Folklorist lucy mair: witches are people who quarrel with us, and use mystical powers to get their own back. Mair: if anything goes wrong with him, someone who believes in witchcraft will assume that one of his enemies is responsible.
Folklorist lucy mair: witches are people who quarrel with us, and use mystical powers to get their own back. Mair: if anything goes wrong with him, someone who believes in witchcraft will assume that one of his enemies is responsible.
Folklorist lucy mair: witches are people who quarrel with us, and use mystical powers to get their own back. Mair: if anything goes wrong with him, someone who believes in witchcraft will assume that one of his enemies is responsible.
Reviewed work(s): Source: Folklore, Vol. 91, No. 2 (1980), pp. 228-238 Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of Folklore Enterprises, Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1260394 . Accessed: 28/02/2012 08:58 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. Folklore Enterprises, Ltd. and Taylor & Francis, Ltd. are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Folklore. http://www.jstor.org 228 Witchcraft, Spirit Possession and Heresy LUCY MAIR THE idea that some people have a sinister power by which they can do harm to others simply by wishing to has been held in the past in most parts of the world, and it still is today in many. These are the people that anthropologists call witches; they may be either men or women. Of course people seldom imagine that they have such power themselves. But if anything goes wrong with him, or his family or his possessions, someone who believes in witchcraft will at once assume that one of his enemies is responsible, and therefore this person must be a witch. Witches are people who quarrel with us, and use mystical powers to get their own back. Obviously, if they quarrel with us, we quarrel with them, but we forget that part of it. I put this statement in the present tense because, although very few people in what we call the West - though it's really the north - now think there is such a thing as 'mystical aggression,' a great many like to blame their own failures on others - on the jealousy of their rivals, or the hide-bound attitudes of their teachers, or just 'the system.' This propensity is a very important reason why people believe in witchcraft where they do. Another very important one is the imperfection of medical knowledge, or in many places its near-absence. People can't see what carries malaria or measles, as they can see the source of an attack by force, and it is not illogical to suppose that a disease has been 'sent' by somebody who couldn't or wouldn't attack directly. All over the world, people's ideas of what witches do, and what they are like, have a great deal in common. I think there are two main reasons for this. In the first place, all witches are supposed to be able to harm their victims without apparently coming near them. That might be left as a mystery, but in practice it isn't. Action at a distance has to be accounted for in some approach to everyday terms. Witches work at night like other criminals, but you can never watch them at it, as you can sometimes with thieves or murderers. Witches always have an alibi; they were sound asleep in bed. So they must have some means of escaping from their bodies and getting into their victims' houses in an incorporeal form. Some Africans believe that witches have a serpent in their entrails which they send out at night to attack their enemies. Early European ones were supposed to have a magic ointment which enabled them to slip through a space as tiny as a keyhole. A person who is ill feels his strength, or his life, being eaten away; so African witches are believed actually to eat their victims' flesh. Therefore, a general characteristic ascribed to witches is that they are greedy for meat; and this is elaborated in various ways. Often they are supposed to gather round a new grave to feast on the corpse. A more rationalistic view - shall we call it? - is that they WITCHCRAFT, SPIRIT POSSESSION AND HERESY 229 cause people to die so as to get a share of the funeral feast. Sometimes they are said to eat infants. There is a small shred of reasoning here. In countries with little medical knowledge, many infants die and their death is often ascribed to witchcraft; why should the witches kill them unless they want to eat them? Familiar spirits and werewolves may be the accomplices of witches in Africa as they once were in Europe. The second reason for the likeness in the imaginary picture of the witch in places far apart in space or time is that everywhere the witch is portrayed as the opposite of whatever is socially approved, and there are not so many differences between cultures in the kind of behaviour that they approve. In addition to being thought of as curmudgeonly types who bear grudges and wreak their revenge in secret instead of coming out into the open, witches are sometimes conceived as representing the physical opposite of what is normal; they may be supposed to walk on their hands, for example. Also they are supposed to be guilty, in addition to their witchcraft, of all the most heinous offences, particulary incest. Parallel to the African beliefs is the elaboration in Europe of the idea of the Black Mass, in which Christian ritual is reversed, and people dance naked in rings facing outwards, eat food without salt, trample on sacred objects, and so on. Another belief that still prevails