Nicholas Noyes was a prominent figure during the Salem Witch Trials in 1692 in colonial Massachusetts. He was a minister in Salem Village and played a significant role in the hysteria that swept through the community. Noyes was born in England in 1647 and immigrated to Massachusetts with his family when he was just a child. He graduated from Harvard College and was ordained as a minister in 1674. Noyes served as the minister of the First Church in Salem Village, which was later renamed Danvers. During the Salem Witch Trials, Noyes was an active supporter of the prosecution.
During the Salem Witch Trials, Noyes was an active supporter of the prosecution. He publicly denounced those accused of witchcraft and played a crucial role in the interrogations and examinations of the accused. Noyes was known for his fervent belief in the reality of witchcraft and his harsh treatment of those accused.
Nicholas Noyes (1647-1717)
The Salem witch trials were a series of hearings and prosecutions of people accused of witchcraft in colonial Massachusetts between February 1692 and May 1693. More than 200 people were accused, nineteen of whom were found guilty and executed by hanging (fourteen women and five men). One other man, Giles Corey, was pressed to death for refusing to plead, and at least five people died in jail. It was the deadliest witch hunt in the history of the United States.
In Salem, Massachusetts, Nicholas Noyes was appointed second minister to the Salem Town church to assist John Higginson (1616-1708). Rev Noyes played an active role in the persecution of accused witches.
Before the execution of Sarah Good on July 19, 1692, Noyes asked her to confess. Her famous last words were, "You are a liar! I am no more a witch than you are a wizard, and if you take away my life God will give you blood to drink." Twenty-five years later, Noyes died of a hemorrhage and literally did choke on his own blood. He was 9 days shy of his 70th birthday. [3] On September 22, 1692, Noyes had officiated as clergyman at the final hangings of those accused of witchcraft. It is reported that he turned toward the suspended bodies of the victims and said, "What a sad thing it is to see eight firebrands of hell hanging there." [4]
On November 14, 1692, 17-year-old Mary Herrick accused Noyes's cousin, Sarah Noyes Hale (wife of James Noyes , and granddaughter of Rev. Mary Eastey of afflicting her, but unsurprisingly Sarah Noyes Hale was never formally charged or arrested. [5] A later commentator on the trials, Charles Upham suggests that this accusation was one that helped turn public opinion to end the prosecutions, and spurred John Hale's willingness to reconsider his support of the trials. [6]
Some sources claim Noyes later retracted his opinions on the witch trials, and publicly confessed his error, [1] but an entirely unflattering portrait of Noyes as an active persecutor of the accused witches in the examinations prior to their trials is presented by Frances Hill in her book, A Delusion of Satan. A 1703 petition to clear the names of the accused witches, signed by Essex County ministers, did not include Noyes' name. In 1712, the excommunications of Rebecca Nurse and Giles Corey were reversed by the Salem Church ". as a result of pressure from Samuel Nurse rather from any remorse on the part of Nicholas Noyes." [7]
Later Years
Noyes published Election Sermon (1698), and, later (1715), a poem on the death of Joseph Green, as well as some verses prefixed to Cotton Mather's Magnalia. [1]
Upon Noyes' death in 1717, an elegy was prepared by Reverend Samuel Phillips of Andover.
It is said that he would often taunt the accused in court. One of the most infamous moments involving Noyes occurred during the trial of Giles Corey. Corey was accused of witchcraft but refused to enter a plea. In response, the court ordered him to be pressed with heavy stones until he either entered a plea or died. As the weight was being placed on Corey, he reportedly called out, "More weight!" and it is said that Noyes responded by saying, "Aye, more weight!" The Salem Witch Trials eventually came to an end, and the hysteria subsided. However, Noyes' reputation was tarnished by his involvement in the trials. Many years later, some members of the community expressed remorse and regret for their actions during the trials, but Noyes was not among them. Nicholas Noyes continued to serve as a minister in Danvers until his death in 1717 at the age of 70. The legacy of his involvement in the Salem Witch Trials remains a controversial topic, with some viewing him as a zealous supporter of injustice, while others argue that he was simply a product of his time and beliefs. In conclusion, Nicholas Noyes was a minister who played a significant role in the Salem Witch Trials. His fervent belief in witchcraft and his harsh treatment of the accused made him a prominent figure during this dark period in American history..
Reviews for "The Legacy of Nicholas Noyes in the Salem Witch Trials"
1. Emily - ★☆☆☆☆
I was extremely disappointed with "Nicholas Noyes Salem Witch Trials". The author seemed to have a biased perspective and failed to present a balanced view of the events. The characters were one-dimensional and lacked depth, making it difficult to connect with any of them. The writing style was dry and lacked emotion, making it a struggle to stay engaged with the story. Overall, I would not recommend this book to anyone looking to learn about the Salem Witch Trials.
2. John - ★★☆☆☆
While "Nicholas Noyes Salem Witch Trials" had potential, it fell short of my expectations. The plot felt disjointed, with multiple subplots that didn't seem to serve much purpose. The pacing was slow, and I found myself losing interest in the story. The author's portrayal of the historical events lacked depth and failed to capture the complexity of the Salem Witch Trials. I was left wanting more from this book and ultimately felt unsatisfied with the overall reading experience.
3. Sarah - ★★☆☆☆
I found "Nicholas Noyes Salem Witch Trials" to be a frustrating read. The writing style was overly verbose, making it difficult to follow the story. The author's attempt to recreate the historical setting fell flat, lacking authenticity and attention to detail. The dialogue was stilted and unrealistic, making it hard to believe in the characters' motivations. Overall, this book failed to live up to its potential and left me feeling disappointed.