pura vida humacao

Ever since I was a child, I have always been fascinated by the concept of heritage and tradition. I have always been curious about the stories and experiences of the generations that came before me. One story that has always stayed with me is the "old aitch" story. Legend has it that the "old aitch" was a treasured possession that had been passed down through the generations of my family. It was said to be a small wooden box, weathered by time and use, containing a collection of letters, photographs, and other mementos from ancestors long gone. It was said to hold the key to unlocking the secrets of our past and understanding our roots.

On the same day, Richard Coman swore that Bridget Bishop had suffocated him while he slept. She had appeared in her “red paragon bodice,” then “lay upon [his] breast or body and so oppressed him that he could not speak nor stir.” Corman’s wife lay beside him, unafflicted and unaware. Why couldn’t Corman’s wife see Bridget’s specter? Did she ask why her husband dreamed of Bridget Bishop?

She kept a house of refreshment for travellers, and a shovel-board for the entertainment of her guests, and generally seems to have countenanced amusements and gayeties to an extent that exposed her to some scandal. Bishop was brought to trial for witchcraft once again in 1692 after Abigail Williams and Elizabeth Parris named her as one of the reasons behind their mysterious illnesses.

It was said to hold the key to unlocking the secrets of our past and understanding our roots. As a child, I remember sitting at my grandmother's feet as she recounted stories of her own childhood and the tales she had heard about the "old aitch." She would describe it with such reverence and awe, painting a vivid picture of the importance it held in our family's history.

The Witchcraft Trial of Bridget Bishop

Bishop, whose maiden name was Playfer, was born sometime between 1632 and 1635 in England.

In 1660, she married her first husband, Samuel Wasselby, in England and moved to the Massachusetts Bay Colony around the same time.

After Wasselby died in 1664, Bridget married her second husband in 1666, a widower named Thomas Oliver who already had children from his previous marriage. Bridget and Thomas Oliver had one child together, a daughter named Christian who was born in Salem on May 8, 1667.

Bridget and Thomas Oliver had a troubled relationship. The couple quarreled often and were even brought to court for fighting in 1670, during which their neighbor, Mary Ropes, testified that Bridget’s face was bloodied and bruised on a number of occasions, according to the book Salem-Village Witchcraft: A Documentary Record of Local Conflict in Colonial New England:

“Mary Ropes, aged about fifty years, deposed that she had several times been called to her neighbor Thomas Oliver’s, by himself, but mostly by his wife, to hear their complaints one of the other, and they both acknowledged that they had been fighting together. Further she saw Goodwife Oliver’s face at one time bloody and at other times black and blue, and the said Oliver complained that his wife had given him several blows.”

Bridget and Thomas Oliver were fined and ordered to be whipped if they did not pay their fine on time.

In 1678, Bridget was brought to court for using foul language against her husband, as described in the book Salem-Village Witchcraft:

“Bridget, wife of Thomas Oliver, presented for calling her husband many opprobrious names, as old rogue and old devil, on Lord’s day, was ordered to stand with her husband, back to back, on a lecture day in the public market place, both gagged, for about an hour, with a paper fastened to each others foreheads upon which their offense should be fairly written.”

After Oliver died of an illness in 1679, Bridget inherited his estate, which consisted of a house worth £45, ten acres of land worth £25, a variety of household goods and two pigs. Oliver’s two sons and the couple’s daughter only received twenty shillings each.

Just three months after receiving her inheritance in November, Bridget’s stepchildren accused her of bewitching Oliver to death. A lack of evidence prevented the case from going to trial and it was speculated that the stepchildren’s accusation was an attempt to get their hands on the property she inherited from their father.

In 1687, Bridget was then accused of stealing brass from a local mill by the mill owner, Thomas Stacy, and arrested. Bridget claimed she didn’t steal the brass, but found it on her property and had no idea how it got there.