over much of the world, even to some extent in supposedly rationalist Europe, is that certain kinds of mental disturbance are caused by some alien spirit entering a person's body: what is called possession. Possessed persons go into trances, they utter unintelligible sounds, which are often taken to be foreign languages that they do not know, they may be able to do horrendous things such as walking on live coals; and when they return to normal they cannot remember what has happened. The possessing spirits may be good or evil; evil spirits have to be driven out, but a good spirit possesses someone in order to make that person its mouthpiece. Such spirit mediums, as they are called, learn to go into trance at will, and in that condition they give guidance to people who consult them about their troubles. And among these troubles the fear of witchcraft is prominent. Anyone will remember instances of both kinds of possession in the New Testament. Christ cast out devils from people whom we would call mad, and the Apostles on the day of Pentecost were possessed by the Holy Spirit, and spoke in so many languages that everyone who was there could understand. Pentecostalist churches seek this kind of possession today. Both these types of belief have flourished in non-literate societies, or in the illiterate sections of populations among whom literacy was limited to a minority. Both became matters of acute controversy as literate Christian churchmen came to formulate and reformulate the bases of their faith. Outside Europe today, only the victims of individual misfortunes accuse others of witchcraft. From time to time, an attempt may be made to get rid of all the witches in a small community and so to speak give it a fresh start. Some people may have a reputation as witches which makes them likely suspects; or they may trade on such a reputation to make people afraid of them. But they are never arraigned or punished simply for being witches. The same was true in classical and early medieval times. There was a recognised crime called maleficium which consisted in causing death or damage by occult means, and it 230 LUCY MAIR was punished in the same way as other attacks on life and property. And the accusations that ordinary people made were all of this kind of injury; that is, if' you stretch a point and include causing hailstorms to ruin standing corn, which was a common accusation in Germany. But from about the thirteenth century in Europe, the church began to take a new line on witchcraft. Now it was no longer a sin among other sins, but an explicit rejection of God and defection to his adversary the devil - a heresy that must be rooted out. Incidentally, this was why witches on the continent were burned; it was not for the heinousness of their crime as such. England burned heretics too, but we didn't treat witches as heretics, and so we didn't burn them but hanged them. Paradoxically, the association of witches with the devil took form just at the time when debate began about the boundary between the human and superhuman, between events that had natural causes and those that must be explained by supernatural intervention. Some of those who took part in this continuing debate denied that human witches could do any of the mischief attributed to them, but very few thought it could not be supernaturally caused, and of course the suprenatural agent must be the devil. There was also a view that when bad weather was coming anyway, the devil let the witches think they were producing it. But whether or not the witches were misguided, whether or not they could do genuine harm, whether or not they had expressly sold themselves to the devil, the received opinion was that they must be in league with him. And this defection to the enemy was far more serious than the particular actions of which they were accused. The church began to be seriously concerned about heresy at the time in the late twelfth century when the Catharist religion flourished in southern France; this was a puritancial populist movement which in many ways anticipated the Reformation. The Cathars were sometimes accused of having made a pact with the devil and honouring him in ritual. A crusade was launched against them, many of them were massacred, and the Dominican Order was given the task of seeking out and extirpating those that were left. This was the origin of the Inquisition. Their method was the one that is used against all secret subversives, to get people to betray their friends, or at least name persons who had been seen at their gatherings. The Cathars, then, had been accused of compounding heresy by devil- worship. The next step was to treat devil-worship as a heresy in itself. This was never a matter of great moment to the simple folk who suspected their neighbours of maleficia, and it was they who brought complaints to the courts. But the judges, instructed by the theologians, worked a mixture of folk-beliefs into an elaborate theory of the behaviour by which you could recognise a witch, and that was what the accusers had to prove. The witches' sabbath was at the centre of this mythology, and a large part of the interrogation of accused persons consisted in putting pressure on them to name others whom they had seen at those rites. This was not a feature of English witch-trials; an American writer says this shows how primitive our witchcraft was (H.C.E. Midelfort, Witch- Hunting in Southwestern Germany, 1972, p. 234). How did Europe eventually come to reject