Massachusetts Bay Colony

Massachusetts Bay Colony
Colony of England

Flag First Colonial Seal
A map depicting various colonial territorial claims related to Massachusetts
Capital Salem, Charlestown, Boston
  Established Land grant issued, 1628; Royal charter issued, 1629
  Revocation of royal charter 1684
  Dominion of New England established 1686
  Dominion dissolved 1689
  Royal charter issued for Province of Massachusetts Bay 1691
  Disestablished Province of Massachusetts Bay governance begins, 1692
Today part of  United States

The Massachusetts Bay Colony (1628–1691) was an English settlement on the east coast of North America in the 17th century in and around the broad opening of Massachusetts Bay, the northernmost predecessor colony of the several colonies later reorganized as the Province of Massachusetts Bay. The lands of the settlement were located in central New England in what is now Massachusetts, with initial settlements situated on two natural harbors and surrounding land, about 15.4 miles (24.8 km) apart[1]—the areas around the present-day cities of Salem and Boston.

The territory nominally administered by the colony included much of present-day central New England, including portions of the U.S. states of Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Connecticut. Territory claimed but never administered by the colonial government extended as far west as the Pacific Ocean. The earlier Dutch colony of New Netherlands disputed many of these claims, arguing that they held rights to lands beyond Rhode Island up to the western side of Cape Cod and the Plymouth Bay Colony.

The Massachusetts Bay Colony was founded by the owners of the Massachusetts Bay Company, which included investors in the failed Dorchester Company which had established a short-lived settlement on Cape Ann in 1623. The Massachusetts Bay Colony began in 1628 and was the company's second attempt at colonization. The colony was successful, with about 20,000 people migrating to New England in the 1630s. The population was strongly Puritan, and its governance was dominated by a small group of leaders who were strongly influenced by Puritan religious leaders. Its governors were elected, and the electorate were limited to freemen who had been examined for their religious views and formally admitted to the local church. As a consequence, the colonial leadership exhibited intolerance to other religious views, including Anglican, Quaker, and Baptist theologies.

The colonists initially had decent relationships with the local Indian populations, but frictions arose over cultural differences which were further exacerbated by Dutch colonial expansion. These led first to the Pequot War (1636–38) and then to King Philip's War (1675–78), after which most of the Indians in southern New England made peace treaties with the colonists (apart from the Pequot tribe, whose survivors largely merged with the Narragansett and Mohegan tribes after the Pequot War).

The colony was economically successful, engaging in trade with England and the West Indies. A shortage of hard currency in the colony prompted it to establish a mint in 1652. Political differences with England after the English Restoration led to the revocation of the colonial charter in 1684. King James II established the Dominion of New England in 1686 to bring all of the New England colonies under firmer crown control. The dominion collapsed after the Glorious Revolution of 1688 deposed James, and the colony reverted to rule under the revoked charter until the charter for the Province of Massachusetts Bay was issued in 1691, which combined the Massachusetts Bay territories with those of the Plymouth Colony and proprietary holdings on Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard. Sir William Phips arrived in 1692 bearing the charter and formally took charge of the new province. The political and economic dominance of New England by the modern state of Massachusetts was made possible in part by the early dominance in these spheres by the Massachusetts Bay colonists.



Early settlements

Map depicting tribal distribution in southern New England, circa 1600; the political boundaries shown are modern

Prior to the arrival of Europeans on the eastern shore of New England, the area around Massachusetts Bay was the territory of several Algonquian-speaking tribes, including the Massachusett, Nauset, and Wampanoag. The Pennacooks occupied the Merrimack River valley to the north, and the Nipmuc, Pocumtuc, and Mahican occupied the western lands of present-day Massachusetts, although some of those tribes were under tribute to the Mohawks, who were expanding aggressively from present-day upstate New York.[2] The total Indian population in 1620 has been estimated to be 7,000[3] with the population of New England at 15–18,000.[4] This number was significantly larger as late as 1616; in later years, contemporary chroniclers interviewed Indians who described a major pestilence that killed between one and two thirds of the population. The land-use patterns of the natives included plots cleared for agricultural purposes, and woodland territories for the hunting of game. Land divisions between the tribes were well understood.[3]

During the early 17th century, several European explorers charted the area, including Samuel de Champlain and John Smith.[5] Plans began in 1606 for the first permanent British settlements on the east coast of North America. On April 10, 1606, King James I of England (James VI of Scotland) granted a charter forming two joint stock companies. Neither of these corporations was given a name by this charter, but the territories were named as the "first Colony" (fourth paragraph of charter) and "second Colony" (fifth paragraph of charter), over which they were respectively authorized to settle and to govern. Under this charter, the "first Colony" and the "second Colony" were to be ruled by a "Council" composed of 13 individuals in each colony. The charter provided for an additional council of 13 persons to have overarching responsibility for the combined enterprise. No name was given to either the company or council governing the respective colonies; the council governing the whole was named "Council of Virginia."[6]

