A Delusion Of Satan?
SYNOPSIS
I can’t recall where I first heard about the Salem Witchcraft Trials, but as early as last year I recommended it to a friend for their Modern History personal interest project. My friend politely declined. Originally I was interested in the socio-cultural context of the time, but upon further reading I discovered that a core controversial issue surrounding the Salem event was one focusing on causation and the way historians have continued to rewrite the same history. As it exemplifies one of the key focus questions of the Extension History course, I decided that it was an appropriately complex and interesting topic for a Major Work, and so pursued this area of study.
My essay begins with a postmodernist script of a hypothetical conversation between some historians, in order to highlight the diversity of historical interpretations of the same event. I then provide a brief overview of the Salem Witchtrials, and subsequently discuss some of the views of contemporary historians. However, the core of my essay focuses on mid-late twentieth century historians, the use of new types of evidence, interdisciplinary studies, and the way 'history' has continued to change over time. Through in-depth analysis of three modern historians, I evaluate the influence of personal and social context on the ongoing interpretations of the cause/s of the Salem hysteria.
The evidence cited in my essay comes from a variety of publications, predominantly from extracts in Frances Hill’s The Salem Witch Trials Reader. This text provided an outline essential to the understanding of historians ranging from contemporary Cotton Mather through to 1996, and it then allowed me to pursue further personal investigation into the featured historians (such as Boyer and Nissenbaum) and their approaches to history. The article by Caporael, and subsequent reference to the conflicting articles by Spanos and Gottlieb, reproduced on the internet, were selected to demonstrate the way historical debate is generated. All together they promote the diversity of the causation debate in an interesting and engaging way.
ESSAY:
Analyse different opinions on the cause/s of the Salem witch trials. How and why has this event been interpreted differently? What do these differences reveal about the nature of history and causation?
A hypothetical conversation between some Salem Witch Trial historians:
Mather: ‘The Salem witch trials were evidently inflicted from the demons of the invisible world.’
Hutchinson: ‘Hold up. As a man of the Enlightenment, I must inform you that there are no such things as demons. The ‘Afflicted’ were altogether guilty of fraud and imposture.’
Boyer: ‘That’s far too simple a deduction. Economic and philosophical factionalism between Salem Town and Salem Village allowed for the trials to escalate as they did.’
Nissenbaum:3‘Exactly. With a lack of autonomy and power in town politics, the trials provided opportunities for the pro-Parris faction to treat the others not as political opposition, but as morally defective individuals.’
Carporael: ‘Well I think it was a physiological condition, like convulsive Ergotism.’
Spanos: ‘Stupid woman! You and Matossian provide no conclusive evidence! Gottlieb and I show the trials can clearly be accounted for within a social psychological framework.’
Kences: ‘The importance of the wars between the New Englanders and the native Indians cannot be underestimated either.’
Hansen: ‘Oh…well I thought they really were witches…’
Through the convolution of centuries of historical discussion, it is evident that the study of history is a malleable concept. After all, one of the largest issues surrounding historical debates is the different portrayals of history through time. How is it that one event can cause such conflict and diverse argument? What has allowed historians to continually re-write history? Through examining different interpretations on the controversial topic of the causes of the Salem Witchcraft Trials of 1692, I hope to shed some light on why establishing causation is so difficult, and how and why historians can write about the same event in radically different ways.
In the winter of 1691/92, two young Puritan girls began suffering from disorderly speech, odd postures, and convulsive fits in the village of Salem, Massachusetts, New England. In the space of less than two years, nineteen had been hanged, an elderly man crushed to death, five had died in prison and over one-hundred and fifty persons left incarcerated . However, Witch-hunts were by no means an unfamiliar concept. Tens of thousands of people in Europe and European colonies had died at the stake or gallows between 1400 and 1650. What makes the Salem trials one of the most universally famous and fascinating is that it happened when and where it did; yet its root causes continue to baffle historians.
Contemporary historians, such as Cotton Mather, viewed the events through the narrow scope of Puritan theology, where what couldn’t be rationally explained was attributed to “horrid sorcerers and hellish conjurers” and “demons of the invisible world” . In the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century, Thomas Hutchinson stated “A little attention must force conviction that the whole was a scene of fraud and imposture.” Both views are one-dimensional and easily placed within a specific social and historical-school-of-thought context. Nonetheless, it is important to remember that what they wrote left a basis for future historians to debate, investigate and improve on.
It is through twentieth century historians, however, that we see the spectrum of causation theories increasing. Burgeoning technologies, significant development in medical knowledge, and the expansion of ‘new-history’ and inter-disciplinary studies, have all allowed for causation debates to be kept alive. This is not to say that it has made determining the cause of the Salem Witch Trials any easier. Winfield S. Nevins perhaps best reveals the implicit uncertainties of modern historians:
‘I must confess to a measure of doubt as to the moving causes of this terrible tragedy. It seems impossible to believe the tithe of the statements which were made at the trials. And yet it is equally difficult to say that nine out of every ten men, women and children who testified upon their oaths, intentionally and wilfully falsified.’
Hundreds of affidavits and court documents remain today, but the impossibility of demonic intervention in a modern context requires historians to read beyond the written evidence. The social and historical context must be taken into account in order to speculate on causation. The myriad of modern interpretations that exist are predominantly born from focusing on different aspects of context alone as a means of explaining the written record; this is why I believe that establishing an extensive knowledge of the social circumstances of an epoch is an essential aspect of any valid historians work. Understanding Salem in 1692 is no exception. As a New England colony comprised of Puritan settlers, it is important to understand their religious worldview. However, aspects of colonial Massachusetts that have been deemed important by modern historians include not only religion, but social and political factionalism between Salem Village and Salem Town, effects of Indian Wars, smallpox epidemics, ergotism, psychological frameworks and the ethnicity of slave Tituba. Not only do these specific enquiries aid in attempting to explain the written testimony, they attempt to answer the causative question of ‘why Salem?’.
One of the most influential interpretations of this type is found in the collaborative work of American historians Paul Boyer and Stephen Nissenbaum. Their paper Salem Possessed: The Social Origins of Witchcraft is the second, and most extensive, of the three papers they co-wrote . They propose that the trials were the outcome, at a fundamental level, of ongoing conflict between Salem Town and Salem Village in a ‘convergence of a specific and unlikely combination of historical circumstances at this particular time and place.’ Explained simply, the trials were the ‘ephemera’ of a bitter and drawn-out factionalist dispute between the religious, but relatively politically powerless, Puritans of Salem Village, and the entrepreneurial merchant capitalists of Salem Town. It was as much a political conflict as it was a religious one, a fight between the old and the new, and it was one that had been brewing for years aided by the physical setting and vacillating Boston authorities.
Boyer and Nissenbaum explained how their theory was born in the preface to Salem Possessed. During the autumn of 1969 the two were organising a new course to be taught at the University of Massachusetts, with Salem Witchcraft at its core; “New Approaches to the Study of History”. During this time they discovered that a large proportion of primary evidence pre-dating the events of 1692 had never been studied by historians . Amongst these were lists of community votes, tax assessments, petitions ‘which provided almost a roll-call breakdown of divisions within the community’ , a previously ignored volume of Reverend Samuel Parris’ sermons which provided a commentary of the towns’ problems, and a supplementary body of family materials (wills, deeds, estates, law suits). Accumulated, they provide overwhelming evidence for a pre-existing social issue that had been acknowledged, but not sufficiently investigated.
All of this adds a new dynamic to the process of re-writing history. What had previously been deemed as unimportant by historians was suddenly of immense value to those working post-Annales. Why the sudden interest in these demographic and documentary sources? The historians themselves provide the answer.
‘It is only recently that historians (ourselves among them) have begun more fully to realize how much information the study of “ordinary” people living in “ordinary” communities can bring to the most fundamental historical questions’
Through their thorough methodical investigation of these new sources, Boyer and Nissenbaum have been able to make a valid, logical hypothesis that is backed by the historical record. Clearly influenced by Annales historiography and the detailed study of local history, the two are able to place the entire Salem event within its own historical and social context, as opposed to in a modern one. The hunts occurred in Salem as a result of Puritanist expression, and were elevated by the specific context of the area.
Further expanding on the work of Boyer and Nissenbaum is James Kences, who attempts to explain the psychological factors present in the community, and the affect this had on the ‘afflicted’ girls. After summing up his theory he writes “The 1692 witch hunt was very much a product of King William’s War, which seems not only to have exacerbated village factionalism, but to have promoted the further alienation of Salem Village from Salem Town” . His work makes explicit the importance of using other historians’ work when it comes to creating your own. Without his synthesis with Boyer and Nissenbaum’s work, his hypothesis may have lacked sufficient basis and been discredited. Instead it is a valid and thoroughly fascinating response to the ever changing historical climate and approach to sources.
Kences’ work has the impressive title of ‘Some Unexplored Relationships of Essex County Witchcraft to the Indian Wars of 1675 and 1687’ , and the basis for his argument is derived from the fact that to the New Englanders, Indians were synonymous with witchcraft . At the time the lives of the people of colonial Massachusetts were dominated by their relationships with the natives. Drawing from historical documentation not only from Salem, but from the surrounding area, Kences is able to retrace the origins of the afflicted girls and makes a startling observation; nearly all of them had either been displaced by Indian attack or had family members killed in them. He then notes that “Essex County had already displayed signs of what social psychologists refer to as “invasion neurosis”, the extreme tension of anticipating an attack which does not materialise.”
Kences’ hypothesis is interesting because it combines the context of the time with modern medical explanations of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and hysteria, and reflects the different ways history can be approached over time. Increasing knowledge about the psyche and the effect of trauma on the individual and the community has allowed Kences to approach the issue of causation in a radically new way. The only problem with psychological explanations is that it is impossible to ever prove them. This doesn’t mean that there isn’t any credibility to the claims, but it does further serve to cloud the issue of causation.
Some historians have also chosen to explore completely new avenues of historical methodology, combining the disciplines of historical research with modern knowledge of disease and physiology. One such example of this is Linnda Carporael’s 1976 paper ‘Ergotism: The Satan Loosed in Salem?’, in which she explores the ‘potential existence of physical pathology’ and makes an argument in favour of convulsive ergotism induced via the ingestion of infected rye. Caporael originally studied psychology, as well as human ethology at College, and is a behavioural scientist. She says “the complexity of the psychological and social factors in the community” meant physiological origins were dismissed without investigation. Through the use of diaries, maps, geographical knowledge, close examination of the court documents and descriptions of the afflicted however, she is able to re-interpret the ‘so-called delusional testimony’ as evidence of ergotism.
Caporael’s interest in pursuing this theory is reflective of her educational background, and demonstrates the importance of cross-disciplinary studies in historical research. The hypothesis is fascinating not only because of its basis, but because through it Caporael attempts to tackle one of the central reliability issues of the Trials- the evidence we have written by the actual participants and their descriptions of the ‘afflicted girls’. Whilst Caporael acknowledges “No single explanation can ever account for the delusion” , she argues “Combinations of interpretations..seem insufficient without some reasonable justification for the initially afflicted girls behaviour” . She couldn’t be more correct. Almost the entire causation debate revolves around this particular point.
However, Brian Pavlac explains the need for “scientific” theories aptly. ‘This interpretation satisfies an understandable desire for removing human responsibility for the hunts.’ It’s almost a new-age way of blaming the devil. Whilst I don’t believe that the Salem panic can be attributed to ergotism, I do think Caporael effectively demonstrates how the use of innovative types of evidence and sources expands our ability to interpret the past. There is validity in exploring medical avenues, even if the victims have been dead for over 300 years. The works of historians such as Mary Matossian , who supports Caporael’s work, and Nicholas Spanos and Jack Gottlieb , who veraciously oppose the ergotism theory, prove that causation is still a prevalent issue. They reveal that new interpretations keep historical debates at the forefront of educated minds; it keeps history alive.
Historian Jonathan Riley-Smith most effectively summarises the need for history to be re-written, and causation debates to be addressed:
“All history is a reconciliation… The only way we can understand the past is in terms of the present. Otherwise, it will make no sense at all.”
We will probably never know what caused the Salem Witch Trials of 1692. But an ever-changing worldview forces historians to continue to confront the issue of causation. The purpose of investigation will change, sources and methodology will differ, but the Salem Witch Trials will remain a pertinent event in history because of the ambiguity surrounding it and the questions it poses to historians. Universally fascinating and altogether frustrating, the Salem event is worthy of continued study because it reveals the fluid nature of history and the difficulty of establishing causation.
Source Analysis
1. Book: The Salem Witch Trials Reader- Frances Hill
Originally uncertain how to find adequate, reliable source material on which to base my Major Work on, the discovery of Hill’s book was invaluable to the development of my essay. Hill provides excerpts from a variety of historical works which encompass hypotheses spanning from contemporary to modern contexts, all of which have been recognised by the wider historical community. Whilst Hill herself has no professional training in history (she has a degree in English Literature and Philosophy), she has written extensively on the subject with four non-fiction books in publication, therefore indicating that her work has validity. Bias towards certain causation theories can be located when she voices her own opinions when she introduces the next historians work; however, she has not shown bias selectivity in her source material. She provides the reader with an extensive compilation of theories and adequate referencing for further independent investigation. This book has been of immense value to the core question of my essay in regards to analysing different historical opinions, as it has broadened my perception of causative historical debates and the extent to which theories have developed and changed over time.
2. Scientific Journal Article: Ergotism: The Satan Loosed in Salem? – Linnda Caporael
Caporael’s ergotism paper was amongst the first theories I uncovered in my research, and it was the innovative ideas behind it that garnered my interest in causation theories and debate. Caporael is not an academic historian, but her historical research is impressive. Her theory is a combination of thorough historical, medical and scientific investigation and it was this cross-disciplinary approach that drew me to analyse it as a core component of my essay. Caporael uses a considerable number of endnotes and cites a variety of sources, however, much of what she says is speculation drawn from sources that cannot be proven, therefore placing its reliability in doubt. She approaches previous historians work with a biased mindset as she is aiming to highlight the validity of her own theory over others. However, the controversy that this article provided was significant in allowing me to demonstrate the way historical debate is generated. Due to word limitations I could not discuss in detail flaws in its content that were disputed by Nicholas Spanos, but nonetheless this article was indispensible in the creation of my work.