what nearly everyone today thinks is a farrago of nonsense? Of course this was not a matter of an instant WITCHCRAFT, SPIRIT POSSESSION AND HERESY 231 enlightenment through recognition of the laws of physical causation. A few writers - Montaigne was one - ridiculed the whole belief system, but public opinion in general moved only slowly from partial to total scepticism. In France a very important influence was that of lawyers concerned with criminal justice. Their argument ran like this: granted that there are witches, and that they are in league with the Devil; granted that their crime can never be detected by normal means; all the same, judges should not be too ready to accept dubious evidence, such as confessions made under torture, the ordeal by water, the 'devil's mark' that witches were supposed to show, or mere allegations of bad reputation. As early as 1601 the Parlement of Paris, which at that time was the highest court of justice in northern France, had ruled that anyone who was convicted of witchcraft had the right to appeal directly to it. From 1603 it refused to recognise the validity of the ordeal by water, in which a person was proved guilty if he (or she) did not drown. In 1640 it gave up the prosecution of people accused of making a pact with the Devil. The church too, in the persons of the theologians of the Sorbonne, asserted as far back as 1615 that nobody should be condemned on the word of the Father of Lies. In this century there began to appear a difference between rural and urban witchcraft. Accusations of what might be called ordinary maleficia went on in the country, but in the cities there appeared something new. This was the idea that devils had entered convents and taken possession of nuns, sometimes many at a time; some priest was held responsible, and when he had been condemned to death the devils usually departed. There was nothing new in the exorcism of devils. What was new in these dramatic cases was that the exorcisms were performed in public. For the church authorities they were a continuation by other means of the physical warfare between Catholics and Protestants that had raged in the sixteenth century. The Devil was in league with the Protestants - or they with him. Anyone who doubted the guilt of the accused, let alone the genuiness of possessions, was siding with the enemy. Of the crowds who came to watch the exorcisms, many no doubt were edified at the spectacle of these spiritual combats and terrified at the strength of the adversary's resistance, and some were persuaded to return to the Catholic faith. But others took it like a fair-ground show. The most famous case was that of the Ursuline sisters of Loudun. It has inspired novels, a play, a film and an opera, all emphasising the sexual frustrations of the nuns, which certainly played their part in the events. But this aspect of the story is of minor importance in the context of the wider issues that divided France at that time. Most of these were illustrated at some point in the drama of Loudun. Loudun was a smaller city than Belfast, but it was as deeply divided between Protestants and Catholics. It was one of the strongholds which the Protestants were allowed to keep at the end of the religious wars of the sixteenth century, where they had their own garrisons and governors of their own choice; and at first they didn't allow Catholics to live there. But this arrangement was only meant to be temporary, and it came to an end in 1624. After that Richelieu set about demolishing the fortresses. 232 LUCY MAIR In Loudun Catholics had been steadily returning. Various religious orders had established themselves in the town, and in 1626 there was founded a small convent of the Ursulines, a teaching order that was first created in the early days of the Counter-Reformation. In 1631 Richelieu ordered the walls of Loudun to be pulled down, and sent an emissary to see to it; his name was Martin de Laubardemont. In the city there was a priest called Urbain Grandier, a handsome, intellectual and arrogant man, who made enemies, as such men do. He was critical of the mendicant orders, he wrote a tract against the celibacy of the clergy, and he had Protestant friends, among them the Governor of the city. His sexual adventures were widely known; they were unseemly in a priest, but far from unique in those days. He joined in protests against the destruction of the walls of Loudon. He was asked to become the spiritual director of the Ursulines, but he refused. The man who accepted the post was called Mignon, and he was already an enemy of Grandier. In 1632 first the prioress, Sister Jeanne des Anges, and then all the nuns, began to show signs of diabolical possession; as one of the most striking, the prioress was said to have been seen walking on the roof of the convent. Father Mignon tried to exorcise them. They insisted, through the mouths of their devils, that Grandier was responsible for their afflictions. Grandier's enemies had already brought various charges against him, though not charges of witchcraft, and he had successfully defended himself to both civil and ecclesiastical authorities. Now he appealed to the Archbishop of Bordeaux, and the Archbishop sent a doctor to examine the nuns, and then ordered the exorcisms to cease. The affair took on political significance when it came to the notice of Laubardemont, who had clashed with Grandier at the time when the Loudunais were trying to preserve their fortifications. Two of the high-born young