
The Skulking
Way of War: Technology and Tactics among the New England Indians
(Baltimore, 1991). Recall that Davis’s move to deprive the Kennebecs of their weapons helped to precipitate the First Indian War in the north. See the discussion below for the Indians’ comment that Andros had “starved” them during the winter of 1688–1689.

Quotation: “A Particular Account of the Late Revolution,” in Charles M. Andrews, ed.,
Narratives of the Insurrections, 1675–1690
(New York, 1915), 197. Boston residents knew in late December 1688 that an invasion fleet was en route from Holland to England (
MHS Colls
48 [1882]: 487), but they did not learn the outcome for five more months (Andrews, ed.,
Narratives,
215–16). On what little they knew and when they knew it, see Richard Johnson,
Adjustment to Empire:
The New England Colonies, 1675–1715
(New Brunswick, N.J., 1981), 84. On the uncertainty in all the colonies, see David Lovejoy,
The Glorious Revolution in
America
(New York, 1972), 237–39.

Most discussions of the much-studied Glorious Revolution in New England do not devote any attention to this consequence of the New Englanders’ actions. But see Parkman,
Count Frontenac and New France,
234.

DHSM
6:476–78 (quotation 478). Men in Saco and Cape Porpoise (Kennebunk) did not wait until Andros’s overthrow; they deserted a few days earlier, perhaps realizing that his regime would soon end (
DHSM
6:470–71, 473–75). On the chaotic situation in Maine after 18 April 1689, see, e.g.,
DHSM
5:35–46 passim;
DHSM
6:479–95 passim; and Edmund Andros, n.d., “An Account of the Forces raised in New England . . . ,” in “Hutchinson Papers,”
MHS Colls
21 (1825): 85–87.

James Weems to —, 1 June 1689,
DHSM
6:485; Samuel Wheelwright et al. to “the Superior Power . . . ,” 25 April 1689, H. H. Edes Papers, MHS. For divisions in frontier villages over the presence of garrisons:
DHSM
6:479–83.

Lovejoy,
Glorious Revolution in America
, places the Massachusetts events in a broader context; see also Johnson,
Adjustment to Empire
. For protests against the decision to hold elections in spring 1690, see “Mr. Bullivants Journall,”
MHS Procs
16 (1878): 107.

Bradstreet to [Portsmouth magistrates], [29 June 1689],
MHS Colls
21 (1825): 91 (see also 89–90); DHSM 9:10–11, 15–16, 17–18, 26; Lt. [James] Weems, “A Short Account of the losse of Pemiquid ffort in New England August the 3d 1689,” CO 5/855, ff 75–76 (quotation 76).

See, e.g.,
DHSM
9:2–7, 12–13, 24, 26–28;
DHSM
5:1–2; MA 107:157a.

Sylvanus Davis et al. to MG&C, 15 July 1689, DHSM 9:14; Charles Frost et al. to same, 27 July 1689, ibid., 20–21; Robert Pike to same, 29 July 1689, ibid., 25. The abandonment of North Yarmouth is described in Davis et al. to Thomas Danforth, 28 August 1689, ibid., 40–42. CO 5/855 is filled with letters recording these disasters; see, e.g., ff 33, 46, 73, 79, 99.

Davis to MG&C, 11 September 1689, DHSM 9:48–49; Davis to the inhabitants of Maine, 17 September 1689, ibid., 60. Other reports and orders: ibid., 58, 61–62.

Davis to MG&C, 22 September 1689, DHSM 4:455; Church to same, 22 September 1689, ibid., 456–57. See Church’s descriptions of the battle in ibid., 459–63; and Church,
History of Philip’s War,
ed. Drake, 160–71.

Church,
History of Philip’s War,
ed. Drake, 170.

Mather, DL, in Lincoln, Narratives, 203; Church to [MG&C], 7 October 1689,
DHSM
4:472. The scouting parties and the one skirmish (at a garrison house in Blue Point) are described in
DHSM
4:463–72 passim. The disbanding and disposition of troops over the winter of 1689–1690 can be followed in
DHSM
9:64–77 passim; and
DHSM
5:3–19 passim.

CO 5/855, f 136 is a printed copy of the proclamation, issued on 3 December 1689. See Governor John Leverett to Lord Privy Seal, 6 September 1675, CO 1/35, f 108, and Robert Pike et al. to [MG&C], 19 October 1676, DHSM 6:137–39, for similar thinking during King Philip’s War.

DHSM
9:60; “The State of New England under the Goverment of Sir Edmund Andros,” n.d., received 27 May 1690, CO 5/855, f 267. Other people made the same allegation about Boston merchants trading with the Indians; see, e.g., “Col. Lidget’s Memoriall touching Trade with the Indians &c,” n.d., received February 1692/3, CO 5/857, f 143. Edward Randolph’s detailed letters to the Lords of Trade and Plantations while he was held in Boston for nearly a year after April 1689 show not only that he was able to communicate regularly with London but also that he had excellent sources of information; see, e.g., CO 5/855, ff 51, 88, 95, 104, and passim. Randolph, among others, named “the Bostoners” he suspected: David Waterhouse and John Foster. See Randolph, “A short narrative . . . ,” 29 May 1689, CO 5/855, ff 10–13 (another copy in CO 5/905, ff 69–75); and “Particular Account,” in Andrews, ed.,
Narratives,
198 and n.

When a group of Maine residents petitioned the king in early 1690, they too declared that ships from Boston had sold “stores of Warr & amunition” to the Indians shortly after the “most unhappy insurrection or Rebellion” (Thomas Scottow et al. to the king, 25 January 1689/90,
DHSM
5:32–34). A petition from residents of New Hampshire asserted the same, 15 May 1690, CO 5/855, f 253. Of course, some frontiersmen themselves were accused of the same offense; see, e.g., “Declaration against John Paine,” 15 July 1687, box 1, f 39, Jeffries Family Papers, MHS.

Thomas, ed.,
Sewall Diary,
1:251–52; Bradstreet to Earl of Shrewsbury, 29 January 1689/90, CO 5/855, f 160. Another contemporary account is “Mr. Bullivants Journall,”
MHS Procs
16 (1878): 105.

Many documents pertaining to the Schenectady raid and its immediate aftermath, from French as well as English sources, are printed in E. B. O’Callaghan, ed., The Documentary History of the State of New-York (Albany, 1849), 1:283–312 (hereafter DHSNY). A detailed description of the attack, perhaps prepared for publication, is in the Livingston Family Papers, Gilder Lehrman Collection, Pierpont Morgan Library. By March 7, residents of Salem had learned of the potential threat to New England; see Charles Redford (Salem) to Sir Edmund Andros (London), 7 March 1690, CO 5/855, f 177.

William Vaughan and Richard Martyn to MG&C, 19 March 1689/90,
DHSM
5:57–58 (see also same to same, 18 March, ibid., 51). The phrase describing the composition of the force is from Mather,
DL,
in Lincoln,
Narratives,
206.

This account draws both on the magistrates’ report of their examination of the prisoner, 19 March 1689/90,
DHSM
5:55–56, and on the retrospective entry for 18 March 1689/90 in “Mr. Bullivants Journall,”
NEHGR
16 (1878): 105–106.