3. Book: Salem Possessed: The Social Origins of Witchcraft- Paul Boyer and Steven Nissenbaum
As two competent and well recognised historians in the field of American Cultural and Intellectual History, Boyer and Nissenbaum’s collaborative work has been essential in shaping my understanding of how the use of different types of sources can be interpreted into the Salem Witch Trials debate. In 1974 this work won the American Historical Association's John H. Dunning Prize, which is awarded biannually to the best book on any subject pertaining to American History, and combined with their Ph. D’s in History, this establishes them as an extremely reliable source. Their Rankean methodology, evident via consistent footnoting and clearly cited sources, combined with Annales theology, adds further proof of the reliability of the source. Much of the material for my essay was drawn from the preface of this book, which spoke in detail of the types of sources the two used, and why. Their work corresponded perfectly with my core question in relation to different interpretations. Boyer and Nissenbaum have published a number of works together on the Salem witch trials that have been supported and upheld into the present by other historians. Their work is valid, logical and accurate, and I found it difficult to establish a point of bias in what they chose to write their hypothesis about.
Bibliography
BOOKS/ ARTICLES
Boyer, Paul and Stephen Nissenbaum, Salem Possessed: The Social Origins of Witchcraft, Cambridge, Mass, 1974
Caporael, Linnda, Ergotism: The Satan Loosed in Salem?, From Science Vol. 192 (2 April 1976)
Hansen, Chadwick. Witchcraft at Salem, New York, 1969
Hill, Frances, A Delusion of Satan, Da Capo Press, USA, 1997, second edition re-printed 2002
Hill, Frances, The Salem Witch Trials Reader, Da Capo Press, USA, 2000
Hutchinson, Thomas. The History of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, London, 1765
Kences, James, Some Unexplored Relationships between Essex County Witchcraft and the Indian Wars of 1675 and 1687, (July 1984), Essex Institute Historical Collections, Vol.120
Mather, Cotton. Magnalia Christi Americana, London, 1702
Mather, Cotton. Memorable Providences Relating to Witchcrafts and Possessions, Boston, 1689.
Mather, Cotton. The Life and His Excellency, Sir William Phips, Knt, Late Captain General and Governor in Chief of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, New England, Boston, 1697; reissued, New York, 1929
Miller, Arthur, The Crucible, 1953. Edition published Penguin Group, Great Britain, 1968
Nevins, Winfield S. Witchcraft in Salem Village in 1962, New York, 1916
Pavlac, Brian, Witch Hunts in the Western World: Persecution and Punishment from the Inquisition through the Salem Trials, Bison Books, University of Nebraska Press, USA, 2010
Spanos, Nicholas, Ergotism and the Salem Witch Panic: A Critical Analysis and an Alternative Conceptualization, Journal of the History of the Behavioural Sciences, Volume 19, October 1983
Starkey, Marion, The Devil in Massachusetts, New York, 1949
Streeter, Michael, Witchcraft: A Secret History, New Burlington Books, London, 2002
WEBSITES
Amazon Books http://www.amazon.com/books-used-books-textbooks/b?ie=UTF8&node=283155 (accessed 29/7/11)
American Historical Association: John H. France Dunning Prize, http://www.historians.org/prizes/AWARDED/DunningWinner.htm (accessed 17/8/11)
Ergot Poisoning- the cause of the Salem Witch Trials, http://www.hbci.com/~wenonah/history/ergot.htm (accessed 16/8/11)
Ergotism – Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergotism (accessed 25/4/11)
Ethology – Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethology (accessed 8/8/11)
Frances Hill’s Official Website, http://www.franceshill.net/, (accessed 17/8/11)
J Blumberg, ‘A Brief History of the Salem Witch Trials’, Smithsonian Institution, October 24, 2007, http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/brief-salem.html
J Clark, ‘Were the American colonists drugged during the Salem witchcraft trial?’, HowStuffWorks, Inc., 2011, http://history.howstuffworks.com/american-history/drugged-salem-witchtrial.htm/printable (accessed 27/2/11)
Linnda R. Caporael – Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linnda_R._Caporael (accessed 14/3/11)
Linnda R. Caporael, Department of Science and Technology Studies http://homepages.rpi.edu/~caporl/home/Home.html (accessed 21/7/11)
Medical and Psychological Explanations of Bewitchment- Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_and_psychological_explanations_of_bewitchment (accessed 4/5/11)
New England Colonies – Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England_Colonies (accessed 8/2/11)
Paul Boyer (Historian)-Wikipedia- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Boyer_(historian) (accessed 7/8/11)
Puritan Migration to New England – Wikipedia- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puritan_migration_to_New_England_(1620%E2%80%931640) (accessed 8/2/11)
Salem, Massachusetts – Wikipedia- http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Salem,_Massachusetts (accessed 8/2/11)
Salem Witch Trials- Wikipedia – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials (accessed 21/12/10)
Stephen Nissenbaum: Department of History, http://www.umass.edu/history/faculty/nissenbaum.html (accessed 6/8/11)
Sutter, T Salem Witchcraft: the Events and Causes of the Salem Witch Trials, Siteclopedia Network, 2003, (accessed 21/12/10)
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
A blog for Audrey
I think it's safe to say that this girl is going to smash this project! She has done a lot of thorough research into her area and has worked consistently at producing an A+++++ quality essay. I haven't read much of her actual essay, but from what I have seen of her synopsis and source analysis, it's bound to be fantastic.
Her question is fascinating, plus Irving is a right nutter anyway, so I would really like to read her work sometime in the near future. Well done!
Her question is fascinating, plus Irving is a right nutter anyway, so I would really like to read her work sometime in the near future. Well done!
A Blog for Zan
Unfortunately I haven't read much of his essay so far, but he has talked about it enough that I know he has a secure grasp on his content. He has worked so so hard on his project, evident from the copious amount of drafts that I have seen him hand in. More than likely this will result in an exceptional mark.
His project content is detailed and interesting, and his question is particularly relevant to modern times. I hope to get the opportunity to read it in full sometime soon.
His project content is detailed and interesting, and his question is particularly relevant to modern times. I hope to get the opportunity to read it in full sometime soon.
Source Analysis
1. Book: The Salem Witch Trials Reader- Frances Hill
Originally uncertain how to find adequate, reliable source material on which to base my Major Work on, the discovery of Hill’s book was invaluable to the development of my essay. Hill provides excerpts from a variety of historical works which encompass hypotheses spanning from contemporary to modern contexts, all of which have been recognised by the wider historical community. Whilst Hill herself has no professional training in history (she has a degree in English Literature and Philosophy), she has written extensively on the subject with four non-fiction books in publication, therefore indicating that her work has validity. Bias towards certain causation theories can be located when she voices her own opinions when she introduces the next historians work; however, she has not shown bias selectivity in her source material. She provides the reader with an extensive compilation of theories and adequate referencing for further independent investigation. This book has been of immense value to the core question of my essay in regards to analysing different historical opinions, as it has broadened my perception of causative historical debates and the extent to which theories have developed and changed over time.
2. Scientific Journal Article: Ergotism: The Satan Loosed in Salem? – Linnda Caporael
Caporael’s ergotism paper was amongst the first theories I uncovered in my research, and it was the innovative ideas behind it that garnered my interest in causation theories and debate. Caporael is not an academic historian, but her historical research is impressive. Her theory is a combination of thorough historical, medical and scientific investigations and it was this cross-disciplinary approach that drew me to analyse it as a core component of my essay. Caporael uses a considerable number of endnotes and cites a variety of sources, however, much of what she says is speculation drawn from sources that cannot be proven, therefore placing its reliability in doubt. She approaches previous historians work with a biased mindset as she is aiming to highlight the validity of her own theory over others. However, the controversy that this article provided was significant in allowing me to demonstrate the way historical debate is generated. Due to word limitations I could not discuss in detail flaws in its content that were disputed by Nicholas Spanos, but nonetheless this article was indispensible in the creation of my work.
3. Book: Salem Possessed: The Social Origins of Witchcraft- Paul Boyer and Steven Nissenbaum
As two competent and well recognised historians in the field of American Cultural and Intellectual History, Boyer and Nissenbaum’s collaborative work has been essential in shaping my understanding of how the use of different types of sources can be interpreted into the Salem Witch Trials debate. In 1974 this work won the American Historical Association's John H. Dunning Prize, which is awarded biannually to the best book on any subject pertaining to American History, and combined with their Ph. D’s in History, this sets them up as an extremely reliable source. Their Rankean methodology, evident via consistent footnoting and clearly cited sources, combined with Annales theology, adds further proof of the reliability of the source. Much of the material for my essay was drawn from the preface of this book, which spoke in detail of the types of sources the two used, and why. Their work corresponded perfectly with my other core question in relation to different interpretations. Boyer and Nissenbaum have published a number of works together on the Salem witch trials that have been supported and upheld into the present by other historians. Their work is valid, logical and accurate, and I found it difficult to establish a point of bias in what they chose to write their hypothesis about.
Originally uncertain how to find adequate, reliable source material on which to base my Major Work on, the discovery of Hill’s book was invaluable to the development of my essay. Hill provides excerpts from a variety of historical works which encompass hypotheses spanning from contemporary to modern contexts, all of which have been recognised by the wider historical community. Whilst Hill herself has no professional training in history (she has a degree in English Literature and Philosophy), she has written extensively on the subject with four non-fiction books in publication, therefore indicating that her work has validity. Bias towards certain causation theories can be located when she voices her own opinions when she introduces the next historians work; however, she has not shown bias selectivity in her source material. She provides the reader with an extensive compilation of theories and adequate referencing for further independent investigation. This book has been of immense value to the core question of my essay in regards to analysing different historical opinions, as it has broadened my perception of causative historical debates and the extent to which theories have developed and changed over time.
2. Scientific Journal Article: Ergotism: The Satan Loosed in Salem? – Linnda Caporael
Caporael’s ergotism paper was amongst the first theories I uncovered in my research, and it was the innovative ideas behind it that garnered my interest in causation theories and debate. Caporael is not an academic historian, but her historical research is impressive. Her theory is a combination of thorough historical, medical and scientific investigations and it was this cross-disciplinary approach that drew me to analyse it as a core component of my essay. Caporael uses a considerable number of endnotes and cites a variety of sources, however, much of what she says is speculation drawn from sources that cannot be proven, therefore placing its reliability in doubt. She approaches previous historians work with a biased mindset as she is aiming to highlight the validity of her own theory over others. However, the controversy that this article provided was significant in allowing me to demonstrate the way historical debate is generated. Due to word limitations I could not discuss in detail flaws in its content that were disputed by Nicholas Spanos, but nonetheless this article was indispensible in the creation of my work.
3. Book: Salem Possessed: The Social Origins of Witchcraft- Paul Boyer and Steven Nissenbaum
As two competent and well recognised historians in the field of American Cultural and Intellectual History, Boyer and Nissenbaum’s collaborative work has been essential in shaping my understanding of how the use of different types of sources can be interpreted into the Salem Witch Trials debate. In 1974 this work won the American Historical Association's John H. Dunning Prize, which is awarded biannually to the best book on any subject pertaining to American History, and combined with their Ph. D’s in History, this sets them up as an extremely reliable source. Their Rankean methodology, evident via consistent footnoting and clearly cited sources, combined with Annales theology, adds further proof of the reliability of the source. Much of the material for my essay was drawn from the preface of this book, which spoke in detail of the types of sources the two used, and why. Their work corresponded perfectly with my other core question in relation to different interpretations. Boyer and Nissenbaum have published a number of works together on the Salem witch trials that have been supported and upheld into the present by other historians. Their work is valid, logical and accurate, and I found it difficult to establish a point of bias in what they chose to write their hypothesis about.
Websites
So I don't forget them!!!!
http://books.google.com/books?id=lSgtq5rZUkEC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false Preface to Salem Possessed: The Social Origins of Witchcraft
http://www.franceshill.net/ Frances Hill's Official Webpage
http://www.umass.edu/history/faculty/nissenbaum.html Nissenbaum's credentials from the University of Massachusetts Amherst Department of history
http://www.historians.org/prizes/AWARDED/DunningWinner.htm On the John H. Dunning Prize
http://books.google.com/books?id=lSgtq5rZUkEC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false Preface to Salem Possessed: The Social Origins of Witchcraft
http://www.franceshill.net/ Frances Hill's Official Webpage
http://www.umass.edu/history/faculty/nissenbaum.html Nissenbaum's credentials from the University of Massachusetts Amherst Department of history
http://www.historians.org/prizes/AWARDED/DunningWinner.htm On the John H. Dunning Prize
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Ethology NOT Ethnology
Went back to make sure that I was right in saying Caporael studied ethology at university. It IS a legitimate course! It's the scientific study of animal behaviour :) and it says quite clearly on the wikipedia page:
'NOT to be confused with Ethnology'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethology
Actually extremely interesting stuff! And totally relevant to stuff I did in biology on Natural Selection and Evolution. Winner!
'NOT to be confused with Ethnology'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethology
Actually extremely interesting stuff! And totally relevant to stuff I did in biology on Natural Selection and Evolution. Winner!
Monday, August 15, 2011
A Blog for Emma-Kate
I would like to say that this lovely lady has done by far the most legitimate research out of all of us. Holy hell Emma-Kate Weaver, you are a champion!
Your blog is thorough and extensive, and it proves that you've done the work and understand it. Also, it's a very interesting topic :) I went to the Tutankhamun exhibition in Melbourne during the last holidays, and when we got to the Akhenaten part I could just rattle off all this stuff that I'd picked up from your blog and listening to you talk about it!
I'm not really sure what else is expected of me in this type of blog, but I just want to wish you the best of luck! You've done so much good work, now it just has to magically transform itself into a mere 2,500 words! Good luck over the next TWO days. And then we will be free of this project forever!
Your blog is thorough and extensive, and it proves that you've done the work and understand it. Also, it's a very interesting topic :) I went to the Tutankhamun exhibition in Melbourne during the last holidays, and when we got to the Akhenaten part I could just rattle off all this stuff that I'd picked up from your blog and listening to you talk about it!
I'm not really sure what else is expected of me in this type of blog, but I just want to wish you the best of luck! You've done so much good work, now it just has to magically transform itself into a mere 2,500 words! Good luck over the next TWO days. And then we will be free of this project forever!
Self- Evaluation
Took a sneak peak at Zan's blog and realised that I too had forgottent to do a self-evaluation, and Im beginning to get the feeling that I should be trying to scab as many marks as possible for this damn project!!!
Synopsis: I think that my synopsis is okay. The one that I have at the moment is the one that I was pressured into writing by Mr Wright in our lesson a couple of weeks ago. I don't think that there's anything drastically wrong with it. Comments anyone?
Essay: Dear Lord this thing is killing me! why why WHY do I always leave things to the last minute? It's taking me quite literally forever to write! fureofbwofbqpwmdbnbvfpifiq3re!!!!!! However, what I have shown Mr Wright appears to be satisfactory, so I at least appear to be on the right track. And I'm also not bored to death of my topic yet, and I don't feel like kicking in the bucket yet, which is awesome.