ladies in the convent were his cousins, and when he learned from their families what was going on, he got a special commission from Richelieu to make an investigation. Exorcisms began again, and now they were held in public. Platforms were set up in the churches, and the possessed women lay and writhed on them while two or three exorcists together might try to compel the devils to leave their victim, and members of the public climbed up to get a good view. The news spread all over France, and people came in crowds, one or two even from England, to see the battles with the powers of darkness. The visitors gave alms to the convent, which considerably increased its revenues. Richelieu paid the expenses of the official exorcists, but others offered their help; friars of different orders competed. Laubardemont set up a tribunal of his own to examine Grandier, disregarding the local court of justice; most of the members were Grandier's enemies. In what was a speedy process for those days, they found him guilty, tortured him to make him name people supposed to have joined him in the Black Mass, which he refused to do, and couldn't have done anyhow, and had him burnt at the stake before a crowd of six thousand people. But the possessions went on, and now anyone who had spoken up for Grandier was liable to be accused. But by this time Richelieu had had enough. People began to think the nuns had acquired a sort of addiction to exorcism; and it was WITCHCRAFT, SPIRIT POSSESSION AND HERESY 233 noticed that at other times than the exorcism sessions they conducted their lives in a perfectly normal way. Richelieu transferred the responsibility for exorcism from the Capuchin Friars to the Jesuits, and the new confessor whom they appointed dealt with his penitents in private. Then the Cardinal ordered the end of exorcism, and with that possession too came to an end for most of the nuns. The political destruction of Protestant Loudun had been achieved; Grandier's friend the governor, who had always stood up for him, had been assassinated. If Richelieu had also cared about the destruction of Grandier, as some thought he did, that too had been accomplished. Of course I am not trying to make out that Richelieu gave Laubardemont his mission simply for that purpose; Richelieu was committed to the restoration of the Roman religion and Laubardemont was a fiercely orthodox Catholic. I am just offering posssible reasons why Richelieu lost interest in the case at the point when he did. The story shows very well how, in a case where guilt or innocence can never be really proved, people are influenced by their interests on extraneous issues. It is not that anyone necessarily made accusations that he knew to be false, but rather that their judgement was affected by their preconceptions. It is always easy to assume the moral obliquity of people who disagree with you, and this is the easier when right views are held to be inseparable from adherence to religious doctrine. Liberal humanism suggests that these issues should be kept separate; the political creeds that seem to be taking its place are closer to those of the devil- hunters. In this case some Protestants questioned the genuineness of the possessions because they really doubted it, others because Catholics accepted it. People who stood for local autonomy against royal absolutism resented the over- ruling of the local judiciary by the king; naturally many of them were Protestants. Catholics thought it was evidence of an alliance with the Devil to doubt that he was responsible for the afflictions of the nuns; naturally they thought the Protestants were his chief allies. Laubardemont, for his part, was so deeply committed to the king's cause that he saw opposition to royal authority as itself a kind of heresy. These events have their place in history because of the discussions they raised about the way to treat accusations of witchcraft. Of course the question whether there was such a thing had been debated for a very long time. But without entering on dangerous religious ground, people could consider two questions more carefully than they had in the past. One was what evidence should be regarded as enough to condemn a man to death; that preoccupied the lawyers. The other was the possibility that the women who were supposedly possessed were simply suffering from hysteria. This was a subject that had preoccupied medical men for a long time too, though the explanations that they offered for hysteria might seem to us bizarre. But they very sensibly asked in this case whether any of the nuns' contortions were really more than could be done without supernatural force. Both they and the judges asked whether possession was sometimes faked. The devils were supposed to speak in languages that their victims didn't know; this was one of the recognised marks of possession. The doctors noticed that the devils themselves didn't seem to know much Latin, and one said it was odd that they had such a strong provincial accent. For those who accepted the reality of possession, there was yet another 234 LUCY MAIR possibility; it could be interpreted as a mark of divine grace. Satan could not afflict anyone in this way unless God allowed it; so God had honoured the Ursulines by submitting their faith to such a rigorous test. In another case of this kind, a nun who was asked whether she had been possessed said that God had not done her that honour. Sister Jeanne de Anges began to be visited by good as well as evil