general history was that of J. G. Palfrey, History of New
England (5 vols., Boston, 1858–1890), to the War of Independence.
It is generally accurate in facts but written in an unsatisfactorily
eulogistic vein. Of importance in more modern views is a volume
of Lectures Delivered . . . before the Lowell Institute . . . by Members
of the Massachusetts Historical Society on Subjects Relating to the
Early History of Massachusetts (Boston, 1869), perhaps especially
the lectures of G. E. Ellis, later expanded, and in the process somewhat
weakened, into his Puritan Age and Rule in the Colony of the
Massachusetts Bay, 1629–1685 (Boston, 1888; 3rd ed., 1891). See
C. F. Adams, Massachusetts: its Historians and its History (Boston,
1893), for a critique of the “filiopietistic” traditions of Massachusetts
writers; also his Three Episodes of Massachusetts History,—namely,
Settlement of the Colony, Antinomianism, and church
and town government in Quincy from 1634–1888 (2 vols., Boston,
1892). On town government see further E. Channing in Johns
Hopkins University, Studies in History vol. ii. (1884); P. E. Aldrich
in American Antiquarian Society, Proceedings, new series, vol. 3, pp.
111–124; and C. F. Adams and others in Massachusetts Historical
Society, Proceedings, 2nd series, vol. vii (1892). On the Pilgrims and
Puritans: See article Plymouth; also E. H. Byington, The Puritan
in England and America (Boston, 1896) and The Puritan as Colonist
and Reformer (Boston, 1899). On the Quaker Persecution:
R. P. Hallowell, The Quaker Invasion of Massachusetts (Boston,
1883; rev. ed., 1887). On Witchcraft: See C. W. Upham, Witchcraft
in Salem (2 vols., Boston, 1867); S. G. Drake, Annals of Witchcraft
(Boston, 1869) and The Witchcraft Delusion in New England
(3 vols., Roxbury, 1866), this last a reprint of accounts of the time
by Cotton Mather and R. Calef; W. F. Poole, “Cotton Mather
and Salem Witchcraft” (North American Review, April 1869);
and controversy of A. C. Goodell and G. H. Moore in Massachusetts
Historical Society, Proceedings. On Slavery: G. H. Moore,
Notes on the History of Slavery (New York, 1866); E. Washburn in
Collections, Massachusetts Historical Society, series 4, iv., 333–346;
C. Deane in same, pp. 375–442, and in Proceedings, American
Antiquarian Society, new series, iv., 191–222. In the essays of
J. R. Lowell are two on “New England two Centuries Ago” and
“Witchcraft.” For economic history, W. B. Weeden, Economic and
Social History of New England, 1620–1789 (2 vols., Boston, 1890);
C. H. J. Douglas, The Financial History of Massachusetts . . . to
the American Revolution (in Columbia University Studies, vol i.,
1892). On the revolutionary epoch, Mellen Chamberlain, John
Adams . . . with other Essays and Addresses (Boston, 1898);
T. Hutchinson, Diary and Letters (2 vols., Boston, 1884–1886);
H. A. Cushing, Transition from Provincial to Commonwealth Government
in Massachusetts (Columbia University Studies in History, vol.