Downside though....It's due in like TWO DAYS!!! AND I DON'T HAVE A COMPLETE DRAFT YET!!!! GARRRRRRRRR WTF!? oh well. I'm going to give Mr Wright my Kences stuff tomorrow, and then I'm going to write Caporael in the library instead of going to Catholic Studies. Then I can show him that during my free, and I can get feedback, and then I can edit the crap outta that bitch.
Also, on a sidenote, will I lose marks for awful sentence structure, a tendency to lapse into the colloquial and causal light swearing? I hope not.
Source Analysis: Say what? we have to do one of these things? I can honestly say that I have no idea what to really write about. I don't know whether to write about Frances Hill's book The Salem Witch Trials Reader as a whole, or whether to talk about the specific articles that I found in there. I'll look at Caporael's article from the internet, and if I ever get around to writing about Spanos I suppose I'll do his article as well.
Golly gee, I wish I had made more of an effort! I must be such a frustrating student to have to deal with, because I'm consistently lazy and then pathetically whiny.
Synopsis: I think that my synopsis is okay. The one that I have at the moment is the one that I was pressured into writing by Mr Wright in our lesson a couple of weeks ago. I don't think that there's anything drastically wrong with it. Comments anyone?
Essay: Dear Lord this thing is killing me! why why WHY do I always leave things to the last minute? It's taking me quite literally forever to write! fureofbwofbqpwmdbnbvfpifiq3re!!!!!! However, what I have shown Mr Wright appears to be satisfactory, so I at least appear to be on the right track. And I'm also not bored to death of my topic yet, and I don't feel like kicking in the bucket yet, which is awesome.
Downside though....It's due in like TWO DAYS!!! AND I DON'T HAVE A COMPLETE DRAFT YET!!!! GARRRRRRRRR WTF!? oh well. I'm going to give Mr Wright my Kences stuff tomorrow, and then I'm going to write Caporael in the library instead of going to Catholic Studies. Then I can show him that during my free, and I can get feedback, and then I can edit the crap outta that bitch.
Also, on a sidenote, will I lose marks for awful sentence structure, a tendency to lapse into the colloquial and causal light swearing? I hope not.
Source Analysis: Say what? we have to do one of these things? I can honestly say that I have no idea what to really write about. I don't know whether to write about Frances Hill's book The Salem Witch Trials Reader as a whole, or whether to talk about the specific articles that I found in there. I'll look at Caporael's article from the internet, and if I ever get around to writing about Spanos I suppose I'll do his article as well.
Golly gee, I wish I had made more of an effort! I must be such a frustrating student to have to deal with, because I'm consistently lazy and then pathetically whiny.
Crazy Crazy Essay
This is what I have so far.... I think it's about 2300 words. No footnotes because Blogger is crazy!
Analyse different opinions on the cause/s of the Salem witch trials. How and why has this event been interpreted differently? What do these differences reveal about the nature of history and causation?
A hypothetical conversation between some Salem Witch Trial historians:
Mather: ‘The Salem witch trials were evidently inflicted from the demons of the invisible world.’
Hutchinson: ‘Hold up. As a man of the Enlightenment, I must inform you that there are no such things as demons. The ‘Afflicted’ were altogether guilty of fraud and imposture.’
Boyer: ‘That’s far too simple a deduction. Economic and philosophical factionalism between Salem Town and Salem Village allowed for the trials to escalate as they did.’
Nissenbaum: ‘Exactly. With a lack of autonomy and power in town politics, the trials provided opportunities for the pro-Parris faction to treat the others not as political opposition, but as morally defective individuals.’
Carporael: ‘Well I think it was a physiological condition, like convulsive Ergotism.’
Spanos: ‘Stupid woman! You and Matossian provide no conclusive evidence! Gottlieb and I show the trials can clearly be accounted for within a social psychological framework.’
Kences: ‘The importance of the wars between the New Englanders and the native Indians cannot be underestimated either.’
Hansen: ‘Oh…well I thought they really were witches…’
Through the convoluted haze of centuries of historical discussion, it is evident that ‘history’ is a malleable concept. After all, one of the largest issues surrounding historical debates is the different portrayals of history through time. How is it that one event can cause such conflict and diverse argument? What has allowed historians to continually re-write history? Through examining different interpretations on the controversial topic of the causes of the Salem Witchcraft Trials of 1692, I hope to shed some light on why establishing causation is so difficult, and how and why historians can write about the same event in radically different ways.
In the winter of 1691/92, two young Puritan girls began suffering from disorderly speech, odd postures, and convulsive fits in the village of Salem, Massachusetts, New England. In the space of less than two years, nineteen had been hanged, an elderly man crushed to death, five dead in prison and over one-hundred and fifty persons left incarcerated . However, Witch-hunts were by no means an unfamiliar concept. Tens of thousands of people in Europe and European colonies has died at the stake or gallows between 1400 and 1650. What makes the Salem trials one of the most universally famous and fascinating is that it happened when and where it did. Yet its root causes continue to baffle historians.
Contemporary historians such as Cotton Mather viewed the events through the narrow scope of Puritan theology, where what couldn’t be rationally explained was attributed to “horrid sorcerers and hellish conjurers” and “demons of the invisible world” . In the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century, Thomas Hutchinson stated “A little attention must force conviction that the whole was a scene of fraud and imposture.” Both views are one-dimensional and easily placed within a specific social and historical-school-of-thought context. Nonetheless, it is important to remember that what they wrote left a basis for future historians to debate, investigate and improve on.
It is through twentieth century historians, however, that we see the spectrum of causation theories increasing. Burgeoning technologies, significant development in medical knowledge, and the expansion of ‘new-history’ and inter-disciplinary studies, have all allowed for causative historical debates to be kept alive. This is not to say that it has made determining the cause of the Salem witch trials any easier. Winfield S. Nevins perhaps best reveals the implicit uncertainties of modern historians:
‘I must confess to a measure of doubt as to the moving causes of this terrible tragedy. It seems impossible to believe the tithe of the statements which were made at the trials. And yet it is equally difficult to say that nine out of every ten men, women and children who testified upon their oaths, intentionally and wilfully falsified.’
Hundreds of affidavits and court documents remain today, but the impossibility of demonic intervention in a modern context requires historians to read beyond the written evidence. The social and historical context must be taken into account in order to speculate on causation. The myriad of modern interpretations that exist are predominantly born from focusing on different aspects of context alone as a means of explaining the written record; this is why I believe that establishing an extensive knowledge of the social circumstances of an epoch is an essential aspect of any valid historians work. Understanding Salem in 1692 is no exception. As a New England colony comprised of Puritan settlers, it is important to understand their religious worldview. However, aspects of colonial Massachusetts that have been deemed important by modern historians include not only religion, but social and political factionalism between Salem Village and Salem Town, effects of Indian Wars, smallpox epidemics, ergotism, psychological frameworks and the ethnicity of slave Tituba. Not only do these specific enquiries aid in attempting to explain the written testimony, they attempt to answer the causative question of ‘why Salem?’.
One of the most influential interpretations of this type is found in the collaborative work of American historians Paul Boyer and Stephen Nissenbaum. Their paper Salem Possessed: The Social Origins of Witchcraft is the second, and most extensive, of the three papers they co-wrote . They propose that the trials were the outcome, at a fundamental level, of ongoing conflict between Salem Town and Salem Village in a ‘convergence of a specific and unlikely combination of historical circumstances at this particular time and place.’ Explained simply, the trials were the ‘ephemera’ of a bitter and drawn-out factionalist dispute between the religious, but relatively politically powerless, Puritans of Salem Village, and the entrepreneurial merchant capitalists of Salem Town. It was as much a political conflict as it was a religious one, a fight between the old and the new, and it was one that had been brewing for years aided by the physical setting and vacillating Boston authorities.
Boyer and Nissenbaum explained how their theory was born in the preface to Salem Possessed. During the autumn of 1969 the two were organising a new course to be taught at the University of Massachusetts, with Salem witchcraft at its core; “New Approaches to the Study of History”. During this time they discovered that a large proportion of primary evidence pre-dating the events of 1692 had never been studied by historians . Amongst these were lists of community votes, tax assessments, petitions ‘which provided almost a roll-call breakdown of divisions within the community’ , a previously ignored volume of Reverend Samuel Parris’ sermons which provided a commentary of the towns problems, and a supplementary body of family materials (wills, deeds, estates, law suits). Accumulated, they provide overwhelming evidence for a pre-existing social issue that had been acknowledged, but not sufficiently investigated.
All of this adds a new dynamic to the process of re-writing history. What had been previously been deemed as unimportant by historians was suddenly of immense value to those working post-Annales. Why the sudden interest in these demographic and documentary sources? The historians themselves provide the answer.
‘It is only recently that historians (ourselves among them) have begun more fully to realize how much information the study of “ordinary” people living in “ordinary” communities can bring to the most fundamental historical questions’
Through their through and methodological investigation of these new sources, Boyer and Nissenbaum have been able to make a valid, logical hypothesis that is backed by the historical record. Cleary influenced by Annales historiography and the detailed study of local history, the two are able to place the entire Salem event within its own historical and social context, as opposed to in a modern one. The hunts occurred in Salem as a result of Puritanist expression, and were elevated by the specific context of the area.
Further expanding on the work of Boyer and Nissenbaum is James Kences, who attempts to explain the psychological factors present in the community, and the affect this had on the ‘afflicted’ girls. After summing up his theory he writes “The 1692 witch hunt was very much a product of King William’s War, which seems not only have exacerbated village factionalism, but to have promoted the further alienation of Salem Village from Salem Town” . His work makes explicit the importance of using other historians work when it comes to creating your own. Without his synthesis with Boyer and Nissenbaum’s work, his hypothesis may have lacked sufficient basis and been discredited. Instead it is a valid and thoroughly fascinating response to the ever changing historical climate and approach to sources.
Kences’ work has the impressive title of ‘Some Unexplored Relationships of Essex County Witchcraft to the Indian Wars of 1675 and 1687’ , and the basis for his argument is derived from the fact that to the New Englanders, Indians were synonymous with witchcraft and at the time the lives of the people of colonial Massachusetts were dominated by their relationships with them. Drawing from historical documentation not only from Salem, but from the surrounding area, Kences is able to retrace the origins of the afflicted girls and makes a startling observation; nearly all of them had either been displaced by Indian attack or had family members killed in them. He then notes that “Essex County had already displayed signs of what social psychologists refer to as “invasion neurosis”, the extreme tension of anticipating an attack which does not materialise.”
Kences hypothesis is interesting because it combines the context of the time with modern medical explanations of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and hysteria, and reflects the way different ways history can be approached over time. Increasing knowledge about the psyche and the effect of trauma on the individual and the community has allowed Kences to approach the issue of causation in a radically new way. The only problem with psychological explanations is that it is impossible to ever prove them. This doesn’t mean that there isn’t any credibility to the claims, but it does further serve to cloud the issue of causation.
Some historians have also chosen to explore completely new avenues of historical methodology, combining the disciplines of historical research with modern knowledge of disease and physiology. One such example of this is Linnda Carporael’s 1976 paper ‘Ergotism: The Satan Loosed in Salem?’, in which she explores the ‘potential existence of physical pathology’ and makes an argument in favour of convulsive ergotism induced via the ingestion of infected rye. Caporael originally studied psychology, as well as human ethology at University,
Pavlac explains the need for “scientific” theories aptly; ‘This interpretation satisfies an understandable desire for removing human responsibility for the hunts.’ It’s almost a new-age way of blaming the devil. Whilst I don’t believe that the Salem panic can be attributed to ergotism, I do think Caporael effectively demonstrates how the use of innovative types of evidence and sources expands our ability to interpret the past. There is validity in exploring medical avenues, even if the victims have been dead for over 300 years. If anything, new interpretations keep historical debates at the forefront of educated minds; it keeps history alive.
This is exemplified by the work of Nicholas Spanos, who disputes the ergotism argument and provides his own hypothesis. (My Spanos debate will go here)
We will probably never know what caused the Salem Witch Hunts of 1692. But what’s important is that we never stop trying too. Our understanding of the past changes over time and it is thus essential that historians continue to re-analyse past events. (I’m not really sure how to sum everything up yet…)
Analyse different opinions on the cause/s of the Salem witch trials. How and why has this event been interpreted differently? What do these differences reveal about the nature of history and causation?
A hypothetical conversation between some Salem Witch Trial historians:
Mather: ‘The Salem witch trials were evidently inflicted from the demons of the invisible world.’
Hutchinson: ‘Hold up. As a man of the Enlightenment, I must inform you that there are no such things as demons. The ‘Afflicted’ were altogether guilty of fraud and imposture.’
Boyer: ‘That’s far too simple a deduction. Economic and philosophical factionalism between Salem Town and Salem Village allowed for the trials to escalate as they did.’
Nissenbaum: ‘Exactly. With a lack of autonomy and power in town politics, the trials provided opportunities for the pro-Parris faction to treat the others not as political opposition, but as morally defective individuals.’
Carporael: ‘Well I think it was a physiological condition, like convulsive Ergotism.’
Spanos: ‘Stupid woman! You and Matossian provide no conclusive evidence! Gottlieb and I show the trials can clearly be accounted for within a social psychological framework.’
Kences: ‘The importance of the wars between the New Englanders and the native Indians cannot be underestimated either.’
Hansen: ‘Oh…well I thought they really were witches…’
Through the convoluted haze of centuries of historical discussion, it is evident that ‘history’ is a malleable concept. After all, one of the largest issues surrounding historical debates is the different portrayals of history through time. How is it that one event can cause such conflict and diverse argument? What has allowed historians to continually re-write history? Through examining different interpretations on the controversial topic of the causes of the Salem Witchcraft Trials of 1692, I hope to shed some light on why establishing causation is so difficult, and how and why historians can write about the same event in radically different ways.
In the winter of 1691/92, two young Puritan girls began suffering from disorderly speech, odd postures, and convulsive fits in the village of Salem, Massachusetts, New England. In the space of less than two years, nineteen had been hanged, an elderly man crushed to death, five dead in prison and over one-hundred and fifty persons left incarcerated . However, Witch-hunts were by no means an unfamiliar concept. Tens of thousands of people in Europe and European colonies has died at the stake or gallows between 1400 and 1650. What makes the Salem trials one of the most universally famous and fascinating is that it happened when and where it did. Yet its root causes continue to baffle historians.
