Talk:Salem witch trials

Featured on Template:March 1 selected anniversaries (may be in HTML comment)

---

The link in this article to John Hale seems to be a person unrelated to the John Hale involved at Salem. The link is for a representative who served from 1843 – 1845, which puts him in the wrong time frame, to put it gently. If someone wants to write an article for the Salem John Hale, that would be nice. If not, I'll get rid of the link. Vonspringer 02:59, 24 May 2005 (UTC

The passage from Increase Mather's Cases of Conscience concerning evil SPIRITS Personating Men, Witchcrafts, infallible Proofs of Guilt in such as are accused with that Crime is often misquoted, with him suggesting 100 witches go free: this is ten times the figure he suggested: here it is as it appeared on pp. 66-7: "When therefore such like things shall be Testified against the accused party not by Spectres which are Devils in the Shape of persons either living or dead, but by real men or women who may be credited, it is proof enough that such an one has that Conversation and Correspondence with the Devil as that he or she, whoever they be, ought to be exterminated from amongst men. This notwithstanding, I will add; It were better that Ten Suspected Witches should escape, than that the Innocent Person should be Condemned. That is an old saying and true, Prestat reum innocentem absolvi, quam ex prohibitis Indiciis & illegitima probatione condemnari It is better that a Guilty Person should be ABSOLVED, than that he should without sufficient ground of Conviction be condemned. I had rather judge a Witch to be an honest woman, than judge an honest woman as a witch. The Word of God directs men not to proceed to the Execution of the most capital offenders, untill such time as upon searching diligently the matter is found to be a Truth, and the thing certain. -- Nunh-huh 08:18, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction. But if this is a common misquote then that fact really should be in parenthesis following the quote. Otherwise somebody will come along later and "correct" it back to 100. Something like '(commonly misquoted as "a hundred guilty witches go free")' would do just fine. --mav

Done, added it in as a note..plus I realized that people confuse "guilty" with "suspected", so that's in there too..." -- Nunh-huh 19:17, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

POV Statement in Background

According to the article " The sexist beliefs that Puritans held for women further stressed the atmosphere: ...women were naturally lustful(although this belief was valid in that men were more likely to die early and thus women often outnumbered men, which made women compete fiercely for scarce men)." I feel such a statement is based on no fact at all. Women often times were survived by husbands due to death in childbirth. Despite the great number of deaths in the area, there is no evidence to suggest that more men died than women and that due to a lack of men, women became lustful and sought men through any means. Not to mention that the sentence feels weak and is certainly grammatically incorrect. I will remove it from the article unless someone can convince me otherwise.

I heartily agree with your objection. The state in the colonies was quite the opposite from the women outnumbering the men. When the colonies were formed it was during a time period when women were seen mainly as wives and housekeepers. Though there is historical proof that men outnumbered women in the much of the colonies history, aside from the facts it would not make sense to have women outnumber men, as women would not usually be sent over until after the settlement was created (a reason for the rape of native women).

Beverly?

According to the article Beverly, Massachusetts, "The witchcraft delusion of 1692 began and ended in Beverly." Is this so? If not, I'll take that line out of the Beverly article, but I want to double-check before acting. AJD 23:55, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Background Opening Sentence

The background opening sentence, despite it being a quote from a book, is false. The first two afflicted were Abigail Williams and Elizabeth Parris, aged 11 and 9. It was Dr Griggs, master also of Betty Hubbard, who diagnosed witchcraft, not the girls. The other girls that were afflicted were between 12 and 20 years old, and include: Betty Hubbard (17), Mercy Lewis (19), Ann Putnam Jr (12), Mary Walcott (17) and Mary Warren (20), who later was herself named a witch. I have so far to find any evidence for the partying in the woodland. --Rck 04:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

verbosity

the page as it stands is verbose, doesn't come to the point, and leaves out some very important information about Mary (Woodrow) Sibley who was the person who started the whole affair. WB2 00:56, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

VIRGINIA EDU

What's up with these people, don't they want a link to their site? 207.214.244.173 06:13, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Was this really religious persecution?

