The Salem witch trials have captured the attention of historians for centuries.  However, despite all the research and retellings, one fact often gets glossed over.  Namely dogs were included among the innocent victims executed for being witches during the hysteria that gripped Massachusetts between 1692 and 1693.  Spoiler alert: the Salem witch trials had nothing to do with actual witchcraft.  For those who may be unfamiliar with this tragic episode in history, in January 1692 a group of girls living in the small community of Salem Village began behaving badly.  They were having screaming fits, convulsions, oh and of course barking like dogs.  When prayers didn’t cure them of their afflictions, the village doctor declared the perfectly reasonable diagnosis of they must be bewitched.  Thus igniting a firestorm of accusations, that left very few families in the area untouched.  By the time the Salem witch hysteria ended, 20 people were executed, as well as 2 dogs.

Now I bet you’re probably thinking, “Don’t witches normally hang out with cats?  Why were dogs accused of being witches?”  At the time, people believed that witches used animal familiars as helpers to conduct their wicked deeds.  This not only included cats, but also birds, cows, pigs, turtles, wolves, dogs…actually any animal could be used.  How these witches used animals also varied depending on the situation.  Some believed that witches kidnapped animals and rode them around to their coven meetings at night, resulting in weakness, injury, strange behavior and the eventual death of the animal.  Therefore, if an animal was suddenly sick or acting weird for no reason, they too were diagnosed as being bewitched.  A more startling sign that the witches were using animals to carry out their sinister intentions were the countless “victims” who described how the witches tormented them in the form of a bird flying around their room; or as a wolf following them on their walk home from visiting a neighbor; or in the case of the canine victims as dogs who looked at them wrong.  Another telltale sign a witch was involved included the afflicted girls getting down on the floor and barking.  No self-respecting child of the seventeenth century would behave like that unless being provoked to do so by a witch’s familiar!  Or at least that’s how bewildered parents, ministers and doctors rationalized the strange behavior.

Anyways, dogs were believed to be a common familiar associated with the Devil, and according to the colonial laws of Massachusetts, “if any man or woman be a witch, that is, has or consults with a familiar spirit, they shall be put to death.”  Therefore in October of 1692, when a girl in the nearby community of Andover accused a neighbor’s dog of trying to bewitch her because it looked at her weird, the poor dog was immediately shot.  However, the dog had the honor of being almost instantly exonerated for his crimes by none other than the famous Puritan Minister and witch expert, Cotton Mather.  Cotton Mather rationalized that if the dog really was the Devil in disguise, it would not be possible to kill it.  So since the dog didn’t survive being shot, he logically must be innocent!  Little comfort for the dog, but at least he was immediately declared innocent of the accusations which is more than can be said of the humans falsely convicted during that time.  By the way, just a few years earlier in 1689, Cotton Mather’s book, Memorable Providences, Relating to Witchcrafts and Possessions, in which he outlines the symptoms of being possessed by a witch, was a best seller in the colonies.  So if anyone could spot a witch, it was him!

The only fault of the second dog killed was that he was acting strangely.  Despite living in Andover, afflicted girls in Salem Village decided that John Bradstreet must have been out riding that dog.  So the dog was shot, without ever having actually been accused of being a witch himself.  Guilt by association, I guess?  Anyways, the man accused of riding him didn’t want to end up like the dog, so fled to the less puritanical colony in seacoast New Hampshire.  Unfortunately, Cotton Mather was preoccupied with more serious matters at the time, and didn’t exonerate this dog.  People were beginning to argue against Mather’s belief that spectral evidence, including animal familiars, should be included as evidence.  Therefore, in an attempt to stand his ground, Mather didn’t pardon the second dog like the first.  But I’m sure this nameless dog was included in subsequent pardons made by later generations, including most recently in 2001 when the Massachusetts legislature passed an act exonerating everyone convicted.

In addition to being used by witches to carry out their evil plot, dogs also were used by the pious citizens of Massachusetts Bay Colony to identify witches.  These unsuspecting dogs were forced to eat “witch cakes.”  This supernatural dessert consisted of a victim’s urine mixed with rye meal and ashes and baked as a cake.  It was then fed to a dog in the hopes that the dog would get possessed and reveal the witch’s identity.  Now I’m guessing like dogs today, dogs in the seventeenth century were willing to try anything once.  But even I draw the line at scoffing down a cake made with urine!  Besides, in my research I couldn’t find any examples of a dog actually accusing someone of witchcraft.  This includes the dog living in the household of Rev. Samuel Parris where the witch hysteria started.  A witch cake was prepared by Tituba, the Parris family’s slave, using the urine of Betty Parris, daughter of Rev. Samuel Parris.  Well the cake didn’t work, because that dog wasn’t talking, and eventually Tituba found herself jailed as a witch too.

Thankfully, within a year this frenzied belief in witches eventually died down, and things returned to normal in Salem Village and the surrounding communities.  Whether you agree with historians who believe the accused witches were victims of mob mentality, mass hysteria, scapegoating, suffered from medical issues, or actually were witches, one thing is certain.  The dogs, and countless other animals who were executed because it was believed they were acting on the witches’ behalf, were innocent victims in this tragic episode in history.

I wonder, how is it possible that Cotton Mather wrote “a first hand story of the Salem witch trials,” when there is no evidence in the transcripts that he actually set foot in the courtroom?