“Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.”
They’re among the most infamous trials in American history. In both 1692 and 1693, more than 200 people were prosecuted in the Salem witch trials. Thirty of them were convicted, nineteen of whom were executed by hanging. One other man was tortured to death when he refused to enter a plea. At least five others died by disease in the jails. But how could this horrible event have happened? What does it tell us about human nature? And what parallels, if any, might these witch-hunts have with today? These are the questions (admittedly somewhat loaded questions) that this post shall attempt to answer.
Origins of the Salem witch trials, in prior European attitudes towards witchcraft
A documentary by the History Channel tried to answer some of these same questions. They mention the earlier medieval attitudes towards witchcraft, and how they affected the Salem witch trials of the seventeenth century. They also mention the founding of the Massachusetts Bay Colony by the Puritans, and a precedent in Colonial America for the execution of accused “witches.” This context is told in an interesting way, despite the low-budget (and somewhat amateurish) filmmaking style of this episode. They also talk about the low standards of evidence, including the admission of so-called “spectral evidence” – that is, the evidence that someone’s “specter” was out “possessing” people (as they saw it). Places elsewhere in Massachusetts already refused to admit such evidence, and these standards seem even sillier to people today. In some ways, the historical background of the witch trials is even more interesting than their telling of the trials themselves – although those have their own drama. Soon, people of all kinds (particularly lower-class women) were being accused of witchcraft. There are several theories regarding the motives, from psychosis to power-hunger to the desire to remove one’s economic rivals. But no one knows this part for certain.
1901 illustration of the execution of George Burroughs
The term “witch-hunting” has rightly become a metaphor for hysterical mob psychology
In medieval times, drowning had been considered a “reliable” way to determine the guilt of the accused. If the woman floated on top of the water, she was a “witch,” and she would soon be executed for this crime. If the woman drowned, she was innocent, but still dead – and the court didn’t care about the innocent casualty. Thus, either method could (and did) produce a victim. There was a similar witch-hunt for communists during the later Cold War, prompting Arthur Miller to write his play “The Crucible” – dramatizing the earlier Salem witch trials. As you may know, this was meant as a commentary on the McCarthyist “Red Scare” of the 1950s. In the years following the American Revolution, people engaged in a similar witch-hunt for suspected “monarchists” – albeit one that was punished by ostracism, rather than death. This is part of why I believe that witch-hunting seems to be something approaching timeless – or, if not fully timeless, then at least a common feature of many societies. The Salem witch trials are the most infamous example, of course, but not the only one. This may be why we keep coming back to this story, because it reminds us of other times – and perhaps, to some extent, our own. Thankfully, though, legal protections for accused persons can prevent most innocent persons today from being killed, even when they are accused of capital offenses. Our Constitution does not explicitly say that anyone is “innocent until proven guilty,” but we can rightly deduce it from a number of clauses that can be found in our Bill of Rights. As William Blackstone had said in 1769 (and I quote), “the law holds, that it is better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer.” (Source: “Commentaries on the Laws of England,” Book 4, Chapter 27) This doctrine is known today as “Blackstone’s Ratio.” John Adams would later expound on this doctrine, in his defense of the soldiers at the so-called “Boston Massacre” trial. (More about that here.)
Illustration of the Salem witch trials from 1876 (long after the fact)
Effects of the Salem witch trials at the time, which quickly became unpopular
In the Salem witch trials, the accusations had come primarily from four teenage girls. But only one of the four would ever apologize for her actions. She later said that she had been possessed by the devil to falsely accuse people. Contrary to popular belief, most of the victims were hanged, and none were “burned at the stake” – a punishment associated with earlier medieval times. However, that punishment was bad enough. Elsewhere in Colonial America, there was a massive reaction against the injustice of the Salem verdicts. This led to a much greater regard for the concept of “innocent until proven guilty.” Despite the self-righteousness of many in the Salem community, many Christians today would say that this community was very active in doing the devil’s work. That is, evil was found more in the accusers than in their victims. This community had ignored many (perhaps even most) of the important empirical lessons of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, and returned to some problematic medieval thinking. It had also returned to some degree of medieval barbarism. We continue to debate why it happened, and what (if any) are the parallels with today. We are also, of course, shocked at the massive injustice of it, and the environment of terror that it produced.
Giles Corey being pressed to death in the Salem witch trials
This film is a good introduction, which does not emphasize the parallels with modern times
Obviously, there are comments to be made here about the dangers of religious fanaticism. But there are also comments to be made about the need for cross-examination of witnesses, and the ability to produce witnesses in one’s own defense. These are some of the protections necessary to give any meaning to the phrase “fair trial.” It is also a commentary on problematic standards of evidence, and on the need for logic to underlie these standards. These trials may be a reminder of the chilling dangers of mob psychology – whether in courts of law, or in the court of public opinion. And they are a reminder of the ability of supposed “victims” to deceive the public. Rather than “believ[ing] all women,” we need to be believing the evidence today, and disbelieving any supposed “victim” who fails to substantiate their claims with some actual evidence. Also, there is a modern dictum that “if you don’t think you’re a racist, then you are a racist. And if you do think you’re a racist, then you’re still a racist.” This reminds one of the medieval drowning test for accused victims, which produced a punishment either way – although, in this case, the punishment (again) comes in the form of ostracism. These seem to show that problematic standards of evidence may not be quite as ancient as they seem to be. These may be some of the disturbing lessons of this mob mentality, which has unfortunate parallels with modern times in more than one way. This documentary does not make the connections that I’ve made, but it is a great (if brief) introduction to the events of the witch trials.
The present-day archaeological site of the Salem Village parsonage
Footnote to this blog post:
During the American Revolution, a number of our Founding Fathers were readers of Sir William Blackstone’s “Commentaries on the Laws of England.” The last volume of that work had been published back in 1769. In that volume, Blackstone had said that “All executions for this dubious crime [of witchcraft] are now at an end ; our legislature having at length followed the wise example of Louis XIV in France, who thought proper by an edict to restrain the tribunals of justice from receiving informations of witchcraft [footnote]. And accordingly it is with us enacted by statute 9 Geo.II. c.5. that no prosecution shall for the future be carried on against any person for conjuration, witchcraft, sorcery, or inchantment.” (Source: Book 4, Chapter 4) However, Blackstone then noted one exception, which was as follows: “But the misdemeanor of persons pretending to use witchcraft, tell fortunes, or discover stolen goods by skill in the occult sciences, is still deservedly punished with a year's imprisonment, and standing four times in the pillory.” (Source: Book 4, Chapter 4) Thus, there was still some punishment for this in the Founding Fathers’ time when the person “pretend[ed],” in Blackstone’s words, to engage in witchcraft. I leave it to the reader to determine the relative degree of justice here.
If you liked this post, you might also like:
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment