Michael Zittle, remembered as the Wizard of South Mountain, was a Maryland practitioner associated with spoken charms and a German conjuring book. Madeleine Vinton Dahlgren names him in the final chapter of South-Mountain Magic, published in 1882. Her account is especially valuable because she says she examined the book herself, while distinguishing that experience from stories of cures and inherited powers.
The surviving narrative documents beliefs and practices, not a demonstrated supernatural treatment. Dahlgren wrote from a strongly religious and often disapproving position. Her descriptions of diabolic power are interpretations within that worldview; they are not independent findings about the cause of anyone’s recovery.
The named practitioner
On printed page 204, Dahlgren identifies Michael Zittle as a prominent local practitioner who died in the summer of 1877. She says people came from around South Mountain and farther away, with many leaving convinced they had been cured. The number of visitors and their satisfaction are reported generally, without a list of cases, medical records or controlled comparisons.
She places his home within a mile of South-Mountain-House, her own mountain residence. That broad historical description is not used here to locate a present-day private home. Modern heritage accounts identify the surrounding community as Zittlestown, near Boonsboro, and remember Zittle as part of the region’s German-speaking cultural history.
The term wizard is a historical nickname attached to him. It should not be read as a verified description of a supernatural ability, nor as evidence that every neighbouring ghost or creature tradition was his invention. His healing reputation and his book are the subject of this case; the Snarly Yow dog narratives belong to a separate tradition recorded elsewhere in Dahlgren’s collection.
An offer that was not a successful treatment
Dahlgren describes a friend who suffered a prolonged eye complaint while on the mountain. Zittle repeatedly sent messages offering to help if allowed to speak the words over her. The friend apparently did not accept. She later regretted not at least meeting and talking with him, because he died some weeks afterwards.
This is an example of an offer, not a recorded cure. It gives no treatment outcome that could demonstrate efficacy. Dahlgren’s remarks about the state of Zittle’s soul when he died are similarly matters of reported belief and religious judgement, rather than a reliable medical account of his death.
Elsewhere in the chapter she discusses regional household charms and folk healing. These passages supply context for what saying the words meant locally. They do not establish that every described practice was performed by Zittle, and this article does not reproduce the ritual directions as health advice.
The book she says she saw
Dahlgren is more direct about examining a physical object. On printed page 207 she says she saw Zittle’s original conjuring book, written in German, and translated portions. Later she explains how this happened: while visiting a woman regarded as a local healer, she heard that the woman was using a borrowed book to try to identify a thief and recover stolen property.
Curious about the often-mentioned volume, Dahlgren obtained reluctant permission to take it home briefly. That is a particular claim of inspection, rather than a claim that she watched Zittle successfully perform its procedures. It also gives a limited glimpse of a book circulating between practitioners, not just a private possession that nobody else could see.
She reports its title in English as The Friend in Need; or, Secret Science. According to her description, the title page claimed translation from Spanish into German and carried a 1826 printing statement without naming a publisher or place. These are statements she found in the volume. They do not authenticate the book’s claimed Spanish manuscript origins or the antiquity of its contents.
Her summary ranges from recovering stolen goods to healing, protection and other forms of divination. She quotes some headings, omits material she considers blasphemous and acknowledges that her German was limited. Near the end, she says she had the book for only a few days and lacked reference works. Those limits matter when using her translations or identifying a particular edition.
What an examination can establish
If accepted as an honest account, Dahlgren’s inspection supports the existence of a particular text associated with Zittle and the kinds of claims written in it. A book containing a protection charm does not demonstrate that the charm protected anyone. Likewise, a printed promise to recover property does not show that the thief was identified.
Her account of the woman seeking stolen property supplies a reason the book was being consulted, but not a verified recovery resulting from it. The publication moves repeatedly between objects she describes, practices people told her about and explanations she proposes. Those layers should remain visible.
The book’s Christian names and symbols also attracted her criticism. She understood their use in charms as sacrilege and considered a diabolic explanation if the claimed effects were genuine. That conditional reasoning does not provide a supernatural diagnosis. It shows how the collector evaluated practices that differed from her own religious standards.
Succession, payment and family stories
Dahlgren says Zittle was believed to have passed his power and book to a relative. She subsequently identifies his son-in-law Summers as an alleged successor. The language is explicitly about what was said or believed to have happened; it is not documentation of a transferable force.
She also recounts a disturbance after Summers’s burial, when his widow feared consequences from aspects of the burial preparation and the body was reportedly exhumed. Dahlgren herself qualifies her dating of that event. The story illustrates the beliefs she was collecting, but the reviewed passage supplies no independent burial record or testimony from the people carrying out the exhumation.
Another tradition says Zittle’s success lasted while he refused payment, and that charging a fee brought bad luck. This links his reputation to expectations about gifts, money and the proper use of a power. It is not a comparative series establishing that either payment or its absence altered treatment outcomes.
Dahlgren’s final conclusion is a useful editorial boundary: the practices and narratives were told to her and accepted by her informants, but her collection could include deception, illusion and other misunderstandings. Recording a conviction is not the same as proving its explanation.
Later preservation and a visitable collection
A PBS Outdoors Maryland episode later discussed Zittle and described his spellbook as displayed at the Boonsborough Museum of History. That is a later account of the object’s public interpretation. UKPX has not compared a museum volume with Dahlgren’s borrowed copy or verified an unbroken ownership history.
The museum’s own current visitor page advertises tours from 1–4 p.m. on the second and fourth full weekends from May through December, plus appointments year-round. Confirm arrangements and any specific item’s availability before travelling. Older town listings give different seasons, so the museum’s own information is used here. Its images are expressly restricted and have not been copied.
Outcome: Insufficient evidence
UKPX classifies the claimed healing and magical powers as Insufficient evidence. Dahlgren supplies a named historical subject, an asserted inspection of his book and attributed reports of practices. The reviewed evidence does not include independently verified treatment outcomes, controlled tests or a demonstrated supernatural mechanism.
The year filter remains undated because individual practice and cure dates are not established. The reported death in 1877 and the 1882 publication date are chronology markers, not substitutes for an incident date. The museum’s existence likewise establishes a public heritage venue, not the effectiveness of a ritual.
Map and sources
The pin is a broad Boonsboro town reference rounded from the US Census Gazetteer. It does not mark Zittle’s home, a treatment, a grave or the museum entrance. The reproduced page is Dahlgren’s published account, not the German conjuring book.
Primary source reviewed: Madeleine Vinton Dahlgren, South-Mountain Magic,1882 text in a later facsimile, chapter VII, especially printed pp. 204–218 (physical PDF 213–227). The full relevant concluding section and the book-inspection account were read. The original text is public domain. The PBS account and museum visitor page supply separately attributed later interpretation and current access information. Checked 13 November 2026.
Visit Boonsborough Museum of History
Associated heritage collection: PBS described Zittle's spellbook here; current display/identity not independently confirmed. Museum's current own page: tours 1–4 p.m., second and fourth full weekends May–December; appointments year-round. Confirm arrangements and desired item's availability before travel. Broad case pin is not entrance.
Official visitor information → · Access information checked 2026-11-13. Check current opening and booking details before travelling.
Share an experience here →Experiences at Boonsborough Museum of History
First-person accounts shared by visitors and reviewed before publication. They are separate from the researched case above.
No visitor reports have been published here yet.