I think in the case of the firm belief in witchcraft and the afflictions of witchcraft on people are an example of superstition and seeing what you want to see. In reading the detailed accounts from Mather of people who have been supposedly been afflicted it is hard to think that there is a logical explanation to the fits of the children that doesn’t involve some sort of magic. However when I thought upon it I started to think that often times if people believe in something enough they will see what they want to see and nothing else. I’m sure that to Mather who firmly believed that there was such a thing as witchcraft it looked as if the girl was indeed being dragged by a chain toward the fireplace and because he really wanted to see signs of witchcraft he wouldn’t see that in actuality the girl was inching herself toward the fireplace. It may beg the question to ask why the children were doing this. It certainly didn’t seem, as in the case with Lawson’s narrative about Salem, that they were doing it to condemn anyone. However it seems that it is not such a crazy thing to happen. It seems likely that in such a repressive environment as a Puritan life that it would cause children to act out. Also since they are all children in the same family, in the same environment, it is likely that they would act out in a similar manner. Also the fact that it said that I believe two of the children were spared from affliction that perhaps those children were not affected by the repressive environment in the same way. It seems odd that someone would just bewitch some of the children and not all. However such psychological thoughts about the acting outs of children were not in Puritan life. Their only explanation for it was witchcraft and I think that they would see them as signs of witchcraft and due to their strong belief in it would mentally block out things that would hint that the children were playacting.
I think that the events at Salem contrast with this in that there were people who played upon people’s superstitions and beliefs. As I was reading it was hard not to laugh at the complete stupidity to not realize that what the so called “afflicted” were doing was carefully orchestrated. The fact that they would have fits in a certain part of their body when the accused moved that body par was just ridiculous. It was very convenient that as soon as the accused were put in jail that the afflictions stopped. One would think such powerful witchcraft couldn’t be hampered by containment. Also the fact that they had visions telling them when the next time they had a fit would be and then magically having a fit at that time (who would have thought) is a trick that could only work on a superstitious audience. It is just sadly laughable how these “afflicted” got away with this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that superstition has a lot to do with what Mather wrote. When people believe in something so strongly and wish to see things like these occurrences, then they may do anything in their power to fabricate such things. The environment in which the children were in has a great deal to do with everything that occurred I think. Children do act out and the tantrums that happened, well any parent would tell you that children have tantrums no matters whose children they are, a minister or a farmer, all children act out. In regards to the children that supposedly didn't act out, I do believe that it was a factor of their own individual environment, each child in a family usually reacts differently to different situations. In some ways I have my reservations about believing anything that Mather says, as maybe there was underlying political factors behind his superstition with this family. Maybe there was a feud or disagreement, so Mather taking it upon himself single handedly destroyed a family. It is just a thought that I have, I may have misinterpreted somethings that were said, but maybe just maybe there is a different reason.
ReplyDelete