SplitBrain Psychology Essay Research Paper SplitBrain Psychology free essay sample

Split-Brain Psychology Essay, Research Paper Split-Brain Psychology A Paper by: David Norelid Imagine being asked to sing # 8220 ; Mary Had a Little Lamb # 8221 ; and non being able to retrieve the words but merely being able to hum the melody, or cognizing the full wordss, but merely being able to bawl out what most closely resembles the call of an abandoned calf. You can non sing and retrieve the words at the same clip because your encephalon hemispheres have been severed from each other. Imagine seeking to play the piano, while one manus wants to play Rachmaninov, and the other wants to play major and minor graduated tables. There are infinite people enduring through these jobs everyday because they underwent a surgical intervention for epilepsy. Although these jobs are awfully enfeebling to the patients, they have opened a wholly new beginning of boundless information for neurobiologists seeking to calculate out the consequence of the head on the organic structure, and frailty versa. We will write a custom essay sample on SplitBrain Psychology Essay Research Paper SplitBrain Psychology or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page In this paper we will seek to show the surgical process known as the split-brain operation and its effects on the persons public presentation. In a normal encephalon, stimuli come ining one hemisphere is quickly communicated by manner of the principal callosum to the other hemisphere, so the encephalon maps as a unit. When the principal callosum of an person is severed, go forthing a split encephalon, the two hemispheres can non pass on. In some signifiers of epilepsy a ictus will get down in one hemisphere, triping a monolithic discharge of nerve cells through the principal callosum and into the 2nd hemisphere. In an attempt to forestall such monolithic ictuss in terrible epileptics, brain surgeons can surgically break up the principal callosum, a process called a commissurotomy. If one side of the encephalon can no longer excite the other, the likeliness of terrible epileptic ictuss is greatly reduced. In a intellectual commissurotomy, the sawbones opens the skull, lays back the encephalon # 8217 ; s coverings and, with a tool called a intellectual retractor, exposes the principal callosum between the two hemispheres. The physician snips through the principal callosum, break uping communicating between the hemispheres and forestalling the transportation of ictuss. There are two hemispheres in your encephalon, the right and the left. At first glimpse, these hemispheres appear to be mirror images of one another, but closer scrutiny reveals that they are extremely specialised parts that serve differing maps. The left hemisphere governs our ability to show ourselves in linguistic communication. In over 95 % of right-handed people, the left hemisphere is dominant for address. The figure is slightly lower for left handers, about 70 % , but still extremely important. The left hemisphere is better so the right at acknowledging sequences of words and letters. It controls our logic, our logical thinking, and our analytical idea procedures. It can concentrate on inside informations, nevertheless it has trouble groking the whole image. The perceptual maps of the right hemisphere are more specialised for the analysis of infinite and geometrical forms and signifiers, elements that are all present at the same clip ( non consecutive like linguistic communication ) . The right hemisphere is the originative half ; it can # 8220 ; see # 8221 ; the whole out of parts, therefore leting us to link mystifier parts together. The right hemisphere besides plays and of import function in the comprehension of emotion. In an experiment where topics were shown images of faces with strong facial look, the right hemisphere was able to spot the look more accurately so the left hemisphere. In add-on, an experiment was done where topics listened to verbal messages said with different emotions. The messages were presented to each ear individually. When presented to the left hemisphere, the topic was more accurate refering the verbal content of the message. However, the right hemisphere was more accurate at placing the emotional tone of the voice. Ehrenwald has classified of import differences between the hemispheres. This information is best expressed as a tabular array: Table 1: General Left-right hemisphere properties Left Right Thinking Abstract, additive, analytic Concrete, holistic Cognitive manner Rational, logical Intuitive, artistic Language Rich vocabulary, good grammar and sentence structure ; pose no grammar, sentence structure ; inflection, hapless vocabulary metaphoric, poetry Executive capacity Introspection, will, initiative, sense of ego, concentrate on trees Low sense of ego, low enterprise, focal point on wood Specialized maps Reading, composing, arithmetic, sensory-motor accomplishments ; inhibits psi Three I # 8217 ; s, music, rich dream imagination, good face and gestalt acknowledgment, unfastened to psi Time experience Consecutive ordered, measured # 8220 ; Lived # 8221 ; clip, crude clip sense Spatial orientation Relatively hapless Superior, besides for forms, wire figures Psychoanalytical facets Secondary procedure, self-importance maps, consciousness ; superego? Primary procedure, dream-work, free assoc. hallucinations? Ideal paradigm Aristotle, Appollonian manner, Marx, Freud, Koestler # 8217 ; s Commissar Plato, Dionysian manner, Nietzsche, Jung Koestler # 8217 ; s Yogi There are two major information tracts by which information of the peripheral nervous system and the cardinal nervous system are exchanged: the somatosensory and the motor control pathways. Some general maps of each system can be separated and described, but these two tracts act upon one another in many ways. It is hard to state, # 8220 ; this is how somatosensory information travels, and this is how centrifugal information travels, # 8221 ; because both information tracts have influences over one another. The followers is a really basic sum-up of the information tract for both centripetal and motor systems. This should supply you with an apprehension of how a normal encephalon communicates with the organic structure, which in bend will assist you better understand how a cut off principal callosum might interfere with certain facets of motor control or ocular reading. The somatosenses provide information about what is go oning on the surface of our organic structure and inside it. Coetaneous senses, or tegument senses, respond to several different stimulations: force per unit area, quiver, warming, chilling, and events that cause tissue harm ( such as hurting ) . Organic senses arise from receptors in and around the internal variety meats, supplying us with unpleasant esthesiss ( such as stomach aches ) , or enjoyable 1s ( such as a cold drink on a hot summer twenty-four hours ) . Receptors located throughout our organic structures detect environmental stimulations, and rapidly direct information to matching parts in the encephalon. All nervous information is sent in the same mode, it is where, in the encephalon, the information is sent which determines how it will be interpreted and what type of matching information will be sent back as a response. Somatosensory axons from the tegument, musculuss, or internal variety meats enter the cardinal nervous system via spinal nervousnesss. Somatosensory nervousnesss located in the face and caput chiefly enter the encephalon through the cranial nervousnesss. Precisely localized information ( such as all right touch ) and inexactly localized information ( such as hurting and temperature ) are transmitted to the encephalon by different tracts. Axons that convey exactly localized information ascend throughout the dorsal columns in the white affair of the spinal cord to nuclei in the lower myelin. From at that place, axons really cross to the hemisphere opposite the side of the organic structure that the stimulations were received. Axons cross to the opposite side of the encephalon at the myelin, travel to the thalamus. The thalamus is divided into several karyons, or groups of nerve cells of similar form and map. Some of these karyons receive the centripetal information from the go uping tracts and project it out to the somatosensory cerebral mantle so that it can be interpreted. In contrast, the axons that convey ill localized information ( hurting, temperature ) enter the spinal cord and instantly cross to the opposite side. From here, these nerve cells ascend through the spinothalamic piece of land to the karyon in the thalamus, later being passed to the right part of the encephalon for reading. Information is sent to musculuss in the organic structure through motor tracts. This information allows you to flex your biceps, squash a tennis ball, rectify your position, and move. There are two types of falling tracts: corticospinal tracts, which originate in the intellectual cerebral mantle, and noncorticospinal tracts, which originate in the brain-stem. In general, the corticospinal tracts have greater influence over motor nerve cells that control muscles involved in all right, stray motions, peculiarly those of the fingers and custodies. The noncortoicospinal tracts are more involved with coordination of the big musculus groups used in things such as the care of unsloped position, balance, walking, and in caput and organic structure motions when turning toward a specific stimulation. Motor tracts may be excitant ( doing a musculus to contract ) , or inhibitory ( forestalling a musculus contraction ) . In general, the right hemisphere interprets information and controls actions of the left side of the organic structure. The left hemisphere interprets information and controls actions of the right side of the organic structure. If the connexion between the hemispheres is severed, centripetal information can non go through to the right part of the encephalon in order for matching response to be made. For illustration, callosal apraxia is a signifier of limb apraxia caused by harm to the anterior principal callosum. When a individual hears a verbal petition to execute a motion, allow # 8217 ; s say to raise both custodies in the air, circuits in the left hemisphere analyze the significance of the address. Then, a nervous bid activates the part of the encephalon that contains the memory of the motion, the prefrontal cerebral mantle. This information is passed to the portion of the encephalon that controls the existent motion to be performed, the motor cerebral mantle. The left motor ce rebral mantle controls the motions of the right manus, and the right motor cerebral mantle controls the motions of the left manus. In order for the right motor cerebral mantle to be activated so that the left manus can be raised, the analysis of the verbal bid must be passed from the left hemisphere to the right side, through the principal callosum. Therefore, the right arm can execute the requested motion, but the left can non. Early on after a split encephalon surgery, the patient shows a pronounced apraxia of the left manus to verbal bid. This occurs because the right hemisphere, which controls the left manus, has hapless linguistic communication comprehension. Unusually, this symptom recovers to a considerable grade. It is possible that the left hemisphere additions ipsilateral ( same side ) control of the left manus, and/or the right hemisphere acquires some basic linguistic communication accomplishment. Roger Sperry and Ronald Meyers foremost discovered the split encephalon in the research lab in the late 1950 # 8217 ; s. Initially they began experimenting with cats, and subsequently proceeded to analyze monkeys. In 1961 the first human patient was capable to the split encephalon surgery. The process worked good as a # 8220 ; remedy # 8221 ; for patients who suffered from terrible epilepsy and did non react to anti-epileptic drugs. It was shortly discovered that patients who had a commissurotomy had some interesting troubles. Patients were non able to pass on information from one hemisphere to the other, about as though they now had two separate encephalons. In surveies of hemispherical differences in ocular acknowledgment, stimulations are frequently presented with a t-scope, which flashes an image in a specific portion of the ocular field so fast that the topic does non hold clip to travel his or her eyes. In a standard split-brain experiment, a split-brain patient is seated in forepart of a screen that hides his or her custodies from position. Behind the screen, there are a twosome of objects that the topic can non see, in this instance a deck of cards and a key. The patient focuses their eyes on the centre of the screen, and the word # 8220 ; cardinal # 8221 ; is flashed really briefly in the left field of vision. The gestural right hemisphere of the encephalon receives information from the left field of vision, and the individual is non able to state the experimenter what they saw. The patient is so asked to utilize their left manus to make behind the screen and pick out the object that corresponds with the word that was flashed. Since the right hemisphere controls motion of the contralateral half of the organic structure, the left manus will be able to right place the object, although the patient is incognizant they even saw a word flashed. Further, every bit long as the object is in the patient # 8217 ; s left manus behind the screen and hidden from position, they can non relay to the perceiver what the object is. Sperry and other scientists proceeded with farther experimentation in order to find the relationship between the right and left hemispheres of the encephalon. How ( and what ) the hemispheres communicate would supply valuable penetration into the # 8220 ; mind # 8221 ; of a split encephalon patient. How did a commissurotomy affect one # 8217 ; s perceptual experiences of the outside universe? In one experiment, a word ( for illustration # 8220 ; fork # 8221 ; ) was flashed so merely the right hemisphere of a patient could have the information. The patient would non be able to state what the word was. However, if the topic were asked to compose what he saw, his left manus would get down to compose the word # 8220 ; fork # 8221 ; . If asked what he had written, the patient would hold no thought. He would cognize that he had written something, he could experience his manus traveling through the gesture, yet he could non state perceivers what the word was. Because there is no longer a connexion between the two hemispheres, information presented to the right half of the encephalon can non convey this information to the left. Interestingly plenty, the centres for address reading and production are located in the left hemisphere. Similarly, if the patient is blindfolded and a familiar object, such as a toothbrush, is placed in his left manus, he appears to cognize what it is ; for illustration by doing the gesture of brushing his dentition. However, he can non call the object to the experimenter. If asked what he is making with the object, gesticulating a brushing gesture, he has no thought. But if the left manus gives the toothbrush to the right manus, the patient will instantly state â€Å"tooth brush† . Micheal Gazzaniga, who did his alumnus work in Sperry # 8217 ; s research lab, did farther experiments which showed the efforts of the left hemisphere to counterbalance for it # 8217 ; s deficiency of information, every bit good as efforts by the right hemisphere to acquire it # 8217 ; s knowledge conveyed. When a split encephalon topic is subjected to trials where the left half of their encephalon does non cognize the right reply, it will frequently do something up based on the information it does hold. In this peculiar trial, each hemisphere was at the same time presented with a different cognitive trial. Each hemisphere was presented with a image and told to pick the object that relates to that image. The left hemisphere was shown a poulet claw, while the right viewed a snow scene. You can see that the patient is indicating to a poulet with his right manus, and a shovel with his left. After each hemisphere responded, the left hemisphere was asked to explicate its picks. The manner the topic verbally interpreted the dual field stimulation is of peculiar involvement. When asked what images he saw on the screen, the patient responded, # 8220 ; I saw a claw and I picked the poulet, and you have to clean out the poulet shed with a shovel. # 8221 ; Test after test, this sort of response occurred. The left hemisphere could easy and accurately place why the right manus chose the corresponding image that it had, and so later, and without batting an oculus, it would integrate the right hemisphere # 8217 ; s response into the model. While perceivers knew precisely why the right hemisphere and made its pick, the left hemisphere could simply think. What is interesting is that the left hemisphere did non offer its suggestion in a guesswork vena but instead as a statement of fact. This sketch illustrates another experiment done with a split encephalon topic in which the left hemisphere compensates without the individual being cognizant what is traveling on. Top Row: The bid # 8220 ; Laugh # 8221 ; was flashed to the left field of vision ( right hemisphere ) , and the topic laughed. When asked, # 8220 ; Why are you express joying? the topic said, # 8220 ; Oh # 8230 ; you guys are truly something. # 8221 ; In-between Row: The bid # 8220 ; Rub # 8221 ; was flashed to the right hemisphere and the topic # 8217 ; s left manus scratched the dorsum of the right manus. When asked what the bid was, the topic said, # 8220 ; Oh # 8230 ; itch. # 8221 ; Bottom Row: The instructions are # 8220 ; Assume the place of the flashed word. # 8221 ; The word flashed was # 8220 ; Boxer. # 8221 ; The topic clinched both fists and held them in a ready place. # 8220 ; What was the word? # 8221 ; # 8220 ; Oh # 8230 ; boxer. # 8221 ; The left hemisphere proved highly expert at instantly imputing cause to the action. The topic could non truly say why they were express joying, for the left hemisphere had non received any information from the right that the bid laugh had been flashed. The topic # 8217 ; s left hemisphere evaluated the response and characterized it. It compensated for its deficiency of cognition by naming upon old experiences in which laughing was an appropriate response and said, # 8220 ; Oh # 8230 ; you guys are truly something # 8221 ; . When the patient tried to explicate why she was rubbing the dorsum of her right manus, her left hemisphere once more tried to counterbalance for the deficiency of cognition, proposing to her that she had an scabies. The fact that she said # 8220 ; rub # 8221 ; alternatively of # 8220 ; rub # 8221 ; shows that she was thinking. Yet, the patient could be rather accurate when the bid gave less leeway for multiple descriptions, as in the instance of the word pugilist. The trial direction was to # 8220 ; presume the place of # 8230 ; . # 8221 ; The topic right assumed the pugilistic place, and when asked what the word was, he said, # 8220 ; Boxer. # 8221 ; But on subsequent tests, when she was restrained and the word pugilist was flashed, the left hemisphere said it saw nil. When released, nevertheless, she assumed the place and said, # 8220 ; O.K. , it was boxer. # 8221 ; In another experiment, a split encephalon patient is asked to place an object # 8211 ; such as a pencil # 8211 ; by making inside a bag and experiencing it. Success depends on which manus does the stretch. Most of the wiring in the organic structure is arranged contralaterally, with the left hemisphere acquiring its information from # 8211 ; and commanding # 8211 ; the right side of the organic structure, and vice-versa. Since the left hemisphere usually controls linguistic communication, when the patient reaches in the bag with his right manus he can readily place the object. However, if the left manus does the stretch, merely the right hemisphere gets the information that the object is a pencil, and is powerless to direct the voice to show this. Occasionally, it seems, a patient # 8217 ; s right hemisphere will hit upon a clever ploy. By happening the point of a pencil and delving it into his thenar, he causes a crisp hurting to be sent up the left arm. Some hurting fibres are ipsilaterally wired, therefore the language-controlling hemisphere gets a hint: it is something crisp plenty to do a hurting. # 8220 ; It # 8217 ; s crisp # 8211 ; it # 8217 ; s possibly a pen? A pencil? # 8221 ; The right hemisphere, catching this voice, may assist it along with some intimations # 8211 ; detering the pen response, promoting the pencil # 8211 ; so that by a brief turn of Twenty Questions the left hemisphere is led to the right reply. Therefore, the right hemisphere may on occasion utilize other signifiers of communicating in order to counterbalance for the nonexistent principal callosum. These experiments, pioneered by Sperry and co-workers, provided penetration into the operations of the two hemispheres and how they are different. Until late it has been believed that the full principal