Publications

Historians have long noted the centrality of Scripture in early New England, yet most of this work focuses on Massachusetts and tends to overlook Plymouth. Legal and political dimensions of Plymouth have also largely escaped scholarly attention. This essay argues that leading thinkers in Plymouth pursued a coherent approach to Mosaic law distinct from their counterparts in Massachusetts. These contrasting intellectual traditions trace back to Elizabethan puritans, whose writings influenced divergent developments in the two colonies. John Cotton strongly emphasized the eternality of Mosaic law in Massachusetts, while William Bradford advocated for moderation and conformity with English law in Plymouth. Similarly, Bradford’s transcription of a theological discussion by Plymouth clergy in 1642 largely cautioned against adopting elements of Mosaic law, whereas a roughly contemporaneous discussion by Cotton and other ministers in Massachusetts tended to embrace the idea. Finally, Bradford’s study of Hebrew toward the end of his life, as well as the expanded role of the Old Testament in Plymouth’s revised law code of 1658, further reveals the Plymouth puritans’ underappreciated contributions to early modern debates over divine law.

This essay explores how New England Puritans sought to enforce biblical adultery laws, especially the Mosaic death penalty. Drawing from Scriptural sources and influenced by earlier precedents such as Calvin’s Geneva, Puritans prosecuted adultery as a capital offense to further their aim of reforming social order. These efforts prompted legal developments and theological debates on both sides of the Atlantic throughout the seventeenth century. Although evidentiary issues, jurisdictional questions, and moral qualms often prevented executions, ordinary New Englanders anticipated and feared death as a plausible consequence for the crime of adultery. The rarity of executions, rather than serving as evidence of failure in the so-called Puritan reformation of manners, instead indicates a deterring effect and an impactful prosecutorial campaign to impose moral standards.