Contemporary historians such as Cotton Mather viewed the events through the narrow scope of Puritan theology, where what couldn’t be rationally explained was attributed to “horrid sorcerers and hellish conjurers” and “demons of the invisible world” . In the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century, Thomas Hutchinson stated “A little attention must force conviction that the whole was a scene of fraud and imposture.” Both views are one-dimensional and easily placed within a specific social and historical-school-of-thought context. Nonetheless, it is important to remember that what they wrote left a basis for future historians to debate, investigate and improve on.
It is through twentieth century historians, however, that we see the spectrum of causation theories increasing. Burgeoning technologies, significant development in medical knowledge, and the expansion of ‘new-history’ and inter-disciplinary studies, have all allowed for causative historical debates to be kept alive. This is not to say that it has made determining the cause of the Salem witch trials any easier. Winfield S. Nevins perhaps best reveals the implicit uncertainties of modern historians:
‘I must confess to a measure of doubt as to the moving causes of this terrible tragedy. It seems impossible to believe the tithe of the statements which were made at the trials. And yet it is equally difficult to say that nine out of every ten men, women and children who testified upon their oaths, intentionally and wilfully falsified.’
Hundreds of affidavits and court documents remain today, but the impossibility of demonic intervention in a modern context requires historians to read beyond the written evidence. The social and historical context must be taken into account in order to speculate on causation. The myriad of modern interpretations that exist are predominantly born from focusing on different aspects of context alone as a means of explaining the written record; this is why I believe that establishing an extensive knowledge of the social circumstances of an epoch is an essential aspect of any valid historians work. Understanding Salem in 1692 is no exception. As a New England colony comprised of Puritan settlers, it is important to understand their religious worldview. However, aspects of colonial Massachusetts that have been deemed important by modern historians include not only religion, but social and political factionalism between Salem Village and Salem Town, effects of Indian Wars, smallpox epidemics, ergotism, psychological frameworks and the ethnicity of slave Tituba. Not only do these specific enquiries aid in attempting to explain the written testimony, they attempt to answer the causative question of ‘why Salem?’.
One of the most influential interpretations of this type is found in the collaborative work of American historians Paul Boyer and Stephen Nissenbaum. Their paper Salem Possessed: The Social Origins of Witchcraft is the second, and most extensive, of the three papers they co-wrote . They propose that the trials were the outcome, at a fundamental level, of ongoing conflict between Salem Town and Salem Village in a ‘convergence of a specific and unlikely combination of historical circumstances at this particular time and place.’ Explained simply, the trials were the ‘ephemera’ of a bitter and drawn-out factionalist dispute between the religious, but relatively politically powerless, Puritans of Salem Village, and the entrepreneurial merchant capitalists of Salem Town. It was as much a political conflict as it was a religious one, a fight between the old and the new, and it was one that had been brewing for years aided by the physical setting and vacillating Boston authorities.
Boyer and Nissenbaum explained how their theory was born in the preface to Salem Possessed. During the autumn of 1969 the two were organising a new course to be taught at the University of Massachusetts, with Salem witchcraft at its core; “New Approaches to the Study of History”. During this time they discovered that a large proportion of primary evidence pre-dating the events of 1692 had never been studied by historians . Amongst these were lists of community votes, tax assessments, petitions ‘which provided almost a roll-call breakdown of divisions within the community’ , a previously ignored volume of Reverend Samuel Parris’ sermons which provided a commentary of the towns problems, and a supplementary body of family materials (wills, deeds, estates, law suits). Accumulated, they provide overwhelming evidence for a pre-existing social issue that had been acknowledged, but not sufficiently investigated.
All of this adds a new dynamic to the process of re-writing history. What had been previously been deemed as unimportant by historians was suddenly of immense value to those working post-Annales. Why the sudden interest in these demographic and documentary sources? The historians themselves provide the answer.
‘It is only recently that historians (ourselves among them) have begun more fully to realize how much information the study of “ordinary” people living in “ordinary” communities can bring to the most fundamental historical questions’
Through their through and methodological investigation of these new sources, Boyer and Nissenbaum have been able to make a valid, logical hypothesis that is backed by the historical record. Cleary influenced by Annales historiography and the detailed study of local history, the two are able to place the entire Salem event within its own historical and social context, as opposed to in a modern one. The hunts occurred in Salem as a result of Puritanist expression, and were elevated by the specific context of the area.
Further expanding on the work of Boyer and Nissenbaum is James Kences, who attempts to explain the psychological factors present in the community, and the affect this had on the ‘afflicted’ girls. After summing up his theory he writes “The 1692 witch hunt was very much a product of King William’s War, which seems not only have exacerbated village factionalism, but to have promoted the further alienation of Salem Village from Salem Town” . His work makes explicit the importance of using other historians work when it comes to creating your own. Without his synthesis with Boyer and Nissenbaum’s work, his hypothesis may have lacked sufficient basis and been discredited. Instead it is a valid and thoroughly fascinating response to the ever changing historical climate and approach to sources.
Kences’ work has the impressive title of ‘Some Unexplored Relationships of Essex County Witchcraft to the Indian Wars of 1675 and 1687’ , and the basis for his argument is derived from the fact that to the New Englanders, Indians were synonymous with witchcraft and at the time the lives of the people of colonial Massachusetts were dominated by their relationships with them. Drawing from historical documentation not only from Salem, but from the surrounding area, Kences is able to retrace the origins of the afflicted girls and makes a startling observation; nearly all of them had either been displaced by Indian attack or had family members killed in them. He then notes that “Essex County had already displayed signs of what social psychologists refer to as “invasion neurosis”, the extreme tension of anticipating an attack which does not materialise.”
Kences hypothesis is interesting because it combines the context of the time with modern medical explanations of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and hysteria, and reflects the way different ways history can be approached over time. Increasing knowledge about the psyche and the effect of trauma on the individual and the community has allowed Kences to approach the issue of causation in a radically new way. The only problem with psychological explanations is that it is impossible to ever prove them. This doesn’t mean that there isn’t any credibility to the claims, but it does further serve to cloud the issue of causation.
Some historians have also chosen to explore completely new avenues of historical methodology, combining the disciplines of historical research with modern knowledge of disease and physiology. One such example of this is Linnda Carporael’s 1976 paper ‘Ergotism: The Satan Loosed in Salem?’, in which she explores the ‘potential existence of physical pathology’ and makes an argument in favour of convulsive ergotism induced via the ingestion of infected rye. Caporael originally studied psychology, as well as human ethology at University,
Pavlac explains the need for “scientific” theories aptly; ‘This interpretation satisfies an understandable desire for removing human responsibility for the hunts.’ It’s almost a new-age way of blaming the devil. Whilst I don’t believe that the Salem panic can be attributed to ergotism, I do think Caporael effectively demonstrates how the use of innovative types of evidence and sources expands our ability to interpret the past. There is validity in exploring medical avenues, even if the victims have been dead for over 300 years. If anything, new interpretations keep historical debates at the forefront of educated minds; it keeps history alive.
This is exemplified by the work of Nicholas Spanos, who disputes the ergotism argument and provides his own hypothesis. (My Spanos debate will go here)
We will probably never know what caused the Salem Witch Hunts of 1692. But what’s important is that we never stop trying too. Our understanding of the past changes over time and it is thus essential that historians continue to re-analyse past events. (I’m not really sure how to sum everything up yet…)
Monday, August 8, 2011
About the project...
If I mention someone's name eg. Samuel Parris, do I have to explain who they are in my essay, or do I add a footnote with a brief explanation? Or do I just leave it and just assume that the reader knows who I'm talking about? I don't want to take up heaps of words by providing an explanation, but I also don't want the reader to be wondering who the hell it is that I'm talking about. It makes sense in my head 'cause I've done the research. Just let me know :) For the draft I'm handing in tomorrow I'll just footnote it and I can be berated for it later if I'm wrong.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
A little change
Ok, so I know I just posted a blog saying I wasn't going to do any more work on my project, but I just want to jot down a little thought I had about my question.
This is what it is:
Analyse different opinions on the cause/s of the Salem witch trials. How and why has this event been interpreted differently?
But I was thinking, what if I added to it a little bit?
Analyse different opinions on the cause/s of the Salem witch trials. How and why has this event been interpreted differently? What do these differences reveal about the nature of history and causation?
I'm not too sure why I want to add this bit, but I feel like what I've already written would actually answer this question more effectively. Thoughts guys?
This is what it is:
Analyse different opinions on the cause/s of the Salem witch trials. How and why has this event been interpreted differently?
But I was thinking, what if I added to it a little bit?
Analyse different opinions on the cause/s of the Salem witch trials. How and why has this event been interpreted differently? What do these differences reveal about the nature of history and causation?
I'm not too sure why I want to add this bit, but I feel like what I've already written would actually answer this question more effectively. Thoughts guys?
A Confession
Ok Mr Wright, you might kill me when you read this, but hear me out.
I honestly can't do any work on my project until next Saturday. I'm way too freaked out about trials, and I have 6 exams next week. I started some more work on it tonight, but I've just ended up feeling a baby bit sick because I know I need to be spending this time studying other things.
I'm really sorry!!! However, I have a 5 day gap until my next exam, and then another 3 until extension history, so this is the plan to get me through the next three weeks.
Friday 29th-August 6th: No work on history extension
By August 8th: Complete draft (I don't know if I'm being a bit presumptuous by thinking I'll get a complete draft out by then, but I really just want it over and done with.) I might get mum to drive me up to school to drop it off to you.
I'll be back at school on the 11th for Extension One English, so I will hopefully be able to grab my first draft back off you for editing.
By Monday 15th- second draft ready for inspection.
16th And 17th- You will most likely be bombarded with notes and edits etc. as I freak out over the deadline.
18th- a semi-decent project will be handed in, of which I will not fail.
fvnipqqwduvbepfb vqfoofrpwduf c ifbebriwebcowqjkwefyefbpfqfyivfeazswsdpkdqfbnbvqifubeei. There we go, I'm glad I actually got this down. I feel a little calmer over this project now. I just know that if I can get through the first week of trials, realistically I have enough time to do at least 3 drafts of my essay.
Also, one question- Is the project due during our lesson on Thursday afternoon, or is it like Extension Two, where we have to sign it all in by 9am?
I honestly can't do any work on my project until next Saturday. I'm way too freaked out about trials, and I have 6 exams next week. I started some more work on it tonight, but I've just ended up feeling a baby bit sick because I know I need to be spending this time studying other things.
I'm really sorry!!! However, I have a 5 day gap until my next exam, and then another 3 until extension history, so this is the plan to get me through the next three weeks.
Friday 29th-August 6th: No work on history extension
By August 8th: Complete draft (I don't know if I'm being a bit presumptuous by thinking I'll get a complete draft out by then, but I really just want it over and done with.) I might get mum to drive me up to school to drop it off to you.
I'll be back at school on the 11th for Extension One English, so I will hopefully be able to grab my first draft back off you for editing.
By Monday 15th- second draft ready for inspection.
16th And 17th- You will most likely be bombarded with notes and edits etc. as I freak out over the deadline.
18th- a semi-decent project will be handed in, of which I will not fail.
fvnipqqwduvbepfb vqfoofrpwduf c ifbebriwebcowqjkwefyefbpfqfyivfeazswsdpkdqfbnbvqifubeei. There we go, I'm glad I actually got this down. I feel a little calmer over this project now. I just know that if I can get through the first week of trials, realistically I have enough time to do at least 3 drafts of my essay.
Also, one question- Is the project due during our lesson on Thursday afternoon, or is it like Extension Two, where we have to sign it all in by 9am?
Mr Wright Meeting
So, I had a meeting with Mr Wright yesterday about where my project is going, as I had absolutely no clue what I was supposed to be writing about. He helped me to write an essay plan, so *hopefully* I can get something resembling a draft out BEFORE I actually have to hand it in.
Here is what we established that I need to do:
1. Write the context overview
2. The problem of why Salem
3. Factional conflict- theory
- why the theory? Historian and method
4. Indian Attack
5. Ergotism- History in action, Spanos arguement
6. summing up and conclusion
eurgh. This is going to take me forever!!!!!! But at least I have some idea where I'm going (even though I wrote about 50 words today in over an hour)
Here is what we established that I need to do:
1. Write the context overview
2. The problem of why Salem
3. Factional conflict- theory
- why the theory? Historian and method
4. Indian Attack
5. Ergotism- History in action, Spanos arguement
6. summing up and conclusion
eurgh. This is going to take me forever!!!!!! But at least I have some idea where I'm going (even though I wrote about 50 words today in over an hour)
Thursday, July 21, 2011
EXCITEMENT!!!
I just found Linnda Carporael's email address! I don't know if she'll even reply, but I'm going to send her an email anyway!
Here is my beyond douchey email:
Hi Ms. Caporael,
My name is Alice Melton, and I am a year 12 student at St. Columba's High School in Springwood, Australia. As part of my final year of schooling I have elected to study Extension History, part of the requirement of the course being that I complete a Major Work on a historical topic of interest. For my project I am writing an essay on changing interpretations of the cause/s of the Salem Witchcraft Trials, and I came upon your 1976 article on convulsive ergotism. I was wondering if I could spare a few minutes of your time to ask you some questions on your proposal.
1. What inspired/ influenced you to pursue a physiological condition as the cause of the Salem Hysteria?
2. What sort of sources did you use when developing your theory? Did you elect to not use some types of sources? Why/ Why not?
3. Do you still support your theory, or in the course of thirty years have you made changes to it?
4. Do you have any comments on history, causation or other Salem historians?
Thank-you so much for your time. Even if you can't reply, please know that your work has been invaluabe to the ongoing development of my essay. If you can send a reply, please do so to either of these addresses:
melton99@bigpond.net.au (Where this email was sent from)
OR:
Mango_muncher24@hotmail.com
Thank-you so so much! I couldn't believe my luck when I found your address online!
Sincerly,
Alice
http://homepages.rpi.edu/~caporl/home/Home.html
Here is my beyond douchey email:
Hi Ms. Caporael,
My name is Alice Melton, and I am a year 12 student at St. Columba's High School in Springwood, Australia. As part of my final year of schooling I have elected to study Extension History, part of the requirement of the course being that I complete a Major Work on a historical topic of interest. For my project I am writing an essay on changing interpretations of the cause/s of the Salem Witchcraft Trials, and I came upon your 1976 article on convulsive ergotism. I was wondering if I could spare a few minutes of your time to ask you some questions on your proposal.
1. What inspired/ influenced you to pursue a physiological condition as the cause of the Salem Hysteria?
2. What sort of sources did you use when developing your theory? Did you elect to not use some types of sources? Why/ Why not?
3. Do you still support your theory, or in the course of thirty years have you made changes to it?
4. Do you have any comments on history, causation or other Salem historians?
Thank-you so much for your time. Even if you can't reply, please know that your work has been invaluabe to the ongoing development of my essay. If you can send a reply, please do so to either of these addresses:
melton99@bigpond.net.au (Where this email was sent from)
OR:
Mango_muncher24@hotmail.com
Thank-you so so much! I couldn't believe my luck when I found your address online!