callosum must be severed to supply proper alleviation from the terrible epilepsy the surgery was seeking to contradict. However this is non needfully the instance, the principal callosum might be able to be severed plenty to supply alleviation, without losing all nervous integrating. Dr. H. G. Gordon, a neurobiologist at the California Institute of Technology says the connexions at the dorsum of the encephalon entirely are adequate to incorporate both human hemispheres. Talking for a California research squad, he reported a new signifier of surgery, devised by P. J. Vogel of Los Angeles, which stops ictuss wholly, or at least renders them treatable with drugs. At the same clip, he added # 8220 ; Psychological trials of Vogel # 8217 ; s patients yield consequences indistinguishable to those of normal topics. We conclude, the intellectual hemispheres wholly integrate if but a little fraction of the principal callosum remains integral. # 8221 ; In Vogel # 8217 ; s new operation ( called anterior intellectual commissurotomy ) the sawbones opens the skull, lays back the encephalon # 8217 ; s coverings and, with a tool called a intellectual retractor, exposes the principal callosum between the two hemispheres Then he snips through the front three-quarterss of the principal callosum and, while at it, besides severs a pipe-cleaner-sized cross connexion known as the anterior commissure. But the dorsum of the principal callosum # 8212 ; the splenium # 8212 ; he leaves integral. The splenium of the principal callosum has been found to be the dominant way of the ocular facets of hemispheric integrating. Whereas the genus has been found to command motor facets. For this new process, the motor aspects much more pertinent to epilepsy ictuss, are severed, while the splenium, the centre of ocular cross over, remain integral . This would do the process required for terrible epilepsy much safer and more practical. The patient would be relieved of the utmost ictuss, while retaining interhemisphereic ocular tracts and some other communicating between hemispheres. This process is now widely used in topographic point of the complete principal commissurotomy, and experiments are being done with precisely how much of the encephalon demands commissured. The process doesn # 8217 ; t absolutely incorporate the two hemispheres, it has been found that callosal transportation times are significantly slower after the operation has occurred. This is thought to be because ocular transportation clip across the principal is slower so the motor transportation clip. Besides two-handed coordination is thought to be slightly inhibited by this process. Never the less, there is definite advancement over the complete loss of communicating which was thought to go on in the original split encephalon topics. Analyzing split encephalon patients # 8217 ; unusual behaviours has led us to detect valuable information about differences between the two hemispheres. The first of the human split-brain surveies began when Michael Gazzaniga joined Roger Sperry as a alumnus pupil at California Tech. In coaction with brain surgeon Joseph Bogen, they began a series of commisurotomies. The operation on their first patient, WJ, was a great success. Before the operation he integrated information between the two hemispheres freely, but after the operation he had two separate heads or mental systems, each with its ain abilities to larn, retrieve, and experience emotion and behaviour. Yet, WJ, was non wholly cognizant of the alterations in his encephalon. As Gazzaniga put it: # 8220 ; WJ lives merrily in Downey, California, with no sense of the outrageousness of the findings or for that affair any consciousness that he had changed. # 8221 ; As antecedently explained ( experiments ) , words flashed to the right field of vision of patients like WJ could be said and written with the right manus. In contrast, patients couldn # 8217 ; Ts say or write words flashed to their left field of vision. Although standard experiments revealed that right hemisphere is gestural, it is far from incompetent. Even though the right hemisphere could non pass on to observers what stimuli it had been presented with, it did demo some verbal comprehension. Even though the patient could non verbalise what word had been presented to the right hemisphere, the left manus was able to indicate to it within a list. Another interesting difference between the hemispheres that these patients displayed was that the right hemisphere was clearly superior in spacial undertakings such as set uping blocks and pulling in three dimensions. Research workers showed each hemisphere a simple drawing and had the corresponding manus pull it. Even though all three of the topics were right-handed, the left-hand drawings were clearly superior. Because of these hemispheric differences and specialisations, split-brain patients have some unusual traits. For illustration, they are less likely to speak about their feelings, as if they # 8217 ; re unavailable for treatment. The patients give grounds of holding two differing heads. The best illustration of this is patient Paul S. Paul # 8217 ; s right hemisphere developed considerable linguistic communication ability sometime old to the operation. Although it is uncommon, on occasion the right hemisphere may portion