letter to Chief Justice William Stoughton on September 2, 1692 in which he congratulates him for "the extinguishing of as a wonderful a piece of devilism as has been seen in the world" and says that "one half of my efforts to serve you have not been told or seen." (The holograph of this letter did not arrive in the archives until about 1985, see link.) 1885: Harvard librarian JL Sibley took on the task of compiling biographies for Harvard graduates and in his entry on Cotton Mather (HU 1678), he presents a lengthy multi-page and even-handed summary of CM's debate with Calef. "The Mathers strove hard to put down Calef's book, and to crowd it into oblivion. ... But Calef's book is one of merit. Without it, our view of the proceedings of the Mathers and others in connection with the witchcraft delusion would have been very incomplete." This same year, GH Moore, superintendent of the Lenox Library, writes "no better authority can be found than Robert Calef's 'Matters of Fact' ... That Mr. Calef was one of the most useful men of his day and generation in Massachusetts is amply demonstrated by his book, which ... continues to this day the most valuable contemporary work on the Witchcraft Delusion. Its tone and temper contrast very creditably with those of his chief antagonist, Cotton Mather, whose fingers were grievously burned in attempting to handle Calef, whom he denounced, with unusual professional emphasis, as a 'Coale fetch'd from Hell.'" In a paper delivered to the American Antiquarian Society (AAS) in 1888, GH Moore writes, "Calef's letter to Willard (September 20, 1695) is one of the rough diamonds of his marvellous book ..." 1891: Harvard English Professor Barrett Wendell writes, "Calef's temper was that of the rational eighteenth century. The Mathers belonged rather to the sixteenth — the age of passionate religious enthusiasm ... Wherefore such of posterity as have not loved his memory have inclined now and again to call [Cotton Mather] by a name he would probably have been the first to use in their place — a very great liar." But, Wendell concludes, "... he meant to be honest." 20th-century revision from Apologism to Neo-credulism In 1924, TJ Holmes, wrote that the critical view of Cotton Mather was based on the "insignificant" case of Margaret Rule and his contact over it with Calef. "Mather opponents tuned their fiddle