Sincerly,
Alice
http://homepages.rpi.edu/~caporl/home/Home.html
Hello synopsis
I can’t remember where I first heard about the Salem Witchcraft Trials, but as early as last year I recommended it to a friend for their Modern History personal interest project. My friend politely declined. Originally I was interested in the socio-cultural context of the time, but upon further reading I discovered that a core controversial issue surrounding the Salem event was one focusing on causation and the way historians have continued to rewrite the same history. As it exemplifies one of the key focus questions of the Extension History course, I decided that it was an appropriately complex and interesting topic for a Major Work, and so pursued this interest.
My essay begins with a postmodernist script of a hypothetical conversation between some historians, in order to highlight the diversity of historical interpretations of the same event. I then provide a brief overview of the Salem Witchtrials, and subsequently discuss some of the views of contemporary historians. However, the core of my essay focuses on mid-late twentieth century historians, the use of new types of evidence, interdisciplinary studies, and the way 'history' has continued to change over time. Through in-depth analysis of three modern historians, I evaluate the influence of personal and social context on the ongoing interpretations of the cause/s of the Salem hysteria.
The evidence cited in my essay comes from a variety of publications, predominantly from extracts in Frances Hill’s The Salem Witch Trials Reader. This text provided an outline essential to the understanding of historians ranging from contemporary Cotton Mather through to 1996, and it then allowed me to pursue further personal investigation into the featured historians (such as Boyer and Nissenbaum) and their approaches to history. The conflicting articles by Caporeal and Spanos, reproduced on the internet, were selected to demonstrate the way historical debate is generated. I have chosen not to discuss ‘poor’ historical interpretations (ie. Marion Starkey), as I feel they detract from the historical credibility of the causation debate.
My essay begins with a postmodernist script of a hypothetical conversation between some historians, in order to highlight the diversity of historical interpretations of the same event. I then provide a brief overview of the Salem Witchtrials, and subsequently discuss some of the views of contemporary historians. However, the core of my essay focuses on mid-late twentieth century historians, the use of new types of evidence, interdisciplinary studies, and the way 'history' has continued to change over time. Through in-depth analysis of three modern historians, I evaluate the influence of personal and social context on the ongoing interpretations of the cause/s of the Salem hysteria.
The evidence cited in my essay comes from a variety of publications, predominantly from extracts in Frances Hill’s The Salem Witch Trials Reader. This text provided an outline essential to the understanding of historians ranging from contemporary Cotton Mather through to 1996, and it then allowed me to pursue further personal investigation into the featured historians (such as Boyer and Nissenbaum) and their approaches to history. The conflicting articles by Caporeal and Spanos, reproduced on the internet, were selected to demonstrate the way historical debate is generated. I have chosen not to discuss ‘poor’ historical interpretations (ie. Marion Starkey), as I feel they detract from the historical credibility of the causation debate.
Sunday, July 17, 2011
A baby bit on a book I read
Witch Hunts in the Western World- Persecution and Punishment from the Inquisition through the Salem Trials
Brian A. Pavlac
I'd be lying if I tried to claim I'd read this whole book. Conveniently however, it was chaptered, so I found and read the relevant stuff. I think I might go and read the whole thing when I have time (i.e. when the HSC is over) because it's really quite interesting.
Pavlac makes a lot of really good points. Let me share them with you:
* It is virtually impossible for historians to develop one theory that can explain the onset of witch hunts- In his book Pavlac looks at witchhunting from around 1400 to 1800 CE, and writes
Brian A. Pavlac
I'd be lying if I tried to claim I'd read this whole book. Conveniently however, it was chaptered, so I found and read the relevant stuff. I think I might go and read the whole thing when I have time (i.e. when the HSC is over) because it's really quite interesting.
Pavlac makes a lot of really good points. Let me share them with you:
* It is virtually impossible for historians to develop one theory that can explain the onset of witch hunts- In his book Pavlac looks at witchhunting from around 1400 to 1800 CE, and writes
' Probably no ultimate explanation for the witch hunts will ever completely satisfy either historians or victims. The assortment of scholarly theories accounting for the hunts offers only partial explanations. Variations in time, place, motivations, and results make comprehensive explanations nearly impossible and multipple causations essential.' pg. 195
He makes a really good point. I may only be focusing on the Salem trials, but in reality each witch hunt is different in many many ways, and so require to be studied seperately in order to understand them. Salem alone has continued to baffle historians for over 300 years, and there's still hundreds more!
* On the topic of causation, he also notes:
'Whatever the theory, the ultimate reasons reside in human nature and the cultural conventions of an age' pg. 4
and he then states:
'Two phenomena allowed the witch hunts to erupt when and where they did . First, a wide spread belief in witches as an imminent public danger fabricated a justification, and more importantly, late-medieval and early-modern Christian intellectuals wove people's long-held superstitious fears about malevolent magic into the Christian worldview.' pg. 4
I think he sums that idea up nicely. There are clearly other factors to take into account when it comes to witch hunts, but I agree that Christian theocracy certainly leant itself to the persecution of witches. Definatley at Salem we can see the influence Puritan theocracy had.
On Salem, Pavlac doesn't have too much to say that I didn't already know, but he does mention one theory that I hadn't heard- That some of the women targeted were targeted because of an attitude that women shouldn't own property. He doesn't make known what his own opinions are, but it is clear that he doesn't buy into 'medical' theories such as ergotism and hallucinations due to Jimson Weed.
Pavlac also invented the term "Strixologist", derived from the Latin word for 'witch'. A Strixologist is someone who writes about witches and whether they are real and if magic could actually change the natural world. Though they may have originally tried to explain witches' origins, character and powers, they eventually ended up refuting the reality of witches. He developed the term to describe those who studied and hunted witches. Not really too related to Salem, I know, but I thought it was an interesting term none-the-less.
What is more relevant to Salem though is this note:
' The majority of scholars have noted...that many witches were among the poorest of society, and hunts rarely ever paid for themselves. Usually once a hunt did begin convicting members of the wealthy elitess, other untouched rich and powerful persons feared for their own lives and livelihoods and shut the hunt down.' pg. 191
Even though there is still some debate over why the witch trials at Salem ended so abrubtly, I think, as do many historians, that it definately had to do with the fact the 'afflicted' girls had over reached themselves and accused extremely prominent people- including the wife of the Governor, Lady Phipps.
Pavlac also discusses Sociological Theories:
'Convincing theories of social functionalism or social accusation have satisfied some historians looking to explain the hunts (Like Boyer and Nissenbaum) . These theories draw on ideas of anthropology, psychology, and postmodernism, describing how societies define themselves by including some and excluding "others."... [they] reinforce and define the limits of socially acceptable behaviour.' pg. 193
Pavlac is the Herve A. LeBlanc Distinguished Service Professor and chair of the Department of History at King's College in Wilkes-Barre Pennsylvania.
I really quite enjoy this book, its very fascinating :)
Saturday, July 16, 2011
A quick note before I begin
Ok, so I've been in Melbourne for the past three days, and all I've been able to think about is the copious amount of schoolwork that I haven't done. Then, I got back from Melbourne and checked edmodo and realised that, yes, I will actually be marked on this blog. I swore in a couple of languages, and have now decided to actually show Mr Wright that i haven't been completely slacking off in this subject.
So, here we goooooooooooooooooo
So, here we goooooooooooooooooo
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
A draft.....FINALLY
OK, I lie. Not a complete draft, but at least something of (hopefully) some substance.
Analyse different opinions on the cause/s of the Salem witch trials. How and why has this event been interpreted differently?
A hypothetical conversation between some Salem Witch Trial historians:
Mather: ‘The Salem witch trials were evidently inflicted from the demons of the invisible world.’
Hutchinson: ‘Hold up. As a man of the Enlightenment, I must inform you that there are no such things as demons. The ‘Afflicted’ were altogether guilty of fraud and imposture.’
Boyer: ‘That’s far too simple a deduction. Economic and philosophical factionalism between Salem Town and Salem Village allowed for the trials to escalate as they did.’
Nissenbaum: ‘Exactly. With a lack of autonomy and power in town politics, the trials provided opportunities for the pro-Parris faction to treat the others not as political opposition, but as morally defective individuals.’
Carporeal: ‘Well I think it was a physiological condition, like convulsive Ergotism.’
Spanos: ‘Stupid woman! You and Matossian provide no conclusive evidence! Gottlieb and I show the trials can clearly be accounted for within a social psychological framework.’
Kences: ‘The importance of the wars between the New Englanders and the native Indians cannot be underestimated either.’
Hansen: ‘Oh…well I thought they really were witches…’
Through the convoluted haze of centuries of historical discussion, it is evident that ‘history’ is a malleable concept. After all, one of the largest issues surrounding historical debates is the different portrayals of history through time. How is it that one event can cause such conflict and diverse argument? What has allowed historians to continually re-write history? Through examining different interpretations on the controversial topic of the causes of the Salem Witchcraft Trials of 1692, I hope to shed some light on why establishing causation is so difficult, and how and why historians can write about the same event in radically different ways.
In the winter of 1691/92, two young Puritan girls began suffering from disorderly speech, odd postures, and convulsive fits in the village of Salem, Massachusetts, New England. In the space of less than two years, nineteen had been hanged, an elderly man crushed to death, five dead in prison and over one-hundred and fifty persons left incarcerated . However, Witch-hunts were by no means an unfamiliar concept. Tens of thousands of people in Europe and European colonies has died at the stake or gallows between 1400 and 1650. What makes the Salem trials one of the most universally famous and fascinating is that it happened when and where it did. Yet its root causes continue to baffle historians.
Contemporary historians such as Cotton Mather viewed the events through the narrow scope of Puritan theology, where what couldn’t be rationally explained was attributed to “horrid sorcerers and hellish conjurers” and “demons of the invisible world” . In the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century, Thomas Hutchinson stated “A little attention must force conviction that the whole was a scene of fraud and imposture.” Both views are one-dimensional and easily placed within a specific social and historical-school-of-thought context. Nonetheless, it is important to remember that what they wrote left a basis for future historians to debate, investigate and improve on.
It is through twentieth century historians, however, that we see the spectrum of causation theories increasing. Burgeoning technologies, significant increases in medical knowledge, and the expansion of ‘new-history’ and inter-disciplinary studies, have all allowed for causative historical debates to be kept alive. This is not to say that it has made determining the cause of the Salem witch trials any easier. Winfield S. Nevins perhaps best reveals the implicit uncertainties of modern historians:
‘I must confess to a measure of doubt as to the moving causes of this terrible tragedy. It seems impossible to believe the tithe of the statements which were made at the trials. And yet it is equally difficult to say that nine out of every ten men, women and children who testified upon their oaths, intentionally and wilfully falsified.’
Hundreds of affidavits and court documents remain today, but the impossibility of demonic intervention in a modern context means historians are required to read beyond the written evidence, and look at different types of sources in order to speculate. One such example of this is Linnda Carporeal’s 1976 paper ‘Ergotism: The Satan Loosed in Salem?’, in which she explores the ‘potential existence of physical pathology’ and makes an argument in favour of convulsive ergotism induced via the ingestion of infected rye.
Analyse different opinions on the cause/s of the Salem witch trials. How and why has this event been interpreted differently?
A hypothetical conversation between some Salem Witch Trial historians:
Mather: ‘The Salem witch trials were evidently inflicted from the demons of the invisible world.’
Hutchinson: ‘Hold up. As a man of the Enlightenment, I must inform you that there are no such things as demons. The ‘Afflicted’ were altogether guilty of fraud and imposture.’
Boyer: ‘That’s far too simple a deduction. Economic and philosophical factionalism between Salem Town and Salem Village allowed for the trials to escalate as they did.’
Nissenbaum: ‘Exactly. With a lack of autonomy and power in town politics, the trials provided opportunities for the pro-Parris faction to treat the others not as political opposition, but as morally defective individuals.’
Carporeal: ‘Well I think it was a physiological condition, like convulsive Ergotism.’
Spanos: ‘Stupid woman! You and Matossian provide no conclusive evidence! Gottlieb and I show the trials can clearly be accounted for within a social psychological framework.’
Kences: ‘The importance of the wars between the New Englanders and the native Indians cannot be underestimated either.’
Hansen: ‘Oh…well I thought they really were witches…’
Through the convoluted haze of centuries of historical discussion, it is evident that ‘history’ is a malleable concept. After all, one of the largest issues surrounding historical debates is the different portrayals of history through time. How is it that one event can cause such conflict and diverse argument? What has allowed historians to continually re-write history? Through examining different interpretations on the controversial topic of the causes of the Salem Witchcraft Trials of 1692, I hope to shed some light on why establishing causation is so difficult, and how and why historians can write about the same event in radically different ways.
In the winter of 1691/92, two young Puritan girls began suffering from disorderly speech, odd postures, and convulsive fits in the village of Salem, Massachusetts, New England. In the space of less than two years, nineteen had been hanged, an elderly man crushed to death, five dead in prison and over one-hundred and fifty persons left incarcerated . However, Witch-hunts were by no means an unfamiliar concept. Tens of thousands of people in Europe and European colonies has died at the stake or gallows between 1400 and 1650. What makes the Salem trials one of the most universally famous and fascinating is that it happened when and where it did. Yet its root causes continue to baffle historians.
Contemporary historians such as Cotton Mather viewed the events through the narrow scope of Puritan theology, where what couldn’t be rationally explained was attributed to “horrid sorcerers and hellish conjurers” and “demons of the invisible world” . In the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century, Thomas Hutchinson stated “A little attention must force conviction that the whole was a scene of fraud and imposture.” Both views are one-dimensional and easily placed within a specific social and historical-school-of-thought context. Nonetheless, it is important to remember that what they wrote left a basis for future historians to debate, investigate and improve on.
It is through twentieth century historians, however, that we see the spectrum of causation theories increasing. Burgeoning technologies, significant increases in medical knowledge, and the expansion of ‘new-history’ and inter-disciplinary studies, have all allowed for causative historical debates to be kept alive. This is not to say that it has made determining the cause of the Salem witch trials any easier. Winfield S. Nevins perhaps best reveals the implicit uncertainties of modern historians:
‘I must confess to a measure of doubt as to the moving causes of this terrible tragedy. It seems impossible to believe the tithe of the statements which were made at the trials. And yet it is equally difficult to say that nine out of every ten men, women and children who testified upon their oaths, intentionally and wilfully falsified.’
