Hoffer, similar to Boyer and Nissenbaum, believes there were many factors that contributed to the conception of the Salem Witch Trials. He uses a broader look at time, history, law, sociology and geography to explain the Salem trials. Hoffer begins his arguments by stating that “there is truth in the generalization that the people of the seventeenth century were by and large more gullible than their eighteenth century descendants. In the 1600s, popular or ‘vernacular’ belief in witches was repeated in the writings of the most learned men. Only at the end of the century did people of wealth and education begin to divorce themselves from folk opinion.” When the Salem Witch trials finally came to an end, people proceeded to prevent similar
…show more content…
Historians delved into geography, politics, religion, folklore, medicine, botany, sociology, women’s studies, psychology, and economics; the list will continue as more and more historians pull from other evidence to research this event. Charles W. Upham, George Kittredge, Paul Boyer, Stephen Nissenbaum, Linnda Caporael, Carol Karlsen, Peter Charles Hoffer, and Emerson Baker were not the only people to write about the Salem Witch trials and they will not be the last. However, future historians will continue to build off their work and either support or criticize their theories and conclusions. The historiography of the Salem Witch Trials changed drastically over a period of 148 years. Charles Upham’s 1867 volumes, Salem Witchcraft: With an Account of Salem Village and a History of Opinions on Witchcraft and Kindred Subjects and Emerson Baker’s 2015 book, A Storm of Witchcraft: The Salem Trials and the American Experience differ in their interpretations widely as did the amount of resources and disciplines they used. How will future historians reflect their individual history while interpreting the Salem Witch Trials? Another century of historical analysis will yield a completely different outcome than any of the past and present
Historians delved into geography, politics, religion, folklore, medicine, botany, sociology, women’s studies, psychology, and economics; the list will continue as more and more historians pull from other evidence to research this event. Charles W. Upham, George Kittredge, Paul Boyer, Stephen Nissenbaum, Linnda Caporael, Carol Karlsen, Peter Charles Hoffer, and Emerson Baker were not the only people to write about the Salem Witch trials and they will not be the last. However, future historians will continue to build off their work and either support or criticize their theories and conclusions. The historiography of the Salem Witch Trials changed drastically over a period of 148 years. Charles Upham’s 1867 volumes, Salem Witchcraft: With an Account of Salem Village and a History of Opinions on Witchcraft and Kindred Subjects and Emerson Baker’s 2015 book, A Storm of Witchcraft: The Salem Trials and the American Experience differ in their interpretations widely as did the amount of resources and disciplines they used. How will future historians reflect their individual history while interpreting the Salem Witch Trials? Another century of historical analysis will yield a completely different outcome than any of the past and present