The "first Colony" ranged from the 34th to 41st degree latitude north; the "second Colony" ranged from the 38th to 45th degree latitude. (Note that the "first Colony" and the "second Colony" overlapped. The 1629 charter of Charles I asserted that the second Colony ranged from 40th to 48th degrees north latitude, which reduces the overlap.) The investors appointed to govern over any settlements in the "first Colony" were from London; the investors appointed to govern over any settlements in the "second Colony" were from the "Town of Plimouth in the County of Devon." The London Company proceeded to establish Jamestown.[7] The Plymouth Company under the guidance of Sir Ferdinando Gorges covered the more northern area, including present-day New England, and established the Sagadahoc Colony in 1607 in present-day Maine.[8] The experience proved exceptionally difficult for the 120 settlers, however, and the surviving colonists abandoned the colony after only one year.[9] Gorges noted that "there was no more speech of settling plantations in those parts" for a number of years.[10] English ships continued to come to the New England area for fishing and trade with the Indians.[11]

Plymouth Colony

In December 1620, a group of Pilgrims established Plymouth Colony just to the south of Massachusetts Bay, seeking to preserve their cultural identity and attain religious independence.[12] Plymouth's colonists faced great hardships and earned few profits for their investors, who sold their interests to the settlers in 1627.[13] Edward Winslow and William Bradford, two of its leaders, were likely authors of a work published in England in 1622 called Mourt's Relation. This book in some ways resembles a promotional tract intended to encourage further migration.[14] There were other short-lived colonial settlements in 1623 and 1624 at present-day Weymouth, Massachusetts; the Wessagusset Colony of Thomas Weston and an effort by Robert Gorges to establish an overarching colonial structure both failed.[15][16]

Cape Ann settlement

In 1623, the Plymouth Council for New England (successor to the Plymouth Company) established a small fishing village at Cape Ann under the supervision of the Dorchester Company, with Thomas Gardner as its overseer. This company was originally organized through the efforts of Puritan minister John White (1575–1648) of Dorchester, in the English county of Dorset. White has been called "the father of the Massachusetts Colony" because of his influence in establishing this settlement and despite the fact that he never emigrated.[17] The Cape Ann settlement was not profitable, and the financial backers of the Dorchester Company terminated their support by the end of 1625. Their settlement was abandoned at present-day Gloucester, but a few settlers remained in the area, including Roger Conant, establishing a settlement a little further south, near the village of the Naumkeag tribe.[18]

Archbishop William Laud was a favorite advisor of King Charles I and a dedicated Anglican, and he sought to suppress the religious practices of Puritans and other nonconforming beliefs in England. The persecution of many Puritans in the 1620s led them to believe that religious reform would not be possible while Charles was king, and many decided to seek a new life in the New World.[19]

John White continued to seek funding for a colony. On 19 March 1627/8,[20] the Council for New England issued a land grant to a new group of investors that included a few holdovers from the Dorchester Company. The land grant was for territory between the Charles and Merrimack Rivers, including a three-mile (4.8 km) buffer to the north of the Merrimack and to the south of the Charles, that extended from "the Atlantick and westerne sea and ocean on the east parte, to the South sea on the west parte."[21] The company to whom the grant was sold was styled "The New England Company for a Plantation in Massachusetts Bay".[22] The company elected Matthew Cradock as its first governor, and immediately began organizing provisions and recruiting settlers.

The company sent approximately 100 new settlers with provisions to join Conant in 1628, led by Governor's Assistant John Endecott, one of the grantees.[23] The next year, Naumkeag was renamed Salem and fortified by another 300 settlers, led by Rev. Francis Higginson, one of the first ministers of the settlement.[24] The first winters were difficult, with colonists struggling against disease and starvation, resulting in a significant number of deaths.[25][26]

The company leaders sought a Royal Charter for the colony because they were concerned about the legality of conflicting land claims given to several companies (including the New England Company) for the little-known territories of the New World, and because of the increasing number of Puritans who wanted to join the company. Charles granted the new charter on 4 March 1628/9,[27] superseding the land grant and establishing a legal basis for the new English colony at Massachusetts. It was not apparent whether Charles knew that the Company was meant to support the Puritan emigration, and he was likely left to assume that it was purely for business purposes, as was the custom. The charter omitted a significant clause: the location for the annual stockholders' meeting. Charles dissolved Parliament in 1629, whereupon the company's directors met to consider the possibility of moving the company's seat of governance to the colony. This was followed by the Cambridge Agreement later that year, in which a group of investors agreed to emigrate and work to buy out others who would not emigrate.