significant nervous circuits with, or even rule, the left hemisphere # 8217 ; s centres for linguistic communication comprehension and production. The fact that Paul # 8217 ; s right hemisphere was so good developed in it # 8217 ; s verbal capacity opened a closed door for research workers. For about all split encephalon patients, the ideas and perceptual experiences of the right hemisphere are locked off from look. Research workers were eventually able to interv iew both hemispheres on their positions about friendly relationship, love, hatred and aspirations. Paul # 8217 ; s right hemisphere stated that he wanted to be an car race driver while his left hemisphere wanted to be a draughtsman. Both hemispheres were asked to compose whether they liked or disliked a series of points. The survey was performed during the Watergate dirt, and one of the points was Richard Nixon. Paul # 8217 ; s right hemisphere expressed # 8220 ; disfavor, # 8221 ; while his left expressed # 8220 ; like. # 8221 ; Most split-brain patients would non be able to show the sentiments of their right hemispheres as Paul S. did, but this gives us penetration on the concealed differences between the hemispheres. These concealed differences are allowed to show themselves after a split encephalon operation because the two hemispheres are closer to bing independently. One hemisphere may non be able to stamp down or act upon differing sentiments, emotions, or desires of the other because most of the communicating between the two can no longer happen. As a consequence, conflicting hemispheric desires or sentiments can do disconnected encephalon patients to exhibit some unusual behaviours. One patient found his left manus fighting against his right manus when seeking to draw up his bloomerss in the forenoon. While the right manus tried to draw them up, the left was seeking to draw them down. On another juncture, he was angry with his married woman and attacked her with his left manus while at the same time seeking to protect her with his right! Split-brain patients have besides taught us about woolgathering. Scientists had hypothesized that dreaming is a right hemisphere activity, but they found that split encephalon patients do describe woolgathering. They found, hence, that the left hemisphere must hold some entree to woolgather stuff. What was most interesting was the existent content of the dreams of the split-brain patients. Klaus Hoppe, a psychoanalyst, analyzed the dreams of 12 patients. He found that the dreams were non like the dreams of most normal people. # 8221 ; The content of the dreams reflected world, affect, and thrusts. Even in the more luxuriant dream, there was a singular deficiency of deformation of latent dream ideas. The findings show that the left hemisphere entirely is able to bring forth dreams. Patients, after commisurotomy, uncover a dearth of dreams, phantasies, and symbols. Their dreams lack the features of dream work ; their phantasies are sterile, useful, and tied to world ; their symbolisat ion is concretistic, dianoetic, and rigid. # 8221 ; These surveies of abnormalcies of split encephalon patients as opposed to normal people are supplying much penetration on hemispheric specialisation. Even if some people can non play the piano right, put on a brace of bloomerss, or even comb their hair decently, they can accomplish a certain sum of normality in their lives by commanding the ictuss that affected them antecedently. They can every bit good derive some comfort in the cognition that their complaints are assisting psychobiologists learn more about the encephalon and its maps than of all time before.

Margaret Jones - Executed for Witchcraft, 1648

Margaret Jones - Executed for Witchcraft, 1648 Known for: first person executed for witchcraft in Massachusetts Bay ColonyOccupation: midwife, herbalist, physicianDates: died June 15, 1648, executed as a witch in Charlestown (now part of Boston) Margaret Jones was hanged on an elm tree on June 15, 1648, after being convicted of witchcraft. The first known execution for witchcraft in New England was the year before: Alse (or Alice) Young in Connecticut. Her execution was reported in an Almanac published by Samuel Danforth, a Harvard College graduate who was then working as a tutor at Harvard. Samuels brother Thomas was a judge at the Salem witch trials in 1692. John Hale, who was later involved in the Salem witch trials as the minister in Beverley, Massachusetts, witnessed the execution of Margaret Jones when he was twelve years old. Rev. Hale was called to help Rev. Parris determine the cause of the strange happenings in his home in early 1692; he was later present at court hearings and executions, supportive of the courts actions. Later, he questioned the legality of the proceedings, and his postumously published book, A Modest Inquiry Into the Nature of Witchcraft, is one of the few sources for information about Margaret Jones. Source: Court Records We know about Margaret Jones from several sources. A court record notes that in April, 1648, a woman and her husband were confined and watched for signs of witchcraft, according to a course which hath ben taken in England for the discovery of witches. The officer was appointed to this task on April 18. Although the names of those watched were not mentioned, the