Bernie, Do you have more info on the WPA transcriptions of the 1930s? What were the WPA sources? Did they transcribe from original documents? Did they also repeat previously published transcriptions? Where were their sources in the 1930s? And, if you know it, are these original trial documents archived in numerous places? It sounds like it, if Nissenbaum and Boyer are "finding" documents no one has previously transcribed before. Or did I misinterpret what you said? Last question: for those of us who live far from Mass and have relied on LDS filming done at the Essex Institute years ago, are you saying that what the LDS filmed is only a small portion of what is now available (never been filmed) and perhaps located in other archives? If you could explain the above questions and update us on where this new found material is located, I think it would be helpful for many of us on the Salem-Witch list -- especially if the previously published transcriptions were in error. -- Helen [email protected] wrote: > Dear Helen Graves, > Drake is worth checking if you have not looked at his work. See Samuel G. > Drake, THE WITCHCRAFT DELISION IN NEW ENGLAND, 3. vols. (1866); reprinted > (New York: Burt Franklin, 1970). See also Samuel G. Drake, ANNALS OF > WITCHCRAFT IN NEW ENGLAND AND ELSEWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES (1869); > reprinted (New York: Benjamin Blom, 1967)--incidentally, in this work on page > 198 he says Ann Pudeator was "about 70." > On Woodward, I simply slipped in not mentioning him as I listed names of > sources. Prior to the WPA transcriptions in the 30's, Woodward was the > standard scholarly text for legal documents pertaining to the witch trials. > New documents were added to what Woodward had, and the WPA typescript became > the standard scholarly source. Boyer and Nissenbaum added new found documents > to the WPA typescript and put the WPA typescript into publication--THE SALEM > WITCHCRAFT PAPERS. Boyer and Nissenbaum did not retranscribe the WPA work, so > they carry the errors in that transcription. There are errors in Woodward, > and there are errors in Boyer and Nissenbaum (WPA transcription). The main > difference between Boyer and Nissenbaum and Woodward then is not so much in > the matter of accuracy, but in the greater quantity of material that they > make available. But the Boyer and Nissenbaum text continues to have errors, > such as the real confusion there between Alice and Mary Parker, to give one > of various errors known at this stage. However, I agree that in light of what > is now available, Boyer and Nissenbaum offer the best source. Some of the > errors in their work will be identified at the Virginia web site as soon as > that can be arranged. Hope this is helpful. Bernie Rosenthal