This one page article by Robert Anderson appeared in the TAG sometime after 1981, since he cites David Greene's 1981 article, in October, p 207. I don't have the complete citation. His address was 5069 Cottonwood Lane, Salt Lake City, UT 84117. Bridget Bishop was the first of the witches to be exectued in the 1692 Salem witchcraft craze, and also the first to be treated by David L. Greene, FASG, in his systematic study of those unfortunates (TAG 57: 129-38). As Dr. Greene tells us, "We first meet Bridget Bishop in Salem on 26 July 1666, when, as Bridget Wasselbe, widow, she married Thomas Oliver. No evidence has as yet been found about her previous history or about the identity of her presumably-first husband, ___ Wasselbe." Casual browsing in the published Boston vital records turned up a clue to Bridget's origin, and eventually recods of her earlier life in England. In the listing of Boston births for 1665, we find "Mary of Sameul Dec. and Bridget Wesselbee late of Norwich in England born Jan. 10" (Boston Record Commisioners' Report 9 [1883]: 98). A systematic survey of the parish registers of Norwich, co. Norfolk, unearthed the following two records in the parish of St. Mary-in-the-Marsh: Samuel Wasselby and Bridget Playfer were married April 13, 1660 1663 Benjamin the son of Samuel Waselby and Bridget his wife was baptized Octob[er] 6th. No record was foudn to tell whether Samuel Waselby died in England or New England. There is no record of the probate of his estate in the appropriate jurisdictions in England or Massachusetts. Also, no further record has been found of Samuel and Bridget's two children. Likewise, no earlier record of Bridget has been found. There is no baptism of a Bridget Playfer in St. Mary-in-the-Marsh, an event which most likely would have taken place in the 1630's, nor is she mentioned in any of the Playfer wills probated in teh seventeenth century in the Consistory Court of Norwhich, the Archdeaconry Court of Norwhich or the Archdeaconry Court of Norfolk. Thomas Oliver himself, Bridget's second husband, was also from Norwhich (John C. Hotten, Original Lists of Persons of Quality [New York 1874], p. 295). There is evidence that Thomas Oliver returned to Norwhich for a few years, and it may be that he became acquainted with Bridget at that time, resulting in her immigration to New England after the death of her first husband (Savage 3:311; Records of the Quarterly Courts of Essex County, Mass. [Salem 1911-75] 3:385). End of article. I wonder if possibly the reason why Bridget Playfer cannot be found in the records is that she already had been married; it sounds like Robert Anderson did not check on this possibility. Otherwise this suggests she was of some line of the Playfer family that was not stable enough for her to be mentioned in wills, maybe her family had cast her or her father off; or that did not have their children baptized, or possibly Bridget was baptized in a church that was not recognized. Since there were Playfer's around and they were propertied and wealthy enough to leave wills, it isn't likely that her family were vagrants from somewhere else. The name is unusual and I don't think it is likelyt aht Bridget of Norwhich County shared it with the Playfers of Norwich County by accident. Yours, Dora Smith