The Massachusetts Bay Colony became the first English chartered colony whose board of governors did not reside in England. This independence helped the settlers to maintain their Puritan religious practices with very little oversight by the king, Archbishop Laud, and the Anglican Church. The charter remained in force for 55 years; Charles II revoked it in 1684 as a result of colonial insubordination with trade, tariff, and navigation laws.[28]

Colonial history

A flotilla of ships sailed from England beginning in April 1630, sometimes known as the Winthrop Fleet. The fleet began arriving at Salem in June and carried more than 700 colonists, Governor John Winthrop, and the colonial charter.[29] Winthrop is reputed to have delivered his famous "City upon a Hill" sermon either before or during the voyage.[30]

Detail of sounding board, Old Ship Church (1681), Hingham, Massachusetts, oldest Puritan meetinghouse in Massachusetts.

For the next ten years, there was a steady exodus of Puritans from England, with about 10,000 people emigrating to Massachusetts and the neighbouring colonies, a phenomenon now called the Great Migration.[31] Many ministers reacted to the repressive religious policies of England, making the trip with their flocks. John Cotton, Roger Williams, Thomas Hooker, and others became leaders of Puritan congregations. Religious divisions and the need for additional land prompted a number of migrations that resulted in the establishment of the Connecticut Colony (by Hooker) and the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations (by Williams and Anne Hutchinson). Minister John Wheelwright was banished in the wake of the Antinomian Controversy (like Anne Hutchinson), and he moved north to found Exeter, New Hampshire.

The advent of the English Civil War in the early 1640s brought a halt to major migration, and a significant number of men returned to England to fight in the war. Massachusetts authorities were sympathetic to the Parliamentary cause, and had generally positive relationships with the governments of the English Commonwealth and The Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell. The colony's economy began to diversify in the 1640s, as the fur trading, lumber, and fishing industries found markets in Europe and the West Indies, and the colony's shipbuilding industry developed. The growth of a generation of people who were born in the colony and the rise of a merchant class began to slowly change the political and cultural landscape of the colony, even though its governance continued to be dominated by relatively conservative Puritans.

Colonial support for the Commonwealth presented problems upon the restoration to the throne of Charles II in 1660. Charles sought to extend royal influence over the colonies, which Massachusetts resisted more than the other colonies. For example, the colonial government repeatedly refused requests by Charles and his agents to allow the Church of England to become established, and it resisted adherence to the Navigation Acts, laws that constrained colonial trade.

All of the New England colonies were ravaged by King Philip's War (1675–1676), when the Indians of southern New England rose up against the colonists and were decisively defeated, although at great cost in life to the colonies. The Massachusetts frontier was particularly hard hit, with several communities being abandoned in the Connecticut and Swift River valleys. By the end of the war, most of the Indian population of southern New England made peace treaties with the colonists.

Revocation of charter

Following the English Restoration in 1660, matters of colonial administration drew the king's attention. Massachusetts in particular was reluctant to agree that the king had any sort of authority to control its governance.[32] This led to crises in the 1660s and late 1670s in which steps were first planned, and then executed in England to vacate the colonial charter. The Lords of Trade had decided for a variety of reasons to consolidate the New England colonies; they issued quo warranto writs in 1681 for the charters of several North American colonies, including Massachusetts.[33] The Massachusetts writ was never served for technical reasons, and the charter was not formally vacated until the chancery court issued a scire facias writ formally annulling the charter on June 18, 1684.[34] The proceedings were arranged so that the time had expired for the colonial authorities to defend the charter, before they even learned of the event.[35]

Unifications and restoration

From 1686, the colony's territory was administratively unified by James II of England with the other New England colonies in the Dominion of New England. The dominion was governed by Sir Edmund Andros without any local representation beyond hand-picked councillors, and was extremely unpopular in New England. Massachusetts authorities conspired to have Andros arrested in April 1689 after the 1688 Glorious Revolution in England, and they reestablished government under the forms of the vacated charter. However, dissenters from the Puritan rule argued that the government lacked a proper constitutional foundation, and some of its actions were resisted on that basis. The years from 1689 to 1692 were also difficult ones, since the colony was at the forefront of King William's War, and its frontier communities were ravaged by attacks organized in New France and conducted by French and Indian raiding parties.

