I think that the explanation that compliments the explanation of gender tensions is character traits. The character traits of each of the suspects helps us analyze each of them and figure out if there is a profile that each of them matches as to why they were accused of being witches. The witches’ age, sex, personal background, family life, criminal background, occupations, and social positions all could have accounted for why they were accused of witchcraft. Most of the suspects were tough, resilient, and purposive. There are several examples of suspects having these characteristics. A few of these of these examples were that of John Godfrey, Anne Hibbens, and Katherine Harrison. John Godfrey “was not merely a frequent litigant; he was also a determined and successful one. Anne Hibbens “would bend, but never break, in the face of unanimous censure by her brethren in the Boston church.” Finally, Katherine Harrison “countered the animus of her Wethersfield neighbors by way of formal actions at court and informal rebuke.” The characteristics made these individuals “not only suspect but genuinely fearsome.” These people’s ill will, presumed envies, and explicit threats to do harm would “all be treated with the utmost seriousness precisely because in a certain sense, they were strong.” In conclusion, in all of this …show more content…
The explanation of character traits compliments the explanation of gender tensions very well, but it on its on is very weak. This conflict’s weakness is that the “profile” of a witch that they developed can be used to describe a large majority of the population during this time. This explanation can be considered unreliable because of who it was that accused these witches. The only people that knew the motives, behaviors of these witches were the accusers. These accusers would most likely had searched around looking for someone that matched their “profile” of a witch and then made up stories of them behaving like a witch. This is the main and strongest reason for this explanation being