spirits. She had visions of her guardian angel, a beautiful youth. On one occasion when she was at the point of death Saint Joseph appeared to her and restored her with a sweet-smelling ointment. The shirt on which the ointment had been dropped effected miraculous cures, and even assisted the birth of Louis XIV. Her angel told her to make a pilgrimage to the tomb of St. Franqois de Sales, and this became a triumphal progress, in the course of which she was received by Richelieu and by the king and queen. Later the guardian angel inspired her with secular as well as spiritual wisdom, and people all over France consulted her on their problems with lawsuits and marriage plans, just as today in the third world people take comparable problems to spirit mediums and shamans. Her emotional interests were directed towards her new confessor and towards Laubardemont. Just because this case was so notorious, it stimulated debate on the general question of the judicial treatment of this kind of accusation. As I mentioned before, the Parlement of Paris gave up prosecutions for witchcraft as early as 1640, though it still had to decide on cases sent up to it from lower courts; in those cases it usually reduced the sentence. As the century wore on, the authorities came to treat the supposed victims of possession simply as disorderly characters. Their accusations against others were not taken seriously, and they were turned out of cities or locked up in madhouses. This is certainly an indication of increasing scepticism. But another reason for a change in attitudes was not directly connected with arguments about natural causes. This was the extension of central authority under Louis XIV. In the field of law this brought many local courts under the jurisdiction of superior ones, and enabled the Parlement of Paris in particular to enforce its ruling that convictions for witchcraft must be referred to it. Their ruling was resisted for some time by many lower courts where judges often shared the popular beliefs; also, taking a strong line on witchcraft was entangled with standing up for autonomy. In the reverse direction there was one occasion when a royal official insisted on the condemnation of a witch simply because the local court opposed it. The issue here was a purely political one; but as it happens, in most cases the central authorities took the more sophisticated view. In England it was the Protestants who took the offensive against the enemies of God. They rejected exorcism, but they still believed in demoniac possession, and that human malice could cause it. Their remedy was prayer and fasting, which no doubt was equally effective with exorcism. But they too sometimes experienced relief at the moment when an accused person died; and some people reverted to the Catholic church when it seemed to offer a stronger defence. The death penalty in England was imposed in these cases not for heresy but for maleficia. The most famous case in a Protestant country, and the last famous case in history, is that of the witches of Salem in Massachusetts. The divines of New WITCHCRAFT, SPIRIT POSSESSION AND HERESY 235 England were indeed greatly concerned with the extirpation of heresy, but that was not the issue in this case. Nevertheless, Satan was involved. The colonists of Massachusetts believed that New England was an outpost in the War with the Devil, and this metaphor regularly coloured their preaching. Salem was a tiny village, with a population of some 200 adults. It had been first settled about 1639 in the hinterland of Salem Town, and it was attacked by the Devil in 1692. The afflicted persons there were mainly little girls, and nobody supposed that God was honouring them by allowing the Devil to assault them. But it was supposed that the New Englanders as a body, a people especially chosen by God, were for that reason subjected to particular trials, and the activity of witches was one such trial. Again, none of the afflicted girls of Salem turned out later to be a saint. But all the same there is a point in common here between my two stories. Nobody thought the Salem girls had been divinely inspired. But some forty years later, more young people in Massachusetts, this time in Northampton, began to manifest just the same kind of symptoms, and this time nobody thought the Devil was at work. Their 'fits,' as they were called in America, were interpreted as an 'outpouring of the spirit' repeating what had happened at the original Pentecost, and pointing the way to the millennium, the kingdom of God on earth. In this case the inspiration - in the strict sense of that word - was the precursor of a major religious movement in American history, what is called the Great Awakening. Its followers claimed to be returning to just that austerity of life that Salem Village stood for, as we shall see. Of course authority was against them, but this time the lines were not drawn on the analogy of a holy war. In the context of my present theme, the contrast between 1692 and 1735 shows that in America as in France, and as earlier in Judaea, the same kinds of disturbance could equally be ascribed to the powers of light and of darkness. In Loudun the devils had attacked the house of a religious order. In Salem they first attacked the house of a minister of religion. In Salem the minister was not in league with them, he was the champion in the fight against them. But he too was at the centre of a conflict that had more than a religious significance. The division