So would this article fit in Category:Religious persecution do you think? -- nyenyec ☎ 13:37, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

No, because this was basically social persecution. None of the accused were 'witches.' I'll try to find the citation for that, if I can't, I'll reply later.--Ollie Garkey 12:49, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Tone

Yes. We had it cleaned up when someone deleted all that ...

WB2 07:15, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism

fixed vandalism, jan 20 2005

Someone just vandalized this page and then 1 minute later had an attack of conscience and reverted to previous version. I'm not sure if I should have faith in humanity or not. Vicarious 17:39, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Tituba, Carib?

According to Elaine Breslaw's book, "Tituba, Reluctant Witch of Salem," Tituba was likely not a Carib. According to Breslaw, Carib's would not have been captured as slaves during this period due to imperial politics. Breslaw suggests that Tituba was an Arawak-speaking resident of Guiana in northern South America. See xxii and 3-20 in Breslaw's book.

I would have to disagree as Tituba was obtained in the West Indies, as Parris had past dealings in the West Indies. Also Natives were taken as slaves before the slave trade became fully entreanced. The Spanish built their entire empire on Native slaves and one of the first things that Columbus brough back were Native Slaves. The English were no different, as seen in the Carolinas, which had a large trade in Native Slaves before African slaves were introduced. I get my information from Nash, The American People, fourth edition.

Poorly written

I was kind of interested in reading about this.. but the article is so badly written that I managed to get as far as the end of the first line and gave up! Can it be unprotected so that it can be re-written?

(For example, a sentence should not start with "The first were ...." The first what? And the reference to "the Putnams" - who are they? They are mentioned here as if the reader should already know all about them. And so it goes on).

Marcus22 09:42, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Wack away!

Tituba was actually a slave from India who had been captured to serve the daughter and two nieces of the minister, Sir William Phips. She was accused along with Sarah Good, whos daughter went with her to jail (Dorcas Good), and Sarah Osborne. Sarah Osborne died in prison, Sarah Good was hanged on July 19th and Tituba was left free. Dorcas Good was set free as well, being only five at the time.

Tituba was not left free, she was sold by her master Parris to pay for the jail fees that she had accumulated. Dorcas was set free, but took psychological damage, AFAIR.

--Rck 04:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

"Good held the typical stereotype of a witch and had been suspected of engaging in maletic practices (citation needed)." What's "maletic"? 130.233.22.111 01:43, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Typo

"their workers arrested or gawking at the spectacles" > word 'or' should be 'for'

A question...

Has anyone here read the writings of Cotton Mather on The Salem Witch trials?

--JJ

"pwned"

Maybe it would be a good idea edit this:

Jake Hohenthaner — pwned by Teddy Smith August 19, 2005

I really don't think that this is appropriate for this article.

The root cause

Never-mind my query, I've made the update I was asking about. Woo hoo! Now I'm a Wikipedian!  :) Estreya 15:54, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Sentence in "Ergot Theory"

I'm not really satisfied with this sentence "A new study has shown that a primitive form of LSD was infecting the wheat supply on one side of the village. " First off, what study? There is no reference cited so this could be some wackos study or it could be something reputable. Also, the sources I've cited in the rest of this section were all discussing RYE not wheat. This is the lone sentence about wheat and I have no idea whether ergot (which I assume is what is meant by "a primitive form of LSD") on wheat does the same as ergot on rye. I propose the sentence be edited out unless it can be expanded by citing some verifiable study. Estreya 18:56, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I found an article that clarified ergot infections in cereal grains and modified the Ergot Theory section to reflect it. Ergot does infect both rye and wheat and it's probable that the colonists were poisoned by both. I moved the sentence on LSD being derived from ergot down to its own paragraph; it's cool trivia but doesn't really fit into either paragraph's main topic. Estreya 23:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I have no references for this but i want to point out that the ergot theory has been forwarded a lot in cases of witchtrials. I think it is kind of an excuse. So like: don't blame the church, since the accusing got mad. However i think the effect of ergot was widely known, and people would generally have recognised a severe delirious state in accusants. So generally: no. its an excuse. 80.57.242.54 09:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