King William III issued a charter in 1691, despite efforts by Massachusetts agents to revive the old colonial charter. It was chiefly negotiated by Increase Mather in his role as the colony's ambassador-extraordinary,[36] unifying Massachusetts Bay with Plymouth Colony, Martha's Vineyard, Nantucket, and territories that roughly encompass present-day Maine, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia to form the Province of Massachusetts Bay. This new charter additionally extended voting rights to non-Puritans, an outcome that Mather had tried to avoid.[37]


Life could be quite difficult in the early years of the colony. Many colonists lived in fairly crude structures, including dugouts, wigwams, and dirt-floor huts made using wattle and daub construction. Construction improved in later years, and houses began to be sheathed in clapboard, with thatch or plank roofs and wooden chimneys.[38] Wealthier individuals would extend their house by adding a leanto on the back, which allowed a larger kitchen (possibly with a brick or stone chimney including an oven), additional rooms, and a sleeping loft. These houses were the precursors to what is now called the saltbox style of architecture.[39] Interiors became more elaborate in later years, with plaster walls, wainscoting, and potentially expensive turned woodwork in the most expensive homes.[40]

Colonists arriving after the first wave found that the early towns did not have room for them. Seeking land of their own, groups of families would petition the government for land on which to establish a new town; the government would typically allow the group's leaders to select the land. These grants were typically about 40 square miles (10,000 ha), and were located sufficiently near other towns to facilitate defense and social support. The group leaders would also be responsible for acquiring native title to the lands that they selected.[41] By this means, the colony expanded into the interior, spawning settlements in adjacent territories as well.[42]

The land within a town would be divided by communal agreement, usually allocating by methods that originated in England. Outside a town center, land would be allocated for farming, some of which might be held communally. Farmers with large plots of land might build a house near their properties on the outskirts of the town.[43] A town center that was well laid out would be fairly compact, with a tavern, school, possibly some small shops, and a meeting house that was used for civic and religious functions.[40] The meeting house would be the center of the town's political and religious life. Church services might be held for several hours on Wednesday and all day Sunday. Puritans did not observe annual holidays, especially Christmas, which they said had pagan roots. Annual town meetings would be held at the meeting house, generally in May, to elect the town's representatives to the general court and to transact other community business. Towns often had a village green, used for outdoor celebrations and activities such as military exercises of the town's trainband or militia.

Marriage and family life

Many of the early colonists who migrated from England came with some or all of their family.[44] It was expected that individuals would marry fairly young and begin producing offspring. Infant mortality rates were comparatively low, as were instances of childhood death.[45] Men who lost their wives often remarried fairly quickly, especially if they had children needing care. Older widows would also sometimes marry for financial security. It was also normal for older widowed parents to live with one of their children. Due to the Puritan perception of marriage as a civil union, divorce did sometimes occur and could be pursued by both genders.[46]

Sexual activity was expected to be confined to marriage. Sex outside of marriage was considered fornication if neither partner was married, and adultery if one or both were married to someone else. Fornication was generally punished by fines and pressure to marry; a woman who gave birth to an illegitimate child could also be fined. Adultery and rape were more serious crimes, and both were punishable by death. Rape, however, required more than one witness, and was therefore rarely prosecuted. Sexual activity between men was called sodomy, and was also punishable by death.[47]

Within the marriage, the husband was typically responsible for supplying the family's financial needs, although it was not uncommon for women to work in the fields and to perform some sort of home labor (for example, spinning thread or weaving cloth) to supplement the family income. Women were almost exclusively responsible for seeing to the welfare of the children.

Children were baptized at the local meeting house within a week of being born. The mother was usually not present because she was still recovering from the birth, and the child's name was usually chosen by the father. Names were propagated within the family, and names would be reused when infants died. If an adult died without issue, his (or her) name could be carried on when the siblings of the deceased named children in his memory.

Most children received some form of schooling, something which the colony's founders believed to be important for forming a proper relationship with God. Towns were obligated to provide education for their children, which was usually satisfied by hiring a teacher of some sort. The quality of these instructors varied, from minimally educated local people to Harvard-educated ministers.


The structure of the colonial government changed over the lifetime of the charter. The colonial charter was designed for the management of a corporation, and the needs of the colonial government did not always fit well into this model. The result was that the government began with a corporate organization that included a governor and deputy governor, a general court of its shareholders (known as "freemen"), and a council of assistants similar to a board of directors.[48] It ended with a governor and deputy governor, a bicameral legislature that included a representative lower house, and a body of freemen, a subset of the colony's adult inhabitants who were authorized to vote in elections. The council of assistants sat as the upper house of the legislature and served as the judicial court of last appeal.

Massachusetts Bay Colony, 300th Anniversary Issue of 1930

The charter granted the general court the authority to elect officers and to make laws for the colony. Its first meeting in America was held in October 1630, but it was attended by only eight freemen.[48] They formed the first council of assistants, and voted (contrary to the terms of the charter) that the governor and deputy should be elected by them, from their number.[49] This was modified in the next session of the general court, in which the governor and deputy were to be elected by the general court.[50]

