The Salem Witch Trials: Boyer And Nissenbaum

The events that occurred in Essex County, Massachusetts during the year of 1692 will never have an entire recorded history that all historians agree on. It took two entire centuries before Marion Starkey wrote one of the first views on the crisis. After that, many other historians started debating, including, Paul Boyer and Stephen Nissenbaum, Carol F. Karlsen, and Mary Beth Norton, each with their own emphasis on a particular causation of the trials such as gender and social tensions. Every aspect the historians mention, all attempts to connect together to form a coherent story behind Salem, and yet not all of the arguments are plausible in the twenty-first century. Starkey, the first historian to publish an argument about Salem, uses a method

These reasons are mainly rooted in the political affairs of the two communities as well as the wealth of certain accusers like the extremely wealthy Putnam family who was supportive towards Parris being in the pulpit. One of the larger points Boyer and Nissenbaum make about the trials is that many of the accused witches came from places outside of Salem Village, where the accusations came from in the beginning. Boyer and Nissenbaum carefully craft their argument using, and citing, many primary and secondary sources, performing numerous calculations on Parris supporters versus Anti-Parris supporters and townspeople’s wealth, as well as including many detailed maps that show the divide between the town and the village in accusation patterns and political views. These powerful pieces of evidence give this argument a tighter stand over Starkey as it is impossible to deny official maps and data collected from tax lists from the town. Yet, despite this strong stand, it still does not give any information about the events of the actual trials; it only discusses accusing patterns, and then stops. It does not place into account the huge role of gender in the trials as women

This is especially important because the reader may expect an answer for the Salem Witchcraft Trials immediately. Unfortunately, as Starkey points out, there may not be a clear history of what happened, nor is it likely. This may frustrate the reader as the debate to the question ‘What happened in Salem the year 1692?’ continues to linger on into the present day. Given that, these arguments serve not to tell the complete story of the trials, rather they serve to make the reader come up with a conclusion themselves. The historians give the reader places to look for more information, as well as see their thought process through footnotes and prefaces, and the reader will, hopefully, use that to probe their own thinking and join in a considerable number of scholars, students, and curious intellects who continue to question these trials