The biggest problem with the Ergot theory is that it does not account for the eclectic mix of people being affected. The primary folks having visions where the girls from the Putnam clan, including the older Ann Putnam (so it is not a kids-only deal), and the husband of Tituba, John the Indian (so it is not a girls only deal); however, most of the young boys seem to have been unaffected. Furthermore, the anti-Putnam group that was largely suspicious of the witchcraft proceedings reported less (if any) of these visions. --207.207.8.188 01:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Ergot Theory is lame

It's sort of lame that the long debunked Ergot Theory is the only one that is mentioned as a possible explanation -- I'll hunt down the debunking from the time the article was published when I have a minute. Any theory based on hallucinatory substances has to explain why only the people that had visions actually had visions, and not the whole village. For example, in the Parris household only the two young girls Betty and Abigail had visions; in the Putnam household, Ann Jr (12) and Ann Sr (31) did. So it was not something peculiar to young people (if it had been, that would still leave the question why the boys in the families did not get anything). The socio-economic theories a la Boyer & Nissenbaum and the post-traumatic stress theory a la Mary Beth Norton are much more likely to be correct. --Rck 04:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Originalbigj's revert

I really did not appreciate your revert to a previous version after my well-researched additions to the Ergot Theory and sources sections, Originalbigj. What did you mean, "everything afterward seems to be worse"? I specifically asked for dialogue on this page and got no response. Now you're saying my corrections suck? Why? I documented everything I wrote and have referenced every statement. How can this not be appropriate for inclusion in this article? I would appreciate an explanation of your actions. In the mean time I have restored just the sections I wrote which your revert decimated. Estreya 20:21, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I thought everything you wrote was good. There was some vandalism that wasn't properly corrected and was still there in the form of long underlines. I figured I'd fix that and work on putting your work back into the article later. Originalbigj 23:48, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, gosh, Originalbigj, give me heart failure! Okay, thanks for the explanation! I'm relieved my additions were not included in what you considered junk.  :) Estreya 02:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry about that. I should have left you a note on the talk page but I didn't think to. Originalbigj 13:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

something weird in background section?

This sentence seems weird to me
"Some say that the indians were the real witch craft in salem village. That they were what drove the people crazy but who knows."
It looks out of place, but I'm not sure? Also, if it is some sort of vandalism, the same user made several other changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.211.213.60 (talk • contribs) 11:28, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, 82.211.213.60, for pointing that out. I've fixed it. AnnH ^(talk) 11:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

historical importance?

I think the Salem witch trials are blown way out of preportion. Only 24 people died ... How many died from indian attacks and other causes during this time period? Everywhere I look on the Net for statistics showing proportional data like this just turns up tirades on the injustice of the event. I don't mean to minimize that aspect of it, but were the Salem Witch trials one of the most important events in early american history? I don't think so. --Nerd42 23:56, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

In terms of raw body count, you are right, it was insignificant in the larger picture. A bit like 9/11: a relatively small number of deaths in comparison with the background death rates. But like 9/11, the Salem witch trials had a disproportionate effect. Both were used as prime examples of how innocent lives could suddenly be taken away in an unexpected moment of madness. -- NeilFraser 15:36, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Drop the lists

The lists provided in the article, while being slightly useful, are the most vandalized sections of the entire article (not to say this article is not constantly vandalized). Therefore, I would like to propose deletion of the lists altogether. This is for several reasons:

1. The list is wholly uncited and thus unverifiable
2. If the list were to be cited, it would likely be extremely close to the original version, at it would be far more useful to simply provide a link to the relevant reference source
3. At any given time, the list could be in an inconsistent state. This diminishes its usefulness, and in addition, no one is really sure whether or not when an anon edits the article its good faith or subtle misinformation.