Hundreds of affidavits and court documents remain today, but the impossibility of demonic intervention in a modern context means historians are required to read beyond the written evidence, and look at different types of sources in order to speculate. One such example of this is Linnda Carporeal’s 1976 paper ‘Ergotism: The Satan Loosed in Salem?’, in which she explores the ‘potential existence of physical pathology’ and makes an argument in favour of convulsive ergotism induced via the ingestion of infected rye.
Scheiße
So. I finally sit down to do some work on my project after much coaxing from Audrey Marsh. And then I discover, to my horror, that my USB, kindly given to me by our wonderful school, has corrupted AGAIN and deleted all my stuff- including my meagre attempt at a draft on Monday.
This is a sign. Like the foal born with a full set of teeth, or knights fighting in the sky. Perhaps I'm just not destined to ever succeed in this subject.
GAHHHHHHH *turns into hulk and kicks small ducks*
This is a sign. Like the foal born with a full set of teeth, or knights fighting in the sky. Perhaps I'm just not destined to ever succeed in this subject.
GAHHHHHHH *turns into hulk and kicks small ducks*
Sunday, July 10, 2011
FREAKING OUT
So. I just spent, oh, I dunno, this entire FREAKIN' day trying to write a draft.
And nothing happened.
I just don't get it.
End.
And nothing happened.
I just don't get it.
End.
Sunday, July 3, 2011
Sporadic Thoughts
For the Essay
* Start with a brief overlook of the events in Salem in 1692
* Look at the early historians- briefly? contemporary Mather, Hutchinson, fruad and enlightenment.
* I'm thinking the main emphasis for my essay will be more modern historians, because I think they have more depth and will allow me to talk about cross-disciplinary studies. I can refer back to older historians through the analysis of the modern ones, especially if i'm trying to determine the historians roots, or what kind of methodology they are applying.
* This in turn will allow me to look at the historiography component of the Extension course- Thinking about it, I reckon I'll be using Ranke, Annales and Post-modernism for sure!
* I'm still tossing up between how many different ones to use. I'm actually confused as to what the hell I'm even doing! I think I may end up using ergotism after all, even if it has been deemed 'irrelevant' by Monsieur Crossie. Then I can look at the contrasting article by Spanos. I also really like James E. Kences, who explored the effect the threat of Indian attack could have had on the psyche of New Englanders, especially the afflicted girls in his article 'Some Unexplored Relationships of Essex County Witchcraft to the Indian Wars of 1675 and 1687' (1984)
* Start with a brief overlook of the events in Salem in 1692
* Look at the early historians- briefly? contemporary Mather, Hutchinson, fruad and enlightenment.
* I'm thinking the main emphasis for my essay will be more modern historians, because I think they have more depth and will allow me to talk about cross-disciplinary studies. I can refer back to older historians through the analysis of the modern ones, especially if i'm trying to determine the historians roots, or what kind of methodology they are applying.
* This in turn will allow me to look at the historiography component of the Extension course- Thinking about it, I reckon I'll be using Ranke, Annales and Post-modernism for sure!
* I'm still tossing up between how many different ones to use. I'm actually confused as to what the hell I'm even doing! I think I may end up using ergotism after all, even if it has been deemed 'irrelevant' by Monsieur Crossie. Then I can look at the contrasting article by Spanos. I also really like James E. Kences, who explored the effect the threat of Indian attack could have had on the psyche of New Englanders, especially the afflicted girls in his article 'Some Unexplored Relationships of Essex County Witchcraft to the Indian Wars of 1675 and 1687' (1984)
Crappy Essay Introduction...
Analyse different opinions on the cause/s of the Salem witch trials. How and why has it been interpreted differently?
One of the biggest issues surrounding historical debates is the different portrayals of history through time. How is it that one even can cause such conflict and diverse argument? Through examining different historical interpretations on the controversial topic of the causes of the Salem Witchcraft Trials, Massachusetts in 1692, I hope to shed some light on why establishing causation is so difficult, and how and why different historians can write about the same event in radically different ways.
This is embarrasing. But I got bored of doing anything that constitutes legitimate research, so this crap happened instead. Am I anywhere near the right track? I have no flippin' idea!
On a more positive note, I've finished reading and highlighting that section of my book. Finally. I think I have a much clearer idea of where I may actually be going with this project. About time, I'd say.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Paul Boyer and Stephen Nissenbaum
Salem Possessed: The Social Origins of Witchcraft (Cambridge, 1974), Chapter 4, "Salem Town and Salem Village: The Dynamics of Factional Conflict"
- Physical Setting
- If authorities at the provincial level had exerted a stronger and more consistent hand in settling matters, Salem Village factionalism would certainly never have exploded as it did. The authorities were unpredictable and capricious as opposed to a firm source of policy.
* Argue that the witch-hunt was caused, at the most fundamental level, by the conflict between the new entrepreneurial world represented by Salem Town and the Puritan world of third-generation Salem Village farmers.
* There was great social change going on at the time- the Salem Town and Salem Village inhabitants were on the cusp of old and new ways of living.
* The pro-Parris faction treated those that threatened them not as a political opposition but as morally defective individuals. It was not uncommon for a town to rid itself of deviant or threatening people.
* The pro-Parris faction treated those that threatened them not as a political opposition but as morally defective individuals. It was not uncommon for a town to rid itself of deviant or threatening people.
*Claim that the reason the witch hunts only happened in Salem, and not in other New England colonies, was because of a convergence of a specific and unlikely combination of historical circumstances at the particular time and place.
- Physical Setting
If Salem Village had been an isolated agricultural community, then Salem Town, and the changes that were occurring there, would not have loomed so large in the Village's consciousness.
Lack of Autonomy
- Salem Village did not have full political or ecclesiastical independence (They were not granted with it in 1672, or 1989). It can be argued that if they had, the village may have been able to develop strong institutions of its own- Institutions that may have given the villagers the power to solve their own factional disputes.
Taste of Independence
-In contrast to the last point, Boyer and Nissenbaum argue that if "Salem Farms" had remained completely part of the town, then no institutions, such as the meetinghouse and legal house, would have been established in the region at all. Even though serious problems no doubt would have persisted after 1672, a single town, physically and institutionally undivided, might have been able to contain those problems within tolerable limits.
Lack of power in Town politics
- Villagers could vote in Town elections and were eligible to hold Town offices, however, due to the difference in numbers rarely were they ever able to use the Town's political power as a weapon in Village conflicts. There was no political power equality between the Villagers and the Town folk.
Boston Authorities
- If authorities at the provincial level had exerted a stronger and more consistent hand in settling matters, Salem Village factionalism would certainly never have exploded as it did. The authorities were unpredictable and capricious as opposed to a firm source of policy.
What I like about Boyer and Nissenbaum (other then his name) is the fact that they are looking at the trials in a radically different way to previous historians. They used documentary and demographic evidence to show the economic and philosophic underpinnings of the two factions of Salem Town and Salem Village. They look much more indepth at social origins, rather then fraud or actual witchcraft, following the trend of most twentieth century historians. Instead of just re-hashing the same evidence and stories, new types of evidence and new schools of thought allow modern historians to interpret and analyse the Salem with-hunts and innovative ways.
Boyer is a cultural and intellectual historian, and Nissenbaum is a Professor of U.S. Cultural History :D
Chadwick Hansen and clinical hysteria
Chadwick Hansen, Witchcraft at Salem (New York, 1969)
OK, I for one can't decide whether I love or hate this guy. He gives an excellent explanation of the onset of the girls fits as due to clinical hysteria (it's actually really really fascinating!), and says it was the penultimate result of their fear of witchcraft
BUT
His theory is that witches really were practising witchcraft in Salem....
OK, Hansen, whatever floats your boat.
He tells us that if the existing documents are read correctly, then they show us that people like Bridget Bishop, Candy, and Mammy Redd actually were practicing black magic... with success.
His argument is thorough...but unconvincing, so i'll ignore it, HOWEVER, I'd like to look at his explanations of clinical hysteria. He takes his information from Dr. Walter B. Cannon of Harvard Medical School, who in 1942 published an article entitled "Voodoo Death". Cannon's thesis was then tested in the Psychobiological Laboratory at John Hopkins Medical School by Curt P. Richter, who then published his findings in 1957 titled "On the Phenomenon of Sudden Death in Animals and Man".
The main point is, that people who thought they were bewitched convinced themselves of it so completely that they developed the symptoms associated with it. Nowadays, these kinds of diseases are known as psychosomatic.
Richter was using rats (obviously) to try and test the survival times of domestic vs. wild rats that were placed in water-filled beakers to swim until they drowned. His results were so irregular, that he set out to discover the cause of death. He discovered that the cause of death was, put simply, hopelessness. The rats were so convinced that there was no chance of escape from the water, that their bodies just shut-down. Richter then went on to train rats by rescuing them repeatedly from the water, and they same for longer and longer. He also discovered that if he rescued rats that were about to die a psychogenic death, they recovered rapidly.
Now if we place this theory into the context of the Salem witch trials, isn't it possible that the girls were so convinced of their bewitchment, both by their fear of it, and by their diagnosis by a physician, that they then developed the symptoms they associated with it? Similarly, the idea of rats recovering after being rescued could work the same way with a counter charm used for witchcraft victims. They believe they have been cured of their bewitchment, and so they recover.
I don't really know why I just wasted half a lesson on this, I just thought it was interesting. If anything it shows that as we move into more modern times more emphasis is being placed on psychological disorders. I'm a big fan of the mental illness, but the only problem with this is 'how do you prove what the mental state of people who have been dead for over 300 years was?'
Monday, June 6, 2011
Histories
Holy Hooker, what is this? TWO blog posts in TWO days?
George Bancroft, The History of the United States of America (1834)
* Democratic politician and diplomat.
* The first, after Calef's More Wonders of The Invisible World, to mention the strained relations between Reverend Samuel Parris and some of his Parishioners, and then notes 'The delusion of witchcraft would give opportunities of terrible vengeance.'
* Like Hutchinson, he makes some claim of fraud on behalf of the afflicted girls, and also makes note of the similarities between their 'strange caprices' and those of the Goodwin children in Mather's Memorable Providences
' The oppotunity of fame, of which the love is not the exclusive infirmity of noble minds was placed within the reach of persons of the coursest mould; and the ambition of notoriety recruited the little company of the possessed.'
*After acknowledging this, he then claims all responsibility for the Witch-hunt rests 'the very few, hardly five or six, in whose hands the transistion state of the government left, for a season, unlimited influence.' I see the point Bancroft is trying to make- I too agree that the court of Oyer and Terminer was flawed in regards to its requirements for conviction. However, I do not believe that we can blame solely the judges; accusations were flying before the court was set up, so something else must have triggered it- And Bancroft has already commented on Parris and his Parishioners, fraud and fame. Hill makes an interesting comment about Bancrofts opinion- he 'displays an overly optimistic Jacksonian Democrat's faith in the good sense of the people.'
* He is astute on the role of Cotton Mather- 'He is an example how far selfishness, under the form of vanity and ambition, can blind the higher faculties, stupefy the judgement, and dupe consciousness itself.' He was clearly not a fan of the guy.
* Notes 'The invisible world began to be less considered; men trusted more to observation and analysis', and the end of Mathers influence, as the reason the Salem trials never extended into other areas.
Charles W. Upham, Salem Witchcraft, (Boston, 1867), part 3: "Witchcraft in Salem Village"
* Ascribes almost every aspect of the witch-hunt to conscious fraud and conspiracy. Oversimplistic.
* HOWEVER, understood the political background to the witch-hunt better than anybody up until the 1970's, which is why his history is an inclusive exploration of the trials' causes and development.
Upham lists a number of relevant factors that may have contributed to the trials- which is one aspects of his history I like. Whilst his conclusions may on the whole be oversimplified, he identifies multiple facets of the society at the time.
* acknowledges 'controversy' between Parris and Salem Village inhabitants
* 'doctrines of demonology had produced their full effect upon the minds of men'
* Stories such as that of the Goodwin children were well known thoughout New England
* People in neighbouring towns were already in prison on charges of witchcraft
* Deputy-governor Danforth (who would become a judge in the trials) had already begun the work of arrests.
* Parris' Indian slave Tituba may have had some knowledge of Spanish/ West Indies 'witchcraft'
Upham then goes on with Mather's idea of the 'afflicted', but develops it into a spiritualist circle headed by Tituba and her husband John Indian. She taught the young girls all about palmistry, fortune-telling, magic etc., which the girls then used for attention.
I'm verrryyyyy dubious on that last point. Sorry Upham, but I don't quite buy it.
Samuel G. Drake, Annals of Witchcraft in New England (New York, 1869)
* His Annals consists mainly of reproductions of the trial transcripts
* Continues with the idea of the spiritualist 'circle', but makes no mention of Tituba
* Blames the girls and their dabbling in witchcraft as the primary cause 'Such were the characters which set in motion that stupendous tragedy, which ended in blood and ruin.'
Sooooo... I have no idea if any of this is relevant to anything- but I figured I should at least demonstrate that stuff has been happening. There is more to come!
I've discovered through my reading that as historical interpretations of the trials become more modern, so too do they become increasingly concerned with science and psychology. But more on that later. I'm off for a shower, and then onto Japanese speaking (joy oh joy)
George Bancroft, The History of the United States of America (1834)
* Democratic politician and diplomat.
* The first, after Calef's More Wonders of The Invisible World, to mention the strained relations between Reverend Samuel Parris and some of his Parishioners, and then notes 'The delusion of witchcraft would give opportunities of terrible vengeance.'
* Like Hutchinson, he makes some claim of fraud on behalf of the afflicted girls, and also makes note of the similarities between their 'strange caprices' and those of the Goodwin children in Mather's Memorable Providences
' The oppotunity of fame, of which the love is not the exclusive infirmity of noble minds was placed within the reach of persons of the coursest mould; and the ambition of notoriety recruited the little company of the possessed.'
*After acknowledging this, he then claims all responsibility for the Witch-hunt rests 'the very few, hardly five or six, in whose hands the transistion state of the government left, for a season, unlimited influence.' I see the point Bancroft is trying to make- I too agree that the court of Oyer and Terminer was flawed in regards to its requirements for conviction. However, I do not believe that we can blame solely the judges; accusations were flying before the court was set up, so something else must have triggered it- And Bancroft has already commented on Parris and his Parishioners, fraud and fame. Hill makes an interesting comment about Bancrofts opinion- he 'displays an overly optimistic Jacksonian Democrat's faith in the good sense of the people.'
* He is astute on the role of Cotton Mather- 'He is an example how far selfishness, under the form of vanity and ambition, can blind the higher faculties, stupefy the judgement, and dupe consciousness itself.' He was clearly not a fan of the guy.