An additional 116 settlers were admitted to the general court as freemen in 1631, but most of the governing power, as well as the judicial power, remained with the council of assistants.[51] They also enacted a law specifying that only those men who "are members of some of the churches" in the colony were eligible to become freemen and gain the vote.[49] This restriction on the franchise was not liberalized until after the English Restoration.[50] The process by which individuals became members of one of the colony's churches involved a detailed questioning by the church elders of their beliefs and religious experiences; as a result, only individuals whose religious views accorded with those of the church leadership were likely to become members and gain the ability to vote in the colony.[52] After a protest over the imposition of taxes by a meeting of the council of assistants, the general court ordered each town to send two representatives, known as deputies, to meet with the court to discuss matters of taxation.[53]

Questions of governance and representation arose again in 1634, when several deputies demanded to see the charter, which the assistants had kept hidden from public view. The deputies learned of the provisions that the general court should make all laws, and that all freemen should be members of the general court. They then demanded that the charter be enforced to the letter, which Governor Winthrop pointed out was impractical given the growing number of freemen. The parties reached a compromise, and agreed that the general court would be made up of two deputies elected by each town.[53] The 1634 election resulted in the election of Dudley as governor, and the general court proceeded to reserve for itself a large number of powers, including those of taxation, distribution of land, and the admission of freemen.[54]

The transformation was complete: a trading company had become a (somewhat) representative democracy. A legal case in 1642 brought about the separation of the council of assistants into an upper house of the general court. The case involved a widow's lost pig and had been overturned by the general court; but the assistants had sat in judicial decision on the case and voted as a body to veto the general court's act.[55] The consequence of the ensuing debate was that the general court voted in 1644 that the council of assistants would sit and deliberate separately from the general court (they had sat together until then), the concurrence of both bodies being required for the passage of legislation. Judicial appeals were to be decided by a joint session, since otherwise the assistants would be in the position to veto attempts to overturn their own decisions.[56] A group of emigrants had bought all the Massachusetts Bay Company's stock and brought the Charter to America in 1630; neither the English king nor Parliament nor an English company exerted any influence in Massachusetts Bay Colony.[57] So it was in effect a self-ruling republic for some decades, also practicing separation of powers.

Laws and judiciary

In 1641, the colony formally adopted its first code of laws, the Massachusetts Body of Liberties[58] written or compiled by Nathaniel Ward.[59] This document consisted of 100 civil and criminal laws based upon the social sanctions recorded in the Bible.[60] These laws formed the nucleus of colonial legislation until independence, and contained some provisions that were fairly advanced for the time. Among these provisions were the ideas of equal protection and double jeopardy that were later enshrined in the United States Constitution.[59]

Many things were frowned upon culturally which modern readers might consider relatively trivial actions, and some led to criminal prosecution. These included smoking tobacco, abusing one's mother-in-law, profane dancing, pulling hair, sleeping during church services, riding behind two men (a woman named Lydia was convicted of this), playing cards, and engaging in any number of activities on the Sabbath.[61]

The colony's council of assistants sat as the final court of appeal, and as the principal court for criminal issues of "life, limb, or banishment" and civil issues where the damages exceeded £100.[60] Lesser offenses were heard in county courts or by commissioners appointed for hearing minor disputes. The lower courts were also responsible for issuing licenses and for matters such as probate. Juries were authorized to decide questions of both fact and law, although the court was able to decide in the event that a jury failed to reach a decision.[62] Sentences for offenses included fines and corporal punishments such as whipping and sitting in the stocks, with the punishments of banishment from the colony and death by hanging being reserved for the most serious offenses.[63] Evidence was sometimes based on hearsay and superstition; for example, the "ordeal of touch" was used in 1646 (in which someone accused of murder is forced to touch the dead body; if blood appears, the accused is deemed guilty) to convict and execute a woman accused of murdering her newborn child.[64] Bodies of individuals hanged for piracy were sometimes gibbeted (publicly displayed) on harbor islands visible to seagoing vessels. (Nixes Mate was one such site where pirate William Fly's body was displayed, now little more than a granite outcrop.)[65]

Notable criminal prosecutions

Quaker Mary Dyer led to execution on Boston Common, June 1, 1660, by an unknown 19th century artist

One of the first people to be executed in the colony was Dorothy Talbye, who was apparently delusional. She was hanged in 1638 for murdering her daughter, as the common law of Massachusetts made no distinction at the time between insanity (or mental illness) and criminal behavior.[66] Midwife Margaret Jones was convicted of being a witch and hanged in 1648 after the condition of patients allegedly worsened in her care.[67]

The colonial leadership was the most active in New England in the persecution of Quakers. In 1660, one of the most notable instances was English Quaker Mary Dyer who was hanged in Boston for repeatedly defying a law banning Quakers from the colony.[68] Dyer was one of the four executed Quakers known as the Boston martyrs. Executions ceased in 1661 when King Charles II explicitly forbade Massachusetts from executing anyone for professing Quakerism.[69]