subsequent events involving Margaret Jones and her husband Thomas lend credence to the conclusion that the husband and wife named were the Joneses. The court record shows: This court beinge desireows that the same course which hath ben taken in England for the discovery of witches, by watchinge, may also be taken here with the witch now in question, therefore doe order that a strict watch be set about her every night, that her husband be confined in a private roome, watched also. Winthrops Journal According to the journals of Governor Winthrop, who was a judge at the trial that convicted Margaret Jones, she was found to have caused pain and sickness and even deafness by her touch; she prescribed medicines (aniseed and liquors are mentioned) that had extraordinary violent effects; she warned that those who would not use her medicines would not heal, and that some so warned had had relapses that could not be treated; and she had foretold things that she had no way to know about. Further, two signs usually ascribed to witches were found: the witchs mark or witchs teat, and being seen with a child who, on further investigation, vanished the assumption was that such an apparition was a spirit. Winthrop also reported a very great tempest at Connecticut at the very time of her execution, which people interpreted as confirming that she was truly a witch. Winthrops journal entry is reproduced below. At this court one Margaret Jones of Charlestown was indict- ed and found guilty of witchcraft, and hanged for it. The evidence against her was,1. that she was found to have such a malignant touch, as many persons, (men, women, and children,) whom she stroked or touched with any affection or displeasure, or, etc., were taken with deafness, or vomiting, or other violent pains or sickness,2. she practising physic, and her medicines being such things as (by her own confession) were harmless, as aniseed, liquors, etc., yet had extraordinary violent effects,3. she would use to tell such as would not make use of her physic, that they would never be healed, and accordingly their diseases and hurts continued, with relapse against the ordinary course, and beyond the apprehension of all physicians and surgeons,4. some things which she foretold came to pass accordingly; other things she could tell of (as secret speeches, etc.) which she had no ordinary means to come to the knowledge of,5. she ha d (upon search) an apparent teat in her secret parts as fresh as if it had been newly sucked, and after it had been scanned, upon a forced search, that was withered, and another began on the opposite side,6. in the prison, in the clear day-light, there was seen in her arms, she sitting on the floor, and her clothes up, etc., a little child, which ran from her into another room, and the officer following it, it was vanished. The like child was seen in two other places, to which she had relation; and one maid that saw it, fell sick upon it, and was cured by the said Margaret, who used means to be employed to that end.Her behavior at her trial was very intemperate, lying notoriously, and railing upon the jury and witnesses, etc., and in the like distemper she died. The same day and hour she was executed, there was a very great tempest at Connecticut, which blew down many trees, etc.Source: Winthrops Journal, History of New England 1630-1649. Volume 2. John Winthrop. Edited by James Ken dall Hosmer. New York, 1908. A Nineteenth Century History In the mid-19th century, Samuel Gardner Drake wrote about the case of Margaret Jones, including more information about what may have happened to her husband: The first Execution for Witchcraft in the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, was at Boston on the 15th of June, 1648. Accusations were probably common long before this, but now came a tangible Case, and it was carried through with as much Satisfaction to the Authorities, apparently, as ever the Indians burnt a Prisoner at the Stake.The Victim was a Female named Margaret Jones, the Wife of Thomas Jones of Charlestown, who perished on the Gallows, as much for her good Offices, as for the evil Influences imputed to her. She had been, like many other Mothers among the early Settlers, a Physician; but being once suspected of Witchcraft, was found to have such a malignant Touch, as many Persons were taken with Deafness, or Vomiting, or other violent Pains or Sickness. Her Medicines, though harmless in themselves, yet had extraordinary violent Effects; that such as refused her Medicines, she would tell that they would never be healed, and accordingly their Diseases and Hurts continued, with Relap se against the ordinary Course, and beyond the Apprehension of all Physicians and Surgeons. And as she lay in Prison, a little Child was seen to run from her into another Room, and being followed by an Officer, it was vanished. There was other Testimony against her more ridiculous than this, but not necessary to be recited. To make her Case as bad as possible, the Record or it says her Behaviour at her Trials was intemperate, lying notoriously, and railing upon the Jury and Witnesses, and that in like Distemper she died. It is not unlikely that this poor forsake Woman was distracted with Indignation at the Utterances of the false Witnesses, when she saw her Life was sworn away by them. The