of the people of Salem Village was between those who wanted to share in the prosperity of Salem Town and those who wanted to cut themselves off from it; between those who held to the Puritan values of austerity and those who pursued that acquisitiveness that we have been taught to call the Protestant ethic. In the New England theocracy the autonomous political unit was a parish with its own minister. So the division of views in Salem was crystallised in opposing attitudes towards the appointment and maintenance of a minister. The minister in question was the Reverend Samuel Parris. He was in the uncomfortable position that one faction of the villagers had duly appointed him, but the other was refusing to maintain him. It was his small daughter and her cousin who first began to suffer from what their elders called distempers and fits, troubles beyond the resources of the village doctor. The children were badgered to say who was amicting them, and eventually they came up with the names of three women. These women were duly examined and sent to prison, but this didn't end the afflictions. More and more girls were possessed, and more and more names were given. Naturally these must have been the names of people whom their elders 236 LUCY MAIR disliked; as time went on, they began to name people in other towns whom they cannot even have known by sight. The accused persons in Salem Village, not all of them women, were questioned in public; the girls were present, and they shrieked and generally made disturbances when people appeared who they said were their tormentors. In all, nineteen men and women were found guilty and hanged. Then the trials came to an end, though the opposition to Parris went on for another five years, until he gave up and left Salem. If there were any people in New England who doubted the reality of witchcraft and possession by devils, none of them said so at that time. Nobody questioned the existence of the Devil. But the ministers of religion who were the leaders of thought in that society did ask whether all reports of possession were genuine, and they did ask whether people might not sometimes be condemned to death on insufficient evidence. The famous Increase Mather, one of the first Presidents of Harvard, and his son Cotton Mather, both spoke and wrote on this subject. Cotton Mather's discussion of an earlier case of possession shows that he was very credulous by modern standards. But he did argue that the victims might have brought their troubles on themselves by deliberately trying to get in touch with infernal forces, as the first Salem victims did. During the Salem crisis he wrote a letter to the Governor of Massachusetts which urged both the 'vigorous prosecution of proven witches' and 'a very critical and exquisite caution' in judging the evidence. It was a sermon preached by Increase Mather that finally led the Governor to end the trials and forbid further prosecutions. As the doctors had done earlier in France, Mather argued that the contortions of the victims could, as he put it, 'proceed from nature and the power of imagination.' He recalled a notorious case of fraud that had recently been detected in England. But in particular he criticised the appeal to what was called 'spectral evidence,' the belief that the Devil might appear to one of the victims in the form of the person responsible for his possession. Of course this idea opens up unlimited possibilities of accusation. For some strange reason, the people of Salem thought the testimony of children to such visions was particularly reliable because of their innocence. Increase Mather argued, on the same lines as Grandier had in his own defence, that it was utterly inadmissible to take as reliable evidence communications from the other world which might have been sent with intent to deceive. He asked 'whether it is not possible for the Devil to impose on the Imaginations of Persons Bewitched, and to cause them to believe that an Innocent, yea that a Pious person does torment them, when the Devil himself doth it.' And he concluded with an uncompromising statement of his position: 'This then I declare and testifie, that to take away the life of any one, merely because a Spectre or Devil, in a bewitched or possessed person, does accuse them, will bring the Guilt of Innocent Blood on the Land where such a thing shall be done.' Hardly were the trials over when the people of Salem became appalled at what they had done - not least because a girl whose own grandfather had been hanged confessed that she had wantonly accused him. There were no more witch trials - but not because New England had rejected its belief in the devil and all his works. That was as strong as ever. In this case we know how accusers and defenders were aligned because both WITCHCRAFT, SPIRIT POSSESSION AND HERESY 237 sides were constantly signing petitions and manifestoes on the subject of Parris's position as minister. And we know the characteristics of the two sides from the brilliant work of two American historians, Paul Boyer and Stephen Nissenbaum (Salem Possessed: The Social Origins of Witchcraft, 1974). They have combed the records of this tiny community in a way that no one has done with the data from Loudun, and they know the actors in the drama as if they had grown up with them. The most obvious division was geographical. Parris's supporters, who were the accusers, lived on the landward side of the village, his opponents on the side that looked towards Salem Town. But