New England Confederation

In 1643, Massachusetts Bay joined Plymouth Colony, Connecticut Colony, and New Haven Colony in the New England Confederation, a loose coalition organized primarily to coordinate military and administrative matters among the Puritan colonies.[70] It was most active in the 1670s during King Philip's War.[71] (New Hampshire had not yet been organized as a separate province, and both it and Rhode Island were excluded because they were not Puritan.)[72]

Economy and trade

In the early years, the colony was highly dependent on the import of staples from England and was supported by the investments of a number of wealthy immigrants. Certain businesses were quick to thrive, notably shipbuilding, fisheries, and the fur and lumber trades. As early as 1632, ships built in the colony began trading with other colonies, England, and foreign ports in Europe. By 1660, the colony's merchant fleet was estimated at 200 ships and, by the end of the century, its shipyards were estimated to turn out several hundred ships annually.[73] In the early years, the fleet principally carried fish to destinations from the West Indies to Europe.[74] It was common for a merchant to ship dried fish to Portugal or Spain, pick up wine and oil for transport to England, and then carry finished goods from England or elsewhere back to the colony.[75] This and other patterns of trade became illegal following the introduction of the Navigation Acts in 1651, turning colonial merchants who continued these trading patterns into de facto smugglers. Many colonial authorities were merchants or were politically dependent on them, and they opposed being required by the crown to collect duties imposed by those acts.[76]

The fur trade only played a modest role in the colony's economy because its rivers did not connect its centers well with the Indians who engaged in fur trapping. Timber began to take on an increasingly important role in the economy, especially for naval purposes, after conflicts between England and the Dutch depleted England's supplies of ship masts.[77]

The colony's economy depended on the success of its trade, in part because its land was not as suitable for agriculture as that of other colonies such as Virginia, where large plantations could be established. The fishery was important enough that those involved in it were exempted from taxation and military service.[78] Larger communities supported craftsmen skilled in providing many of the necessities of 17th century life. Some income-producing activities took place in the home, such as carding, spinning, and weaving of wool and other fibers.[79]

Goods were transported to local markets over roads that were sometimes little more than widened Indian trails.[80] Towns were required to maintain their roads, on penalty of fines, and the colony required special town commissions to lay out roads in a more sensible manner in 1639. Bridges were fairly uncommon, since they were expensive to maintain, and fines were imposed on their owners for the loss of life or goods if they failed. Consequently, most river crossings were made by ferry. Notable exceptions were a bridge across the Mystic River constructed in 1638, and another over the Saugus River, whose upkeep costs were subsidized by the colony.[81]

The colonial government attempted to regulate the economy in a number of ways. On several occasions, it passed laws regulating wages and prices of economically important goods and services, but most of these initiatives did not last very long.[82] The trades of shoe-making and coopering (barrel-making) were authorized to form guilds, making it possible to set price, quality, and expertise levels for their work. The colony set standards governing the use of weights and measures. For example, mill operators were required to weigh grain before and after milling, to ensure that the customer received back what he delivered (minus the miller's percentage).[83]

The Puritan dislike of ostentation led the colony to also regulate expenditures on what it perceived as luxury items. Items of personal adornment were frowned upon, such as lace and costly silk outerwear in particular. Attempts to ban these items failed, and the colony resorted to laws restricting their display to those who could demonstrate £200 in assets.[84]


Most of the people who arrived during the first 12 years emigrated from two regions of England. Many of the colonists came from the county of Lincolnshire and East Anglia, northeast of London, and a large group also came from Devon, Somerset, and Dorset in the southwest of England. These areas provided the bulk of the migration, although colonists also came from other regions of England.[85] The pattern of migration often centered around specific Nonconformist clergy who sought to leave England under threat from Archbishop Laud, who encouraged their flock to accompany them.[86] One characteristic unique to the New England colonies (as distinguished from some of the other English colonies) was that most of the immigrants were emigrating for religious and political reasons, rather than economic ones.[87]

The preponderance of the immigrants were well-to-do gentry and skilled craftsmen. They brought with them apprentices and servants, the latter of whom were sometimes in indentured servitude.[88] Few titled nobility emigrated, even though some supported the emigration politically and financially and also acquired land holdings in Massachusetts and other colonies.[89] Merchants also represented a significant proportion of the migrants, often the children of the gentry, and they played an important role in establishing the economy of the colony.[88]

With the start of the English Civil War in 1642, emigration came to a comparative standstill, and some colonists even returned to England to fight for the Parliamentary cause. In the following years, most of the immigrants came for economic reasons; they were merchants, seamen, and skilled craftsmen. Following the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, the colony also saw in an influx of French Protestant Huguenots. During the period of the charter colony, small numbers of Scots immigrated, but these were assimilated into the colony.[90] The population of Massachusetts remained largely English in character until the 1840s.[91]