She also stated that she sent her daughter into town with the brass to discover what it was, not to sell it, as Thomas Stacy accused her of doing. Unfortunately, there are no surviving records indicating the outcome of this trial.

After Oliver’s death, Bridget Bishop married Edward Bishop, a well-respected sawyer (woodcutter). Bridget Bishop’s life at this time is sometimes difficult to trace because many historians, including Charles Upham in his 1867 book Salem Witchcraft, have confused her with Sarah Bishop, who was also accused of witchcraft and was married to Bridget Bishop’s step-son, who was also named Edward Bishop, according to the book Salem Story:

“As the first person to be executed in the Salem Witch Trials, Bridget Bishop has received plenty of attention from Salem’s historians, amateur and professional. She has served as a paradigm of the executed person as social deviant, the outsider who falls prey to a community devouring the eccentric on its margin. This is a version of Salem’s story codified in 1867 by Charles Upham, who in his Salem Witchcraft told the story of Bridget Bishop as a singular character, not easily described. ‘She kept a house of refreshment for travellers, and a shovel-board for the entertainment of her guests, and generally seems to have countenanced amusements and gayeties to an extent that exposed her to some scandal. She is described as wearing ‘a black cap and black hat, and a red paragon bodice,’ bordered and looped with different colors. This would appear to have been a rather showy costume for the times. Her freedom from the austerity of Puritan manners, and disregard of conventional decorum in her conversation and conduct, brought her into disrepute; and the tongue of gossip was generally loosened against her.’ Upham had made a mistake. Although he correctly identified Bridget Bishop as a woman who previously been charged with witchcraft, he conflated two people into one, inaccurately identifying her as living just outside of Salem Village, rather than in Salem [town] where she did live, and of being a rather colorful tavern keeper, which she was not. Upham’s mistake was understandable, since the confusion as to her identity actually goes back to 1692, and only some brilliant detective work by David L. Greene in 1981 brought clarity to the matter; still, some scholars have continued to make the misidentification.”

The mistake originates from Reverend John Hale‘s testimony against Sarah Bishop on May 22, which many historians have misidentified as testimony against Bridget Bishop because during the testimony Hale merely refers to the accused as “Goodwife Bishop…wife of Edward Bishop Jun’r.”

Since Bridget and Sarah Bishop were both accused of witchcraft and were both married to men named Edward Bishop, it’s easy to see how the two became mixed up over time.

Bridget Bishop’s Memorial Marker, Salem Witch Trials Memorial, Salem Mass, November 2015. Photo Credit: Rebecca Brooks

It was almost as if the "old aitch" was a tangible link to our ancestors, a physical representation of our heritage. Sadly, the "old aitch" was lost many years ago, in the chaos and upheaval of moving houses and changing circumstances. It was gone, and with it, a piece of our family's story. The loss was deeply felt, and for years, we mourned the absence of this cherished artifact. However, as I grew older, I came to realize that the true significance of the "old aitch" was not solely in its physical form but in the stories and memories it represented. The stories that were passed down through the generations, the experiences that shaped our family's identity – those were the true treasures. The "old aitch" was merely a vessel for these precious memories. I have since made it my mission to learn as much as I can about my family's history, to preserve and pass on these stories to future generations. I have spoken to older relatives, delving into their memories and piecing together the puzzle that is our family tree. Each story shared, each memory recounted, is a testament to the resilience and strength of those who came before us. While the physical "old aitch" may be lost to us, its spirit lives on in the stories and memories we continue to uncover and pass on. It serves as a reminder of the importance of heritage and tradition, of the stories that shape us and connect us to our roots. It reminds us that our ancestors are not just names on a family tree but lived experiences that have shaped who we are today. So, while I may never hold the "old aitch" in my hands, I carry it with me in my heart, knowing that our family's story is a legacy worth preserving and cherishing. And as I continue to uncover the stories of our past, I am reminded of the power of our shared history and the enduring strength of our family bond..

Reviews for "pura vida humacao"

pura vida humacao