The Case of Salem

    One of the most striking initial motifs we pulled from the phenomenon of witch hunts is the concept of the Other and how people participate in Othering. Previous discussions of events similar to those that transpired in Salem in 1692 gave me the impression that accusations were made and convictions were obtained by purely coincidental means: if a neighbor wanted to take over someone else’s land or held a grudge from an interaction that tarnished their honor, the easy solution was to name the transgressor as a witch. However, what I’ve been introduced to now is the consideration that these occurrences quickly progressed from coincidental to methodical. For the men in power - church officials particularly - it became an opportunity to reinforce the necessity of religion and stomp out anyone and anything that challenged it. In this case, it included the beggars of the community who resented those higher in society (undoubtedly witches), those who sporadically attended church (also undoubtedly witches), or immoral women (most definitely witches). These actions systematically struck fear into communities to be on their best behavior, avoiding an accusation at all costs, even if it meant naming someone whom they knew was innocent. 

    This whole process fortifies the concept of Othering, and while it is unimaginable the extents to which these people went, the notion as a whole is not unfamiliar. Hardening the beliefs and strengthening the resolve of the “elite” inherently separates those who resist or do not fit. Think of the manifestations this has in our day and time: grade school bullying, gender inequality, racial supremacy, etc. Othering is an easy outlet to define who you are but, more specifically, who you are not. While I can’t agree with the methods or outcomes, this novel understanding of Othering puts historical witch hunts in perspective, and I can conceptualize the logic of the hunters.

    The questions that keep popping up in my brain are how did this happen? or how could this have been avoided? However, I think my greatest question that deeply begs an answer is why was the only suitable punishment death? It is outlandish and frightening for me to think that church and government officials - often the same people if we’re being honest - would willingly take another’s life in the name of God’s orders. Granted, they viewed witchcraft as a threat to their religion and way of life, but execution??? Beyond this, why did they then grant pardons to some of the accused if they confessed and named other witches? Wouldn’t they still be witches and thus still an issue for them? All these observations boil down to the conclusion that these actions were intended to make a point: do not betray or oppose the Church. 

    These incidents are merely one instance of oppression for differing views - though there really is no proof of true witchcraft occurring - and I see it as an opportunity for the reinforcement of the Christian ideals. As we have seen through our readings, witchcraft does not solely entail consorting with evil or the Devil himself, however, it has time and time again been criminalized on the basis that it is misaligned with Christian beliefs and ideals. This methodical Othering led to extremes, although I’m confident that they did get their point across.