Slavery existed but was not widespread within the colony. Some Indians captured in the Pequot War were enslaved, with those posing the greatest threat being transported to the West Indies and exchanged for goods and slaves.[92] Governor John Winthrop owned a few Indian slaves,[93] and Governor Simon Bradstreet owned two black slaves.[94] The Body of Liberties enacted in 1641 included rules governing the treatment and handling of slaves.[95] Bradstreet reported in 1680 that the colony had 100 to 120 slaves, but historian Hugh Thomas documents evidence suggesting that there may have been a somewhat larger number.[96]


The Massachusetts colony was dominated by its rivers and coastline. Major rivers included the Charles and Merrimack, as well as a portion of the Connecticut River, which has been used to transport furs and timbers to Long Island Sound. Cape Ann juts into the Gulf of Maine, providing harbors for fishermen plying the fishing banks to the east, and Boston's harbor provided secure anchorage for seagoing commercial vessels. Development in Maine was restricted to coastal areas, and large inland areas remained under native control until after King Philip's War, particularly the uplands in what is now Worcester County.


The colonial charter specified that the boundaries were to be from three miles (4.8 km) north of the Merrimack River to three miles south of the Charles River and westward to the "South Sea" (i.e., the Pacific Ocean).[21] At the time, the course of neither of the rivers was known for any significant length, which eventually led to boundary disputes with the colony's neighbors.[97] The colony's claims were large, but the practicalities of the time meant that they never actually controlled any land further west than the Connecticut River valley. The colony also claimed additional lands by conquest and purchase, further extending the territory that it administered.

The southeastern boundary with the Plymouth Colony was first surveyed in 1639 and accepted by both colonies in 1640.[98] It is known in Massachusetts as the "Old Colony Line", and is still visible as the boundary between Norfolk County to the north and Bristol and Plymouth Counties to the south.[99]

The northern boundary was originally thought to be roughly parallel to the latitude of the mouth of the Merrimack River, since the river was assumed to flow primarily west. This was found not to be the case and, in 1652, Governor Endecott sent a survey party to locate the northernmost point on the Merrimack. Local Indians guided the party to the outlet of Lake Winnipesaukee, incorrectly claiming that as the Merrimack's source. (The Merrimack's principal tributary goes significantly further north as the Pemigewasset River.) The survey party carved lettering into a rock there (now called Endicott Rock), and its latitude was taken to be the colony's northern boundary. When extended eastward, this line was found to meet the Atlantic near Casco Bay in present-day Maine.

Following this discovery, the colonial magistrates began proceedings to bring existing settlements under their authority in southern New Hampshire and Maine.[100] This extension of the colonial claim conflicted with several proprietary grants owned by the heirs of John Mason and Sir Ferdinando Gorges.[101] The Mason heirs pursued their claims in England, and the result was the formation of the Province of New Hampshire in 1679.[102] The current boundary between Massachusetts and New Hampshire was not fixed until the 18th century. In 1678, the colony purchased the claims of the Gorges heirs, gaining control over the territory between the Piscataqua and Kennebec Rivers.[103] The colony and later the province and state retained control of Maine until it was granted statehood in 1820.[104]

The colony performed a survey in 1642 to determine its southern boundary west to the Connecticut River.[105] This line, south of the present boundary, was protested by Connecticut, but stood until the 1690s, when Connecticut performed its own survey.[106] Most of today's Massachusetts boundaries with its neighbors were fixed in the 18th century.[107] The most significant exception was the eastern boundary with Rhode Island, which required extensive litigation, including Supreme Court rulings, before it was finally resolved in the 19th century.[108]

Lands which had previously belonged to the Pequots to the southwest were divided after the Pequot War in present-day Rhode Island and eastern Connecticut. Claims were disputed in this area for many years, particularly between Connecticut and Rhode Island.[109][110] Massachusetts administered Block Island and the area around present-day Stonington, Connecticut as part of these spoils of war,[111][112] and was one of several claimants to land in what was known as Narragansett Country (roughly Washington County, Rhode Island). Massachusetts lost all of these territories in the 1660s, when Connecticut and Rhode Island received their royal charters.[113][114]

Timeline of settlement

This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it.

See also


  1. Google phrase: distance Salem,MA to Boston,MA
    Results: 38 min (22.2 mi) via US-1 S / 37 min (15.2 mi) via MA-107 and MA-1A S / 38 min (26.2 mi) via I-95 S and I-93 S
  2. Hart, pp. 1:129–131
  3. 1 2 Hart, p. 1:129
  4. Vaughan, p. 28
  5. Hart, pp. 1:127–128
  6. The 1606 charter did not assign names to the regional companies or councils, but the April 4, 1629 charter granted by King Charles I erroneously asserted that the 1606 charter had given the name "Council established at Plymouth in the county of Devon" to the council governing the "second Colony."
  7. Hart, p. 1:5
  8. Hart, pp. 1:16–17
  9. Thayer, pp. 13–216
  10. Vaughan, p. 14
  11. Vaughan, p. 15
  12. Hart, pp. 1:67–70
  13. Stratton, p. 27
  14. Heath, pp. xiii–xv
  15. Labaree, p. 26
  16. Adams and Nash, pp. 29–34
  17. Young, Alexander (1846). Chronicles of the First Planters of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, 1623–1636. Boston: C. C. Little and J. Brown. p. 26. Retrieved 2008-12-23.
  18. Moore, p. 238
  19. Labaree, pp. 17–19
  20. Dates in this article are in the Julian calendar, which was then in use in England. The new year in that calendar fell on March 25, so dates between January 1 and March 25 are written with both years to avoid confusion.
  21. 1 2 Morison (1981), p. 32
  22. Morison (1981), p. 31
  23. Moore, pp. 347–348
  24. Hubbard (1848), p. 112
  25. Labaree, p. 39
  26. Winthrop et al, p. 35
  27. MacDonald, p. 22
  28. Francis, Richard. Judge Sewall's Apology. p. 41
  29. Labaree, p. 30
  30. Bremer (2003), p. 175
  31. Labaree, p. 85
  32. Adams, pp. 181–182
  33. Hart, p. 1:564
  34. Adams, p. 212
  35. Hart, p. 1:565
  36. Starkey, pp. 129–131
  37. Starkey, p. 131
  38. Labaree, p. 56
  39. Labaree, pp. 56–58
  40. 1 2 Labaree, p. 59
  41. Labaree, pp. 48–49
  42. Labaree, pp. 84–90
  43. Labaree, p. 51
  44. Main, p. 29
  45. Hawke, David (2003). Everyday Life in Early America. New York: Harper. p. 66. ISBN 0060912510.
  46. Foster, Thomas (October 1999). "Deficient Husbands: Manhood, Sexual Incapacity, and Male Marital Sexuality in Seventeenth-Century New England". The William and Mary Quarterly. 56: 723–744. doi:10.2307/2674233.
  47. Main, pp. 64–65
  48. 1 2 Hart, p. 1:103
  49. 1 2 Hart, p. 1:105
  50. 1 2 Hart, p. 1:106
  51. Hart, pp. 1:104–105
  52. Main, p. 47
  53. 1 2 Hart, p. 1:107
  54. Hart, p. 1:108
  55. Hart, p. 1:113
  56. Hart, p. 1:112
  57. Clifton E. Olmstead (1960), History of Religion in the United States, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., p. 71
  58. Bremer (2003), p. 305
  59. 1 2 "Massachusetts Body of Liberties". Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Retrieved 2012-05-22.
  60. 1 2 Dow, p. 200
  61. All of these crimes were drawn from the records of Essex County during the colonial period. Dow, pp. 224–225
  62. Dow, p. 201
  63. Dow, pp. 200–204
  64. Dow, p. 202
  65. Dow, p. 224
  66. Addison, p. 131
  67. Guiley, p. 186
  68. Rogers, pp. 1–2
  69. Bremer (2006), p. 1:xli
  70. Labaree, pp. 87–88
  71. Labaree, pp. 100–105
  72. West, p. 104
  73. Hart, p. 1:448
  74. Labaree, p. 90
  75. Labaree, p. 93
  76. Labaree, pp. 94–95
  77. Labaree, p. 92
  78. Hart, p. 1:424
  79. Hart, p. 1:425
  80. Hart, p. 1:431
  81. Hart, p. 1:432
  82. Hart, pp. 1:426–427
  83. Hart, p. 1:427
  84. Hart, p. 1:429
  85. Hart, pp. 1:56–57
  86. Hart, p. 1:55
  87. Hart, p. 1:52
  88. 1 2 Hart, p. 1:54
  89. Hart, p. 1:53
  90. Hart, pp. 1:61–62
  91. Hart, p. 1:63
  92. Bremer (2003), p. 273
  93. Bremer (2003), p. 314
  94. Anderson, p. 1:211
  95. Thomas, p. 453
  96. Thomas, p. 207
  97. Hubbard (2009), pp. 14–17
  98. Winthrop et al, p. 339
  99. Morison (1956), p. 156
  100. Mayo, pp. 221–226
  101. Hubbard (2009), pp. 13–14
  102. Fry, pp. 54–65
  103. Fry, pp. 19–22, 65
  104. Labaree, p. 87
  105. Bowen, p. 15
  106. Bowen, p. 54
  107. Field, p. 171
  108. Field, p. 374
  109. Wheeler, pp. 1–2
  110. Field, pp. 98–101
  111. Wheeler, p. 11
  112. Field, p. 107
  113. Wheeler, p. 15
  114. Field, pp. 100,107
  115. 1630: Information and Much More from


Online primary sources

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Massachusetts Bay Company.

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 12/2/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.