* Notes 'The invisible world began to be less considered; men trusted more to observation and analysis', and the end of Mathers influence, as the reason the Salem trials never extended into other areas.
Charles W. Upham, Salem Witchcraft, (Boston, 1867), part 3: "Witchcraft in Salem Village"
* Ascribes almost every aspect of the witch-hunt to conscious fraud and conspiracy. Oversimplistic.
* HOWEVER, understood the political background to the witch-hunt better than anybody up until the 1970's, which is why his history is an inclusive exploration of the trials' causes and development.
Upham lists a number of relevant factors that may have contributed to the trials- which is one aspects of his history I like. Whilst his conclusions may on the whole be oversimplified, he identifies multiple facets of the society at the time.
* acknowledges 'controversy' between Parris and Salem Village inhabitants
* 'doctrines of demonology had produced their full effect upon the minds of men'
* Stories such as that of the Goodwin children were well known thoughout New England
* People in neighbouring towns were already in prison on charges of witchcraft
* Deputy-governor Danforth (who would become a judge in the trials) had already begun the work of arrests.
* Parris' Indian slave Tituba may have had some knowledge of Spanish/ West Indies 'witchcraft'
Upham then goes on with Mather's idea of the 'afflicted', but develops it into a spiritualist circle headed by Tituba and her husband John Indian. She taught the young girls all about palmistry, fortune-telling, magic etc., which the girls then used for attention.
I'm verrryyyyy dubious on that last point. Sorry Upham, but I don't quite buy it.
Samuel G. Drake, Annals of Witchcraft in New England (New York, 1869)
* His Annals consists mainly of reproductions of the trial transcripts
* Continues with the idea of the spiritualist 'circle', but makes no mention of Tituba
* Blames the girls and their dabbling in witchcraft as the primary cause 'Such were the characters which set in motion that stupendous tragedy, which ended in blood and ruin.'
Sooooo... I have no idea if any of this is relevant to anything- but I figured I should at least demonstrate that stuff has been happening. There is more to come!
I've discovered through my reading that as historical interpretations of the trials become more modern, so too do they become increasingly concerned with science and psychology. But more on that later. I'm off for a shower, and then onto Japanese speaking (joy oh joy)
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Contemporary and early Histories
Hmmmmm.....I think it's pretty obvious here who the slackest in the class is.....
Anyway, I'm on my fourth cup of tea for the day, and Extension History has finally come up in my extensive homework schedule. I've read quite a bit of Frances Hill's The Salem Witch Trials Reader, so I figured i'd do you all a favour and tell you about it.
There is almost 90 pages dedicated purely to what different historians have to say on the trials. They range from contemporary sources to late 20th century ones. What I've read are interesting...and some of them are just a tad ridiculous.
I'm going to start with the more early sources, because it's getting late and my bed is beckoning me to a swift sleep. (alliteration for the win!)
Cotton Mather, The Life of His Excellency Sir William Phillips, Knt (London, 1697)
* Attempts to explain why the trials happened- but his explanation blames purely the devil, the 'invisible world' and by the fact that people were practising 'detestable conjurations' in Salem, and throughout much of New England.
*This approach is not surprising however. Mather was also a key player in the trials themselves, and was a strong advocate for the admission of spectral evidence (though he did originally say it should not be the convicting evidence). Of all the principle actors in the trials whose lives were documented afterwards, Mathers was one of only two who did not admit to any guilt.
*Was an influential Puritan Minister who was deeply concerned with the lack of piety in New England. His essay Illustrious Providences (1684) set out to prove the existence of the spiritual side of the world.
* After the Trials, Mather wrote many works defending the trials. His own father publicly burnt his work Wonders of the Invisible World. Ouch.
Mathers accounts are interesting because they are so contemporary. He was there, he resided in the actual trials. However, it is also very clear that his history of the trials is extremely bias. He seeks to blame the Devil and sorcery for what happened because it would
a) Support his defense for Spectral Evidence
b) Explain would could not be (and still has not been) explained
c) Demonstrate the Devil's active work, and thus encourage belief in the Lord Jesus Christ
d) Perhaps because he honestly believed that's what it was- He certainly wrote enough about it to be convincing of his own convictions.
Thomas Hutchinson, The History of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay (London, 1765)
* A man of the Enlightenment- his history is therefore very different to Mather's. He had no time for superstition, and instead oversimplified by ascribing the whole witch-hunt to fraud and conspiracy.
* His strengths (looking past the religious, superstitious aspect for other possible factors) were his weaknesses. Like other Enlightenment historians such as Gibbon, his dismissal of religion affects the credibilty of his work. Whilst I do not believe that real witches can be blamed as the cause of the witch trials, I understand that God-fearing Puritans in 17th century New England certainly believed it to be plausible- and we have to understand that to try and understand them (Ive been listening in class! Perhaps a little sentient empathy? or mentalities anyone?)
* reproduces original documents, including examinations and confessions. He also utilises already written histories on the trials, and books on witchcraft that existed pre-Salem.
*Suggests that the reason the afflicted's behaviour matched that of the Goodwin children (whom Mather's investigated for his Illustrious Providences because of their strange aflictions in Boston, in 1688) so closely was because books on witchcraft were readily available to those in New England, and they could therefore be copied.
* Accuses the girls of fraud- 'So much notice taken on the children, together with the pity and compassion expressed by those who visited them, not only tended to confirm them in their design, but to draw others into the like'.
* And then it arcs into a conspiracy where once started, no-one had the courage to back out. He surmises the trials 'proceeded from the reluctance in human nature to reject errors once imbibed.'
* Was one of the first to question 'whether the the afflicted were under bodily distempers, or altogether guilt of fraud and imposture' rather than 'preternatural or diabolical possession.'
Coming up tomorrow.....
George Bancroft, The History of the United States of America (1834)
Charles W. Upham, Salem Witchcraft, (Boston, 1867), part 3: "Witchcraft in Salem Village"
Samuel G. Drake, Annals of Witchcraft in New England (New York, 1869)
M.V.B Perley, A Short History of the Salem Witchcraft Trials (1911)
Good-night!!!!!
Anyway, I'm on my fourth cup of tea for the day, and Extension History has finally come up in my extensive homework schedule. I've read quite a bit of Frances Hill's The Salem Witch Trials Reader, so I figured i'd do you all a favour and tell you about it.
There is almost 90 pages dedicated purely to what different historians have to say on the trials. They range from contemporary sources to late 20th century ones. What I've read are interesting...and some of them are just a tad ridiculous.
I'm going to start with the more early sources, because it's getting late and my bed is beckoning me to a swift sleep. (alliteration for the win!)
Cotton Mather, The Life of His Excellency Sir William Phillips, Knt (London, 1697)
* Attempts to explain why the trials happened- but his explanation blames purely the devil, the 'invisible world' and by the fact that people were practising 'detestable conjurations' in Salem, and throughout much of New England.
*This approach is not surprising however. Mather was also a key player in the trials themselves, and was a strong advocate for the admission of spectral evidence (though he did originally say it should not be the convicting evidence). Of all the principle actors in the trials whose lives were documented afterwards, Mathers was one of only two who did not admit to any guilt.
*Was an influential Puritan Minister who was deeply concerned with the lack of piety in New England. His essay Illustrious Providences (1684) set out to prove the existence of the spiritual side of the world.
* After the Trials, Mather wrote many works defending the trials. His own father publicly burnt his work Wonders of the Invisible World. Ouch.
Mathers accounts are interesting because they are so contemporary. He was there, he resided in the actual trials. However, it is also very clear that his history of the trials is extremely bias. He seeks to blame the Devil and sorcery for what happened because it would
a) Support his defense for Spectral Evidence
b) Explain would could not be (and still has not been) explained
c) Demonstrate the Devil's active work, and thus encourage belief in the Lord Jesus Christ
d) Perhaps because he honestly believed that's what it was- He certainly wrote enough about it to be convincing of his own convictions.
Thomas Hutchinson, The History of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay (London, 1765)
* A man of the Enlightenment- his history is therefore very different to Mather's. He had no time for superstition, and instead oversimplified by ascribing the whole witch-hunt to fraud and conspiracy.
* His strengths (looking past the religious, superstitious aspect for other possible factors) were his weaknesses. Like other Enlightenment historians such as Gibbon, his dismissal of religion affects the credibilty of his work. Whilst I do not believe that real witches can be blamed as the cause of the witch trials, I understand that God-fearing Puritans in 17th century New England certainly believed it to be plausible- and we have to understand that to try and understand them (Ive been listening in class! Perhaps a little sentient empathy? or mentalities anyone?)
* reproduces original documents, including examinations and confessions. He also utilises already written histories on the trials, and books on witchcraft that existed pre-Salem.
*Suggests that the reason the afflicted's behaviour matched that of the Goodwin children (whom Mather's investigated for his Illustrious Providences because of their strange aflictions in Boston, in 1688) so closely was because books on witchcraft were readily available to those in New England, and they could therefore be copied.
* Accuses the girls of fraud- 'So much notice taken on the children, together with the pity and compassion expressed by those who visited them, not only tended to confirm them in their design, but to draw others into the like'.
* And then it arcs into a conspiracy where once started, no-one had the courage to back out. He surmises the trials 'proceeded from the reluctance in human nature to reject errors once imbibed.'
* Was one of the first to question 'whether the the afflicted were under bodily distempers, or altogether guilt of fraud and imposture' rather than 'preternatural or diabolical possession.'
Coming up tomorrow.....
George Bancroft, The History of the United States of America (1834)
Charles W. Upham, Salem Witchcraft, (Boston, 1867), part 3: "Witchcraft in Salem Village"
Samuel G. Drake, Annals of Witchcraft in New England (New York, 1869)
M.V.B Perley, A Short History of the Salem Witchcraft Trials (1911)
Good-night!!!!!
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Boring. Blog. Post.
Interesting wikipage on medical explanations of bewitchment
* Ergot Poisoning
* Encephalitis
* Lyme Disease
* Jimson Weed poisoning
* Post-traumatic Stress Disorder
* Hysteria and Psychosomatic Disorders
* Projection
I'm just putting it out there- but I kinda wish they'd all just been smoking Marijuana or some other illicit substance.
Monday, April 25, 2011
Ergotism
Of many of the theories over the cause/s of the Salem witchcraft trials, the theory of convulsive ergotism stuck out to me.
I printed off and read Linnda R. Caporael's 1976 article Ergotism: The Satan Loosed in Salem? She not only provides plausable evidence for the existence of ergot in Salem, but is able to explain the symptoms of the young girls, as well as a possible explanation for the 'spectral evidence' that was used as evidence of witchcraft in court.
She also notes that, at least in her time, no-one had ever sufficiently explored the idea of a physiological condition as a possible factor. She says this is because many historians did, and still do, believe that the girls physical afflictions and spectral evidence were made up. I agree with Caporael that it is extremely difficult to assess the physical and mental states of people who have been dead for centuries, but I also think, like her, the 'evidence' of witchcraft cannot be ignored purely because we no longer believe that Satan or witches played any part. Saying that, it is important to place the hysteria that followed in its own contextual framework. Outbreaks of ergotism had occured in the past (records indicate as early as 857AD in Germany), but none had led to such events such as those at Salem. More on that later.
What is ergot
?
Ergot is a parasitic fungus that grows on a large variety of cereal grains-especially rye, which was one of the main grains of the time- which is slightly curved. It replaces individual grains on the host plant. Before it was realised that ergot was poisonous, people believed it to be sun-cooked grains of the plant.
How does it occur?
Ergot prefers warm, damp, rainy springs and summers to occur in large amounts. However, this does not mean that all crops would be affected-one might be, and then the one next to it may be relatively fine. The diary of Samuel Sewall, one of the judges in the trial, notes that there were early rains and warm weather in spring, and it progressed into a hot and stormy summer in the year of 1691, and that in 1692 there was a drought (so presumably no contamination the next year). Therefore, fitted into the timeframe, there were perfect conditions for ergot to occur.
The grains would have been stored in barns, possibly for months, before being threshed and consumed. Presumably this was done shortly after Thanksgiving (fourth thursday of November for all us non-Americans), which was the only holiday the Puritans observed. The children's symptoms began in December of 1691.
I printed off and read Linnda R. Caporael's 1976 article Ergotism: The Satan Loosed in Salem? She not only provides plausable evidence for the existence of ergot in Salem, but is able to explain the symptoms of the young girls, as well as a possible explanation for the 'spectral evidence' that was used as evidence of witchcraft in court.
She also notes that, at least in her time, no-one had ever sufficiently explored the idea of a physiological condition as a possible factor. She says this is because many historians did, and still do, believe that the girls physical afflictions and spectral evidence were made up. I agree with Caporael that it is extremely difficult to assess the physical and mental states of people who have been dead for centuries, but I also think, like her, the 'evidence' of witchcraft cannot be ignored purely because we no longer believe that Satan or witches played any part. Saying that, it is important to place the hysteria that followed in its own contextual framework. Outbreaks of ergotism had occured in the past (records indicate as early as 857AD in Germany), but none had led to such events such as those at Salem. More on that later.
What is ergot
?Ergot is a parasitic fungus that grows on a large variety of cereal grains-especially rye, which was one of the main grains of the time- which is slightly curved. It replaces individual grains on the host plant. Before it was realised that ergot was poisonous, people believed it to be sun-cooked grains of the plant.
How does it occur?
Ergot prefers warm, damp, rainy springs and summers to occur in large amounts. However, this does not mean that all crops would be affected-one might be, and then the one next to it may be relatively fine. The diary of Samuel Sewall, one of the judges in the trial, notes that there were early rains and warm weather in spring, and it progressed into a hot and stormy summer in the year of 1691, and that in 1692 there was a drought (so presumably no contamination the next year). Therefore, fitted into the timeframe, there were perfect conditions for ergot to occur.
The grains would have been stored in barns, possibly for months, before being threshed and consumed. Presumably this was done shortly after Thanksgiving (fourth thursday of November for all us non-Americans), which was the only holiday the Puritans observed. The children's symptoms began in December of 1691.
Evidence for ergot in the Salem area
Ergot could have found its way into the areas surrounding Salem by two means:
1: The Puritans bought it with them in English rye when they immigrated to the New World.
2: The common grass around the area was and is, wild rye, a host plant for ergot.
Before the Puritans arrived, early colonists were dissatisfied with the wild rye as a forage for their cattle and reported that it often made the cattle ill with unknown diseases. Presumably, then, ergot grew in the New World before the Puritans arrived.
Symptoms of ergotism
There are two types of ergotism:
Gangrenous ergotism- self-explanatory, it caused blister, dry rot of extremeties etc. I think if this type of ergotism was occuring there would be some record of it, but from what I can find, there isn't.