iii., 1896); S. B. Harding, Contest over the Ratification of the Federal
Constitution in Massachusetts (Harvard University Studies, New York,
1896); and on the Shays Rebellion compare J. P. Warren in American
Historical Review (Oct., 1905). On New England discontent preceding
1812, Henry Adams, Documents Relating to New England
Federalism, 1780–1815 (Boston, 1877); T. W. Higginson, Massachusetts
in the Army and Navy during the War of 1861–65 (Official,
Boston, 2 vols., 1896). For a list of the historical societies of the
state consult A. M. Davis in Publications of the Colonial Society of
Massachusetts, vol. i.; the most important are the Massachusetts Historical
Society, established 1791, publishing Collections and Proceedings
(Boston) and the American Antiquarian Society, established
1812, publishing Proceedings (Worcester). In many cases the most
valuable material on various periods is indicated under the biographies
(or autobiographies in some cases) of the public men named in the
above article, to which add Timothy Pickering, George Cabot,
Joseph Warren, Elbridge Gerry, Benjamin F. Butler, G. S. Boutwell
and George F. Hoar. Many townships have published their local records,
and many township and county histories contain valuable
matter of general interest (e.g. as showing in detail township action
before the War of Independence), though generally weighted heavily
with genealogy and matters of merely local interest. In American
works of fiction, particularly of New England authors, the reader
will find a wealth of description of Massachusetts and New England
life, past and present, as in the writings of William D. Howells, Sarah
O. Jewett, Mary E. Wilkins-Freeman, Harriet B. Stowe and others.
MASSACRE, a wholesale indiscriminate killing of persons,
and also, in a transferred sense, of animals. The word is adopted
from the French; but its origin is obscure. The meaning and
the old form macecle seem to point to it being a corruption
of the Lat. macellum, butcher’s shop or shambles, hence meat
market; this is probably from the root mac-, seen in μάχεσθαι,
to fight, μάχαιρα, sword, and Lat. mactare, to sacrifice. Another
derivation connects with the Old Low Ger. matsken, to cut in
pieces; cf. mod. Ger. metzeln, to massacre.
MASSAGE. The word massage has of late years come into general use to signify the method of treating disease or other
physical conditions by manipulating the muscles and joints.
According to Littré the word is derived from the Arabic mass,
and has the specific meaning of “pressing the muscular parts
of the body with the hands, and exercising traction on the
joints in order to give suppleness and stimulate vitality.”
It was probably adopted from the Arabian physicians by the
French, who have played a leading part in reviving this method
of treatment, which has been practised from time immemorial,
and by the most primitive people, but has from time to time
fallen into disuse among Western nations. In the Odyssey
the women are described as rubbing and kneading the heroes
on their return from battle. In India, under the name “shampoo”
(tshāmpuā), the same process has formed part of the
native system of medicine from the most remote times; professional
massers were employed there by Alexander the Great
in 327 B.C. In China the method is also of great antiquity,
and practised by a professional class; the Swedish gymnastic
system instituted by Pehr Henrik Ling is derived from the
book of Cong-Fou, the bonze of Tao-Sse. Hippocrates describes
and enjoins the use of manipulation, especially in cases of
stiff joints, and he was followed by other Greek physicians.
Oribasius gives an account of the application of friction with
the bare hands, which exactly corresponds with the modern
practice of massage. It is worthy of note that the treatment,
after being held in high esteem by the leading Greek physicians,
fell into disrepute with the profession, apparently on account
of its association with vicious abuses. The same drawback
has made itself felt in the present day, and can only be met
by the most scrupulous care in the choice of agents and the
manner of their employment. Among the Greeks, Romans,
Egyptians, and later the Turks, massage came to be part
of the ordinary procedure of the bath without any special
therapeutic intention, and the usage has survived until to-day;
but that mode of application was no doubt a refinement of
civilized life. Medical rubbing is older and more elementary
than bathing, as we see from its employment by savages. Probably
it was evolved independently among different races
from the natural instinct—shared by the lower animals—which
teaches to rub, press or lick any part of the body in which
uneasiness is felt, and is therefore the oldest of all therapeutic
means.
According to Weiss, the therapeutic use of massage was revived in Europe by Hieronymus Fabricius ab Aquapendente (1537–1619), who applied it to stiff joints and similar conditions. Paracelsus in his De medicina Aegyptiorum (1591), gives a description of methodical massage as practised by the Egyptians quite on modern lines. Thereafter it appears to have been adopted here and there by individual practitioners, and various references are made to it, especially by French writers. The word “massage” occurs in an essay written by Pierre Adolphe Piorry (1794–1879) for a large encyclopaedia which appeared in 1818, but it was probably used before. The practice was gradually advocated by an increasing number of medical men. In Great Britain it was called “medical rubbing,” and at Edinburgh Beveridge had a staff of eight trained male rubbers. A book published by Estradère in 1863 attracted much attention, but the man who contributed most to the modern popularity of massage was Metzger of Amsterdam, who began to use it tentatively in 1853, and then proceeded to study and apply it methodically. He published an essay on the subject in 1868. The modern refinements of the treatment are chiefly due to him. At the same time, its application by Dr Silas Weir Mitchell to hysterical and other nervous conditions, in conjunction with the “rest cure,” has done much to make it known.
Massage, as now practised, includes several processes, some of which are passive and others active. The former are carried out by an operator, and consist of rubbing and kneading the skin and deeper tissues with the hands, and exercising the joints by bending the patient’s limbs. The active movements consist of a special form of gymnastics, designed to exercise particular muscles or groups of muscles. In what is called “Swedish massage” the operator moves the limbs while the patient resists, thus bringing the opposing muscles into play. Some writers insist on confining the word “massage” to the rubbing processes, and use the general term “manipulation”
