Natasha, I was once a firm supporter of the Ergot theory, but after much discussion amongst this mailing list, I have somewhat changed my mind. Your paper is well-written, and there are a few reputable scholars who would agree with you, but you may want to consider other issues as well. The Ergot idea at first seems to be the answer, for it explains the outbreak and the hysteria - A bad batch of rye causes hallucinations, and without an explanation and in a very religious atmosphere, the community blames it on witchcraft. One problem with this theory is that mostly the girls experience the hallucinations. A bad batch of rye would likely have been shared by an entire family if not by a few families. There is one family that seems to have been affected, but the outbreaks generally center around individual girls. Putting aside this problem, there are further problems within the transcripts themselves. The "hallucinations" appear at times when the girls need the sympathy of the court. I'm not saying the Ergotism was not involved, but if it was, there was also some manipulation - and some major political manuvering within the community that cannot be put aside. What the Ergot theory does - is it excuses the girls' from being blamed. (The girls were only about 11 years old and living within a very repressed community.) It is implied (in a letter about the trials) that one girl (likely Abigail) continued to suffer from some kind of physical ailment after the trials had been over and for the rest of her life. Could it have been from ergotism? No ones knows, and many are anxious to dismiss the possibility and consequently - anxious to blame 11 year old girls for this tragedy. I personally believe that the girls had initially been struck by something, that they eventually learned to believe their own press, and that older community members took advantage of the situation. It is easier for me to imagine young and impressionable girls as victims rather than as the "little witches" in Miller's The Crucible. Anyway, no one knows. But, the ergot theory, while it sounds good, has some holes. Julie Jirout >From: "natasha barbosa" <nbshopgurl@hotmail.com> >To: Cindy.Abel@creighton.edu, Conjer@aol.com, fnewby@getus.com, >frstabby@aol.com, gwestey@cs.com, joanswrid@aol.com, judi3158@aol.com, >juliejirout@hotmail.com, kc61kx@mscamm.com, Salem-witch-l@rootsweb.com, >SALEM-WITCH-L-request@rootsweb.com, terry_garlaw@am.exchip.com >Subject: Salem, Please HELP >Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 20:35:39 +0000 > >Please Read!! >I am writing a paper on this for school. Write what you think of it. Thank >you so much. > >Salem was a small town, in the northeast corner of Massachusetts. The >village was a Puritan community. The inhabitants were all very social, and >close-knit. Gossip was common, and word spread quickly. When strange things >started happening in their peaceful town, everyone new about it. The first >occurrence was that several children took sick. Many infants died, and >cattle perished as a result of an unknown substance. The community, being >Puritan and believing strongly in devilish lore, blamed this on witchcraft. >To be a witch in a town such as Salem was a heinous crime. All were >strongly against anything to do with Satan. Anyone who did consort with him >was a traitor to their fellow people .Those convicted would be examined for >witch marks then punished. Few were killed by any other means than >hanging, but many died while serving prison terms. What many people dont >know is that when an accused person walked into the courthouse, they were >immediately presumed guilty. Evidence was always thrown against them. There >was little or no time for them to defend themselves. Not one single person >accused of witchcraft wasnt charged guilty. The people would generally >complain of afflictions, missing property, deaths in the family due to >unknown reasons, et cetera. Then they would pick a person and blame him/her >for it under the title witch. The evidence was slight. In some cases >there was no evidence except the testimonials of the accusers. Even these >remained inconsistent, but as they were supposed victims, their word was >higher than the defendants. Many suggestions of possible sources of the >afflictions have been presented over time, including encephalitis >lethargica. Yet that occurrence remains highly improbable. The more >prevalent explanation is ergotism. Ergotism comes from eating rye, barley, >or wheat contaminated with ergot. Ergot is a mold that grows on several >different types of grain; it contains lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD). LSD >is best known of the hallucinogenic class of drugs. In Salem people who >ingested this drug experienced all sorts of bizarre inexplicable behavior. >Ergotism, and not witchcraft, or disease was the source of the pains, >visions, and spasms of the villagers. Proof of this is that symptoms of >LSD and afflictions of victims of witchcraft are the same. The weather >conditions in Salem that year were perfect for growing ergot. People in the >villages grew rye and the other grains as a staple food source. > _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
As Bob points out, Natasha didn't say what grade she is in, but I am mighty impressed at her obvious interest in the subject and the research she has started to do. She was awfully brave to post her paper to an e-mail list that would scrutinize her facts and not hesitate to dispute them. I hope the criticism doesn't discourage her from pursuing the subject further. I hope she has the testicular fortitude to handle our responses. Julie does an excellent job of pointing out the weaknesses of the ergot poisoning theory. The Salem Witch Trials smack with scam, especially when several of the "uncorrupted" people reaped from the rewards of confiscated properties of those prosecuted. The girls probably started it to save their own skins after being caught with Tituba while she exhibited some of her native practices, then were probably encouraged by their elders when it became obvious they could manipulate the situation to their benefits. Susannah Martin had also been accused of witchcraft once before the trials. Her husband, George, was still alive at the time and quickly put a stop to it. (I don't know the details, but it would be interesting to hear how he dealt with her accusers.) This made her an easier target in 1692. Julie isn't kidding about the girls believing their own press. Please keep in mind that these girls were as hot a topic in the press as Elian Gonzalez was when his story peaked. In situation unblindingly similar to George Martin's, the girls' undoing was when the governor of the colony learned they were accusing his wife as well. Shortly thereafter, laws were passed saying defendents could not be convicted on spectral evidence. Adrienne Foster