The second type is Convulsive Ergotism. It attacks the central nervous system causing;
* mania
* psychosis
* hallucinations
* paralysis
* prickling sensations in the skin
* painful muscular contractions
*tinnitus aurium (a fancy way of saying ringing in the ears, or buzzing)
* disturbances in sensation
* vomiting and diarrhea
Now let's look at the reported symptoms of the afflicted girls:
* The girls complained of being pinched and pricked with pins
* contortion into strange positions
* screaming and making strange sounds
* having fits
'Spectral Evidence' used by the accusers (including girls)
* Accusations of choking, pricking with pins, and biting by the specter of the accused
* Complaints of vomiting and "bowels almost pulled out"
* Visions of the accused, or their specter, hurting or cursing them
Caporael makes an important point about the clear correlation between the symptoms of ergot poisoning, and the documented notes of the symptoms of the afflicted and the 'evidence' used by the accused during the witch trials.
Caporael's theory is certainly plausible, and I find more satisfying and more interesting than simply saying the girls were faking it. Whilst we will never be able to prove the existence of ergot at the time, the evidence provides at least a circumstantial case.
Symptoms of ergotism
There are two types of ergotism:
Gangrenous ergotism- self-explanatory, it caused blister, dry rot of extremeties etc. I think if this type of ergotism was occuring there would be some record of it, but from what I can find, there isn't.
The second type is Convulsive Ergotism. It attacks the central nervous system causing;
* mania
* psychosis
* hallucinations
* paralysis
* prickling sensations in the skin
* painful muscular contractions
*tinnitus aurium (a fancy way of saying ringing in the ears, or buzzing)
* disturbances in sensation
* vomiting and diarrhea
Now let's look at the reported symptoms of the afflicted girls:
* The girls complained of being pinched and pricked with pins
* contortion into strange positions
* screaming and making strange sounds
* having fits
'Spectral Evidence' used by the accusers (including girls)
* Accusations of choking, pricking with pins, and biting by the specter of the accused
* Complaints of vomiting and "bowels almost pulled out"
* Visions of the accused, or their specter, hurting or cursing them
Caporael makes an important point about the clear correlation between the symptoms of ergot poisoning, and the documented notes of the symptoms of the afflicted and the 'evidence' used by the accused during the witch trials.
'When examined in the light of a physiological hypothesis, the content of so-called delusional testimony, previously dismissed as imaginary by historians, can be re-interpreted as evidence of ergotism.'
Caporael's theory is certainly plausible, and I find more satisfying and more interesting than simply saying the girls were faking it. Whilst we will never be able to prove the existence of ergot at the time, the evidence provides at least a circumstantial case.
Friday, April 22, 2011
Peer Pressured Procrastination Break-through
So to my dismay I have realised that I havn't blogged in nearly 2 months! What the hell? Even I'M not usually that slack.
I ordered some books from book depository last week, so hopefully they will arrive sometime next week. I've also printed off many of the articles that I've already posted on here, and have read and highlighted them. I find it easier to do it that way, instead of reading from the computer. Ive got hand written notes that I will put up soon, but I've been trying to escape using the computer because of my ever-dwindling attention span.
I didn't get to a University Library. I know. I suck. What have I done with these holidays? I wish you could tell me.
I just thought I should check in and tell you all that I haven't forgotten about this subject (Seriously, I don't know how you could)
I think I need to have a set timetable for this project. I function better with routine and the threat of a deadline, rather then hanging around drinking tea 'til August comes round.
I'll put my summary of the articles up soon* for you all to see.
* 'soon' is un-specified amount of time. 'soon' differs from person to person. Don't doubt that Alice can make 'Soon' an extensive period of time. If she tries to, beat her about the head with her own tea-cup.
I ordered some books from book depository last week, so hopefully they will arrive sometime next week. I've also printed off many of the articles that I've already posted on here, and have read and highlighted them. I find it easier to do it that way, instead of reading from the computer. Ive got hand written notes that I will put up soon, but I've been trying to escape using the computer because of my ever-dwindling attention span.
I didn't get to a University Library. I know. I suck. What have I done with these holidays? I wish you could tell me.
I just thought I should check in and tell you all that I haven't forgotten about this subject (Seriously, I don't know how you could)
I think I need to have a set timetable for this project. I function better with routine and the threat of a deadline, rather then hanging around drinking tea 'til August comes round.
I'll put my summary of the articles up soon* for you all to see.
* 'soon' is un-specified amount of time. 'soon' differs from person to person. Don't doubt that Alice can make 'Soon' an extensive period of time. If she tries to, beat her about the head with her own tea-cup.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Extension History Proposal
Extension History Proposal
Alice Melton
1 Description of preliminary research
Initially my research was aimed at allowing me to attain a sense of the atmosphere that pervaded 1962 Salem, as I was unsure about what my focus points for my History Project would be. I was interested in the social, cultural and religious context of the time, and through class discussion and suggestions from my peers I read The Crucible by Arthur Miller [1]. This play provided both the general arc of events and encapsulated the paranoia of the townsfolk, adding to my accumulating fascination of why the Salem Witch trials occurred.
To add to my general knowledge, I also read various websites on Salem, primarily Wikipedia [2] and the online article Salem Witchcraft: The Events and Causes of the Salem Witch Trials by Tim Sutter [3]. Along with the book WITCHCRAFT: A secret history by Michael Streeter [4]and Jess Blumberg’s article for Smithsonian.com A Brief History of the Salem Witch Trials [5], it was made evident that the most important historiographical issue was not context, but cause. From here I have made an attempt to collect as many different theories as possible, and there are surprisingly many. The evidence we have from the time before, during and after the trials is open completely to interpretation, as is the evidence that isn’t there (especially the use of spectral ‘evidence’ and the misdiagnosis of the strange afflictions of the young girls as the devils work.) In particular, Linda Caporeal’s 1976 hypothesis from Science ‘Ergotism: The Satan Loosed in Salem?’[6], which investigates the possibility of a physiological condition as the cause for the girls illness’; and the more recent 2008 article ‘Were the American colonists drugged during the Salem witchcraft trial?’[7] by Josh Clark, demonstrate the continual debate over cause amongst historians.
2. Describe the process you went through to arrive at your questions.
At first I wanted to look at the aforementioned topic-how did the religious, social and historical context of Salem lead to the trials? I was also interested in why the Salem trials are so well known. What was it about them that make them more memorable than previous witch trials in Europe and America? After we went through the readings and different historical schools for this course however, it became apparent that my question needed to focus more on historiography and how history has been perceived differently by different people, which is why I have decided on the following question:
Analyse different opinions on the cause/s of the Salem witch trials. How and why has it been interpreted differently?
In order to answer this question, I have made a list of subsidiary questions:
* Why is determining the cause/s of the Salem witch trials so difficult and controversial?
* What different approaches have been taken by historians and other individuals in order to try and explain why the trials happened?
* Are they valid approaches and claims? Why/Why not? What do I believe?
* How do different approaches to history reflect both the context of the Historian and the ideology they have? (I want to look briefly at Post-modern theorist Louis Althusser if I have time)
3. Research intentions in relation to areas/texts to examine
I aim to select three opposing theories on the cause of the Salem witch trials to dissect and analyse for my project. At this stage I am interested in looking further into Linda R. Caporeal’s theory on convulsive ergotism, and the oppressive religious beliefs and customs of the Puritan religion. Through further investigation I intend to select another theory from the extensive list which I believe best demonstrates the contrasting approaches to this historical issue.
There are also a number of books and websites that I intend to utilise sometime in the not so distant future- in particular this work The Salem Witch Trials : A Reference Guide by David K. Goss that Mr Wright found for me on e library, and Frances Hill’s books Delusion of Satan: Full Story of the Salem Witch Trials and The Salem Witch Trials Reader. I hope to get these books off www.bookdepository.com as I was unable to locate any books on the Salem witch trials at Penrith City Library, but I have been informed of inter-library loans and I would also like to visit Fisher Library at Sydney University.
4. Research intentions in relation to methodology
My history project focuses primarily on the historical debate over the cause/s of the Salem Witch trials, a controversial topic that has raged for over 300 years. From my research it has become clear that in order to deal with this issue I must focus heavily on the contrasting approaches taken by historians (and others) and why they have taken them. My enquiry questions will hopefully be answered by continued research and investigation into the hypotheses presented by various historians, and through my own ability to acknowledge that history is never black and white. Instead it is complex and there is no such thing as a 'right' answer in relation to cause. Through my project I have an opportunity to better understand how and why a historical event is continually reviewed, revised, debated and theorised over time by historians.
Footnotes
[1] Miller, A The Crucible. Penguin Group, Great Britain, 1968
[2] Wikipedia, Salem witch trials, Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. updated 1/3/2011, viewed on 21/12/2010, 2/2/2011, 8/2/2011, 1/3/2011, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials
[3] Sutter, T Salem Witchcraft: the Events and Causes of the Salem Witch Trials, Siteclopedia Network, 2003, viewed on 21/12/2010, 8/2/2011, 28/2/2011
[4] Streeter, M WITCHCRAFT: A secret history, New Burlington Books, London, 2002,
[5] J Blumberg, ‘A Brief History of the Salem Witch Trials’, Smithsonian Institution, October 24, 2007, http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/brief-salem.html
[6] L Caporael, ‘Ergotism: The Satan loosed in Salem?’, Science, Vol. 192, 2 April 1976
[7] J Clark, ‘Were the American colonists drugged during the Salem witchcraft trial?’, HowStuffWorks, Inc., 2011, viewed 27/2/2011, http://history.howstuffworks.com/american-history/drugged-salem-witchtrial.htm/printable
Alice Melton
1 Description of preliminary research
Initially my research was aimed at allowing me to attain a sense of the atmosphere that pervaded 1962 Salem, as I was unsure about what my focus points for my History Project would be. I was interested in the social, cultural and religious context of the time, and through class discussion and suggestions from my peers I read The Crucible by Arthur Miller [1]. This play provided both the general arc of events and encapsulated the paranoia of the townsfolk, adding to my accumulating fascination of why the Salem Witch trials occurred.
To add to my general knowledge, I also read various websites on Salem, primarily Wikipedia [2] and the online article Salem Witchcraft: The Events and Causes of the Salem Witch Trials by Tim Sutter [3]. Along with the book WITCHCRAFT: A secret history by Michael Streeter [4]and Jess Blumberg’s article for Smithsonian.com A Brief History of the Salem Witch Trials [5], it was made evident that the most important historiographical issue was not context, but cause. From here I have made an attempt to collect as many different theories as possible, and there are surprisingly many. The evidence we have from the time before, during and after the trials is open completely to interpretation, as is the evidence that isn’t there (especially the use of spectral ‘evidence’ and the misdiagnosis of the strange afflictions of the young girls as the devils work.) In particular, Linda Caporeal’s 1976 hypothesis from Science ‘Ergotism: The Satan Loosed in Salem?’[6], which investigates the possibility of a physiological condition as the cause for the girls illness’; and the more recent 2008 article ‘Were the American colonists drugged during the Salem witchcraft trial?’[7] by Josh Clark, demonstrate the continual debate over cause amongst historians.
2. Describe the process you went through to arrive at your questions.
At first I wanted to look at the aforementioned topic-how did the religious, social and historical context of Salem lead to the trials? I was also interested in why the Salem trials are so well known. What was it about them that make them more memorable than previous witch trials in Europe and America? After we went through the readings and different historical schools for this course however, it became apparent that my question needed to focus more on historiography and how history has been perceived differently by different people, which is why I have decided on the following question:
Analyse different opinions on the cause/s of the Salem witch trials. How and why has it been interpreted differently?
In order to answer this question, I have made a list of subsidiary questions:
* Why is determining the cause/s of the Salem witch trials so difficult and controversial?
* What different approaches have been taken by historians and other individuals in order to try and explain why the trials happened?
* Are they valid approaches and claims? Why/Why not? What do I believe?
* How do different approaches to history reflect both the context of the Historian and the ideology they have? (I want to look briefly at Post-modern theorist Louis Althusser if I have time)
3. Research intentions in relation to areas/texts to examine
I aim to select three opposing theories on the cause of the Salem witch trials to dissect and analyse for my project. At this stage I am interested in looking further into Linda R. Caporeal’s theory on convulsive ergotism, and the oppressive religious beliefs and customs of the Puritan religion. Through further investigation I intend to select another theory from the extensive list which I believe best demonstrates the contrasting approaches to this historical issue.
There are also a number of books and websites that I intend to utilise sometime in the not so distant future- in particular this work The Salem Witch Trials : A Reference Guide by David K. Goss that Mr Wright found for me on e library, and Frances Hill’s books Delusion of Satan: Full Story of the Salem Witch Trials and The Salem Witch Trials Reader. I hope to get these books off www.bookdepository.com as I was unable to locate any books on the Salem witch trials at Penrith City Library, but I have been informed of inter-library loans and I would also like to visit Fisher Library at Sydney University.
4. Research intentions in relation to methodology
My history project focuses primarily on the historical debate over the cause/s of the Salem Witch trials, a controversial topic that has raged for over 300 years. From my research it has become clear that in order to deal with this issue I must focus heavily on the contrasting approaches taken by historians (and others) and why they have taken them. My enquiry questions will hopefully be answered by continued research and investigation into the hypotheses presented by various historians, and through my own ability to acknowledge that history is never black and white. Instead it is complex and there is no such thing as a 'right' answer in relation to cause. Through my project I have an opportunity to better understand how and why a historical event is continually reviewed, revised, debated and theorised over time by historians.
Footnotes
[1] Miller, A The Crucible. Penguin Group, Great Britain, 1968
[2] Wikipedia, Salem witch trials, Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. updated 1/3/2011, viewed on 21/12/2010, 2/2/2011, 8/2/2011, 1/3/2011, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials
[3] Sutter, T Salem Witchcraft: the Events and Causes of the Salem Witch Trials, Siteclopedia Network, 2003, viewed on 21/12/2010, 8/2/2011, 28/2/2011
[4] Streeter, M WITCHCRAFT: A secret history, New Burlington Books, London, 2002,
[5] J Blumberg, ‘A Brief History of the Salem Witch Trials’, Smithsonian Institution, October 24, 2007, http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/brief-salem.html
[6] L Caporael, ‘Ergotism: The Satan loosed in Salem?’, Science, Vol. 192, 2 April 1976
[7] J Clark, ‘Were the American colonists drugged during the Salem witchcraft trial?’, HowStuffWorks, Inc., 2011, viewed 27/2/2011, http://history.howstuffworks.com/american-history/drugged-salem-witchtrial.htm/printable
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)