deluded Court denounced her frantick Denial of the Charges as lying notoriously. And in the probably honest Belief in Witchcraft, the same Recorder says, in the most complacent Credulity, that the same Day and Hour she was executed, there was a very great Tempest at Connecticut, which blew down ma ny Trees, c. Another equally credulous Gentleman, writing a Letter to a Friend, dated at Boston on the 13th of the same Month, says: The Witche is condemned, and to be hanged Tomorrow, being Lecture Day.Whether there were any other suspected Persons at the time Margaret Jones was prosecuted, we have no Means of ascertaining, yet it is more than propable that a supposed Spirit of Darkness had been whispering in the Ears of the Men in Authority in Boston; for about a Month before the Execution of Margaret, they had passed this Order: The Courte desire the Course which hath been takin in England for Discovery of Witches, by watching them a certina Time. It is ordered, that the best and surest Way may forthwith be put in Practice; to being this Night, if it may be, being the 18th of the third Month, and that the Husband may be confined to a private Roome, and be also then watched.That the Court was stirred up to ferret out Witches, by the late Successes in that Business in England, sev eral Persons having been tried, condemned and executed in Feversham about two Years before is not improbable. By the Course which hath been taken in England for the Discovery of Witches, the Court had References to the Employment of Witch-Finders, one Matthew Hopkins having had great Success. By his infernal Pretensions some scores of innocent bewildered People met violent Deaths at the Hands of the Executioner, all along from 1634 to 1646. But to return to the Case of Margaret Jones. She having gone down to an ignominious Grave, leaving her Husband to suffer the Taunts and Jeers of the ignorant Multitude, escaped further Prosecution. These were so insufferable that his Means of Living were cut off, and he was compelled to try to seek another Asylum. A ship was lying in the Harbor bound for Barbadoes. In this he took Passage. But he was not thus to escape Persecution. On this Ship of 300 Tons were eighty Horses. These caused the Vessel to roll considerably perhaps heavily, wich to Persons of any Sea Experience would have been no Miracle. But Mr. Jones was a Witch, a Warrant was sued out for his Apprehension, and he was hurried thence to Prison, and there left by the Recorder of the Account, who has left his Readers in Ignorance of what became of him. Whether he were the Thomas Joanes of Elzing, who in 1637 took Passage at Yarmouth for New England, cannot be positively stated, although he is probably the same Person. If so, his Age at that Time was 25 Years, and he married subsequently.Samuel Gardner Drake. Annals of Witchcraft in New England, and Elsewhere in the United States, From Their First Settlement. 1869. Capitalization as in the original. Another Nineteenth Century Analysis Also in 1869, William Frederick Poole reacted to the account of the Salem witch trials by Charles Upham. Poole noted that Uphams thesis was largely that Cotton Mather was at fault for the Salem witch trials, to gain glory and out of gullibility, and used the case of Margaret Jones (among other cases) to show that witch executions did not begin with Cotton Mather. Here are excerpts from the section of that article addressing Margaret Jones: In New England, the earliest witch execution of which any details have been preserved was that of Margaret Jones, of Charlestown, in June, 1648. Governor Winthrop presided at the trial, signed the death-warrant, and wrote the report of the case in his journal. No indictment, process, or other evidence in the case can be found, unless it be an order of the General Court of May 10, 1648, a certain woman, not named, and her husband, be confined and watched.... [Poole inserts the transcript, shown above, of Winthrops journal] ...The facts in relation to Margaret Jones seem to be, that she was a strong-minded woman, with a will of her own, and undertook, with simple remedies, to practise as a female physician. Were she living in our day, she would brandish a diploma of M. D. from the New England Female Medical College, would annually refuse to pay her city taxes unless she had the right to vote, and would make speeches at the meetings of the Universal Suffrage Association. Her touch seeme d to be attended with mesmeric powers. Her character and abilities rather commend themselves to our respect. She made anise-seed and good liquors do the good work of huge doses of calomel and Epsom salts, or their equivalents. Her predictions as to the termination of cases treated in the heroic method proved to be true. Who knows but that she practiced homoeopathy? The regulars pounced upon her as a witch, as the monks did upon Faustus for printing the first edition of the Bible, put her and her husband into jail, set rude men to watch her day and night, subjected her person to indignities unmentionable, and, with the assistance of Winthrop and the magistrates, hanged her, and all this only fifteen years before Cotton Mather, the credulous, was born!William Frederick Poole. Cotton Mather and Salem Witchcraft North American Review, April, 1869. Complete article is on pages 337-397.