An anon was recently deleting the list, I think that it was the right thing to do for the wrong reasons. If there are no objections, I will go ahead and delete the list. — Ambush Commander^(Talk) 22:43, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I think it would be a pity, but the more I see of this vandalism, the more I'm convinced that it might be an unfortunate necessity. AnnH ^(talk) 23:40, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I am with a group

I am with a group that is using this article as a fact checking/editing project, so we will be working fairly hard on this piece. We just wanted to let everyone know that we may be doing a lot to this paper. Thanks —This unsigned comment was added by Erik's Angels (talk • contribs) .

Margaret Scott

In the template box at the bottom of the article that links to related articles, the "Margaret Scott" link goes to an article about a Tasmanian poet born in 1934. Surely a different Margaret Scott. I doubt many people would be confused by it, but it's kind of... sloppy. Maybe the template should be changed to make sure it doesn't link there.Cyllya 08:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Article well written

Thanks for taking the time to do this precis - I enjoyed it and think it touches on most of the prevailing theories. One item I read elsewhere said that, a year or two after the trials ended, the original girl accusers tried to start things up all over again, but were ignored. Can't remember where I read it but if true it might indicate that someone originally invovled had an axe to grind and found the girls a useful tool..... and didn't need them the second time around....

Bridget Bishop

Needs her own page...not a redirect to here...-Billy Bishop 01:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Same for Martha Carrier. Unfortunately, I don't have the information to do it. Septegram 15:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for Bridget Bishop-Billy Bishop 02:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

MARY BLACK -- 1955 ????

Excuse us, Mr Salem Witch Trial Box maker, Mary Black was NOT born 22 May 1955. Thank you...

Also, you might want to correct the William Hobbs link...

Sexism comment

"Girls had particular cruelties heaped upon them" - this is not necessarily justified, "Restrictions" would surely be a better term instead of "cruelties"? Jeremynicholas 09:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. That whole paragraph could use a rewrite; its tone is a bit judgmental for an encyclopedia entry. For example, I think it's misleading to say that "children suffered." Their role was certainly different from a modern child's, but I don't believe there are any records indicating that they suffered for it. Oconduibh 19:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Abigail

Abigail Williams did not become sick with Betty Parris. She was still in her right mind, the other girl fallen sick was Ruth Putnam. The article leads you to believe Abigail was ill.

Recent Vandalism

User:SantaLuciaStudent has recently been vandalising this page, with vandilism being reverted twice. I have given this user a warning, but I would appreciate if an admin would look into following it through. -Phi*n!x 20:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Dog Deaths?

We were taught today in English that 19 women and 2 dogs died during the times of the Salem Witch Hunt. Any conformation on this, or anything it could be? I'll take an educated guess if I have to, and say they were the dogs fed that "witch cake" baked out of urine, but I don't think they'd die from that. It just seems so abstract to be taught in a high school Honors English class, so, can anyone help out? Thanks! - King Louis XIV 23:33, 28 September 2006 (UTC) (P.S: Something off-topic I just noticed. Why does http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Carrier redirect to this article?

In my college course on witchcraft we were told 19 PEOPLE (only 75% women) and 2 dogs were found guilty and put to death for witchcraft. As in, the dogs had a formal trial and were hung for the crime of witchcraft. Apparently they were acting funny, we didn't get into it much. I think they were considered familiars of one of the accused. We were also told that 4 most people died in prison awaiting trial, and one man was pressed to death w/out entering a plea. I'm not sure why the article says 20 people were put to death...? -Christine

Betty or Elizabeth?