what was significant was not a matter of being near the town but of attitudes towards it. Salem Town had grown in fifty years to be the second commercial port of Massachusetts, and the growth in its prosperity had brought with it great differences in wealth, as it always does. The leading men, those who were elected to political office, were not farmers any more; they were merchants, and they were better off than any farmer. Members of the faction opposed to Parris, who defended the accused and opposed the trials, were markedly richer than his supporters. And while they got richer, the farmers got poorer as there was no more land to open up. Several of the anti- Parris faction lived along the road that led to Boston. Along this road came news both from Boston and Salem Town; along it were taverns where news circulated. Salem Village disapproved of strong drink; ministers said that young men who went to the taverns were 'seldom away before Drunk or well tippled.' One of the inns was licensed to sell drink only to what we call bona fide travellers. Two inn- keepers were hanged as witches. This is a description of the types of person who supported and opposed the separation of Salem Village from Salem Town, a separation that was epitomised in the presence of Samuel Parris as minister. It is not quite so easy to find common characteristics among the people who were accused of witchcraft. One that is mentioned by Boyer and Nissenbaum would not surprise an anthro- pologist. They were all outsiders to the village; that is, they had not been born there. A more unexpected finding is that they were all socially mobile, though not all in the same direction. Some had come up in the world; they had incurred the unpopularity that is often the price of that kind of success. Others had fallen, and did not accept their lower status in the deferential manner of people who had been born to it. I said there was no express question of heresy in the Salem prosecutions. But if you assume that the established order is the right one, and if you believe that there is a Devil, you can easily believe that those who subvert the established order are in league with him. He can lead people astray in matters of morals as much as doctrine. The order that Parris and his friends were fighting for was that of a closely-knit community in which every member put the commands of God and the good of the whole before his private interests. They were fighting a losing battle against the attraction of new opportunities. The opposition could not be readily formulated in the way that arguments about the validity of exorcism could. It is Boyer and Nissenbaum who have formulated for us the troubles of a community where the New England clergy could see only 'a spirit full of contentions and animosities.' When I spoke of Loudun I emphasised the conflict of material and political 238 LUCY MAIR interests that surrounded the question of heresy, and of the agency of the Devil in the afflictions of the nuns. I have argued that there was such a conflict in Salem too. I am not trying to see moral ideas as a mere reflection of the infrastructure. I only think it is reasonable to suppose that nobody espouses views that are plainly contrary to his interests. It is the sense of the moral obliquity of your opponents that leads you to believe that the Devil has inspired them. But there is more to it than a pure certainty of being on the Lord's side. Boyer and Nissenbaum, here following Perry Miller, argue that it was the internal conflicts of the Salem villagers that inspired their conviction that witchcraft was destroying their community. The trouble was that, in Miller's words, 'the wrong thing was also the right thing.' If the saints pursued their calling with the diligence that God commanded, some of them were bound to make a commercial success, and with this would come the enjoyment of the things of this world that their doctrine condemned. The argument resembles that of Dr. Norman Cohn when he writes of 'Europe's inner Demons.' To him the ascription to heretics of an alliance with the Devil, and the outrageous fantasies that go with it, express an unconscious resentment of the very religion that is ostensibly being defended, a Christianity whose precepts are too hard to follow. I would like to conclude by mentioning again the light that these stories throw on the ending of trials for witchcraft. In both stories it is clear that this did not happen because the idea was rejected as impossible. The people who were most influential in both cases were concerned with fair trial; it was the value of the evidence that was used that gave them doubts, and in France, rather more than in New England, they also considered the possibility of other causes in particular instances. Judges dismissed cases, and eventually the public, after grumbling a good deal, gave up bringing them. In France it was made illegal to claim to detect witches, as it has regularly been in British colonial law. In England the law making witchcraft a crime was repealed in 1736, but judges had been rejecting indictments for some time before that. If it is a mark of enlightenment to abandon the prosecution of witches, and indeed it is, historically the enlightenment has been that of a concern with justice rather than of an acceptance of natural science.
Wagner in Russia, Poland and The Czech Lands Musical, Literary and Cultural Perspectives by Stephen Muir, Anastasia Belina-Johnson (Eds.), Richard Taruskin (Foreword)