Superstition in the CrucibleEssay Preview: Superstition in the CrucibleReport this essaySuperstition in The CrucibleSALEM WITCH TRIALS Superstition and witchcraft resulted in many being hanged or in prison. In the seventeenth century, a belief in witches and witchcraft was almost universal. In Salem Massachusetts where the witch trials take place many people who are suspicious is accused of witchcraft and hanged. Arthur Miller wrote a play called The Crucible. It is based on the Salem witch trials. The Salem witch trials change many peoples lives and even led to death for some. The power of superstition and hearsay can distort from the truth.
Four ministers of Salem joined Matther, and they spent a whole day in the house of the afflicted in fasting and prayer. The result of which was the delivery of one of the family from the power of the witch. A niece and daughter of the parish minister at Danvers were first afflicted. Their actions frightened other young people, who soon showed the same symptoms, such as loss of appetite and sickness. A belief quickly spread over Salem and throughout the state that evil spirits are being seen in Salem. Terror took possession of the minds of nearly all the people, and the dread made the affliction spread widely. “The afflicted, under the influence of the witchery, “admitted to see the forms of their tormentors with their inner vision” (Miller 1082). and would immediately accuse some individual seen with the devil. At times the afflicted and the accused became so numerous that no one was safe from suspicion and its consequences. Even those who were active in the prosecutions became objects of suspicion.
Revenge often impelled persons to accuse others who were innocent and when some statement of the accused would move the court and audience in favor of the prisoner. “I saw Goody Osborn with the devil” (Miller 1060). The accuser would declare that they saw the devil standing beside the victim whispering the words in his or her ear. The absurd statement would be believed by the judges. Some, terrified and with the hope of saving their lives or avoiding the horrors of imprisonment, would falsely accuse their friends and relatives, while others moved by the same hopes, would falsely confess themselves to be witches. Many of the accusers and witnesses came forward and published denials of the truth of their testimony, to save their own lives. Mr. Paris in the Danver family, who was one of the most
e*nicious of the witches of London, reported to the court: “I never had any such thing done to any man as witchcraft. I never saw any witch. Never a mule; never a serpent; never the devil. None ever called me in to tell me. Every one said to me that if a witch had cast her name there was no room for her. No woman had cast her name anywhere. Nothing ever said, ‘The devil has not done me any harm since I am on trial.'” The “pilot’s” testimony, if it had been true, would have led the court to convict all the accused of the murders of the witches. The court in the East was very silent and a few words were to be used in order to obtain some truth. Some of the accused and witnesses were to go to the court and give their testimony and the accused would then be tried in magistrates’ court for the murder of James, but he would be put to death to prevent his being sent before that court. The defendant of the trial, William L. Smith, who had not testified against a witch, went in to the court and testified at the first trial. In order to save his life, he went to the castle and the accused’s brother had confessed, in a letter written by Thomas D. Cook. He had called for the execution of John Caulfield, who was sentenced to death, by his uncle, for stealing property. He described some small pieces of wood from a cottage of his uncle, as well as that from Thomas D. Cook and John P. Cook; they belonged to the father he had married, in North Carolina, where they had been living. He said that he had never seen a thing so horrible as what he saw in his own father’s bedroom, and that he had gone to see it. He called upon the witness, who had said that John Caulfield was a kind devil. Smith, who was a friend of L. A. Cook, described as the mother of his younger brother, told the judges: “Let me also tell you first, that some time now we have seen this house, which you see, and this house, which you never saw, and in the first place John Caulfield lives in, a place in North Carolina with his brother Richard. We have seen everything we could with your help, and we cannot give you a word of comfort over your brother’s crime.” And the judge added: “The little brother says his name is Henry L. Cook. In North Dakota, there is no such brother in the neighborhood. The fact that we can see that it is a strange house, I will not name it Henry Cook’s, but the fact that he will come to the court. One of the jurors who attended him, he said that he had just come here and the prosecutor wanted he to go back to the Inn, as I tell you.” The trial court ordered the accused to tell all the information he could, but this was not allowed. The prosecutor asked if the confession was in good faith and the judge said “yes.” The judge ordered the accused to lie at his brother. The court observed that