I believe that Betty's name should be properly stated, which is Elizabeth Parris. This cited from "We're Not Suspicious" written by Vincent Benét and many other cases. Even if her nick name is Betty, it should be noted and clearly stated that her name is Elizabeth. I'm just the one kid who realizes the mistake in class and raises his hand out of the class that realizes and doesn't raise their hand. -Jeremy

Spelling of links

Under "Legal Procedures", both "John Procter" and "Martha Cory" are listed, but don't link to any articles. However, Wikipedia has articles on both "John Proctor" and "Martha Corey", which I assume are what was meant by each. My knowledge on the subject is very limited, so I can't say if there are any other such problems, but I'd be on the lookout for it :)

REPLY: What is the criteria for choosing the "correct" spelling of names which had various spellings in the primary sources? "Proctor" is the common spelling used today in many (but not all) references to the people involved. In the legal documents of the episode, however, written by people who actually knew the family, the name was consistently spelled "Procter" with an "e" not an "o". Ogram 04:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

"edit protected"

the section about "salem today" is somewhat misleading. while all the information included in that paragraph is entirely accurate, it tends to give the impression that the town called "salem" is not infact the actual location of the "old salem village" where the hysteria and the trials actually occurred. just about a ten minute drive from the current town of Salem is a town called Danvers. this bustling town of 27,000 is much smaller than Salem and is not filled with any witch stores whatsoever. there are no signs portraying witches or museums that have wax figures and replicas on display. however they do have a monument to all those who were wrongfully killed during the trials. they also have the original house of rebecca nurse, an accused member of the community as well as a family member of the pastor and others involved in the trials. the exact location of the gallows that were used to execute some of the accused witches is not known, but it is within the city limits of Danvers, MA. Contrary to popular belief, none of the persecutions or hysteria took place in the town now known as Salem. The only thing that did actually happen there, were the trials held in the courthouse, although some were held in a smaller courtroom on the rebecca nurse property. Salem, MA is the place where all the tourists seem to flock too, because of its name and abundance of gift shops and theme stores. But if your really looking for the feel of those left behind by the witch trials, its Danvers you want to visit.

Summary Box

The summary box for this page really needs some work, but how is that done?

1: "Authorities" is a misleading word to use. Stoughton was the chief justice and Danforth was one of the justices of the peace, but John Hathorne, Jonathan Corwin and Bartholomew Gedney were the most active of the magistrates in proceedings. Hale, Parris, and Increase Mather were ministers, but where's Cotton Mather?

2: The "Accusers" is also incomplete, and biased toward listing only the "afflicted girls" in Salem Village -- adults Sarah Biber and Ann Putnam Sr. there also accused plenty of people. In Andover, main afflicted accusers were Timothy Swan, Rose Foster, Martha Sprague and Sarah Phelps, Jr. This also misses that it was the men in the communities who actually lodged the formal accusations -- Samuel Parris, Thomas Putnam, Edward Putnam, Ezekiel Cheever in Salem Village. A better category for this would be "Afflicted"

3: There were around 175 people for whom we have legal dcoumentation that chrages were lodged against them. This list is really not very complete, and tends to concentrate of Salem Village cases. The category should say sometrhing about it being a partial list.

4: The list of confessors is also incomplete. There were more people charged in Andover than in any other community -- over 50 -- and 7 out of 8 of them confessed.

5: Giles Cory is not in the list of those executed, but listed as "Died During Interrogation." This is incorrect. He was executed. The punishment of "Peine forte and dur" which crushed him to death was not an interrogation torture, but a specific punishment for his refusal to agree to put himself on trial before God and the country.

6: An important category that is often overlooked because we only count those who actually hanged, is that there were people who were convicted but were never executed: Abigail Hobbs, Mary Lacy Sr, Abigail Faulkner Sr., Dorcas Hoar, Mary Bradbury, Ann Foster, Elizabeth Procter, Sarah Wardwell, Elizabeth Johnson Jr. and Mary Post. It was petitions for reversals of attainder from some of these women that go the tide to turn a decade later. Ogram 13:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Redirection

Someone redirect Salem Witchcraft Trial to this.