"The story of witchcraft is primarily the story of women . . . ." At first glance, this statement is simple and direct. I found myself referring to this concept repeatedly as I read Karlsen’s research. After reading the entire work, I went back to the preface to discover exactly what argument Karlsen was discussing. What I found was a multi-faceted complex argument comprised of subtle pronouncements. Furthermore, as an obvious adherent to the feminist school of historical thought, she details the significance of witchcraft accusations for women in New England. Consequently, I am going to focus on statements Karlsen makes in her preface as the basis of my analysis. She argues for the relevance and importance of women’s roles in the consuming panic of witchcraft fear in 17^th Century American society. She subtly contends that specific interests were at work in the shaping of witchcraft accusations and the book elaborates that a specific type of woman risked accusation out of proportion to her demographic representation in society.

Karlsen further elaborates on her theme with, "witches were generally thought of as women and most of those who died in the name of witchcraft were women." Karlsen does an excellent job of illustrating this point in her book. Specifically, she uses statistical tables and relevant available evidence to support her claim. This fact is not in dispute historically. Where Karlsen deviates from other historians is in her special focus on specific types of women prone to accusations of witchcraft. She begins her first chapter with an illustration that highlights the special significance of women in relation to witchcraft accusations. Ann Hibbens is the first of many examples of women who Karlsen uses to prove that a special demographic and economic characteristic typlified the risk of accusation of witchcraft. My question at this point is what is the relevance? Where did the focus shift from why women are more likely to be witches to why particular types of women were more susceptible and vulnerable to accusations of witchcraft? Reviewing the preface, I noticed a phrase that cleared up my confusion. Her reference to "intricate patterns of interest" subtly set the stage for the rest of the book. Unfortunately, buried between a criticism of prior works and a jump to present day feelings about witchcraft the emphasis loses clarity and power.

The third clarification Karlsen proceeds with sets the stage for her entire argument. The following example elaborates the premise and further emphasizes her adherence to the feminist school of historical thought prevalent throughout her explanation of witchcraft and the role of women.

This quote is the only incidence, I noticed in the preface, where she alludes to the central theme dominating her book. The feelings about and meanings of witchcraft to early American settlers, the specific crucial roles of women shapes and forms her assumptions and conclusions. Unexplained is her leap in logic to the present.

Confusingly, Karlsen leaps to the present with two short paragraphs concerning the implication of early America belief in witchcraft influencing modern thinking and fascination with historical witchcraft. She asserts, "the continuing power of woman-as-witch in our collective imagination" addresses the issue of the power that continues to mold and shape the perception of witches and witchcraft in modern America. What relevance does this have? Why would she throw this in? Pondering these questions led to my conclusion that the reference to current thought links the "woman-as-witch" ideology to the current emphasis on female empowerment prevalent in feminist writing today. She subtly interjects a commentary on the dearth of sufficient historical research concerning the role women played in shaping our society, past and present.

In a methodical manner, Karlsen outlines evidence and draws conclusions. The next step in analyzing her work is a consideration of her sources and evidence. Karlsen cites numerous sources for her evidence. She cites sources 766 times in the book. Her copious endnotes, 77 pages long, are detailed and specific. Karlsen averages one citation per page in the preface, three citations per page in Chapters 1 - 4, and two citations per page in Chapters 5 – Epilogue. Her reliance on quotation leads to connected quotes and paraphrasing that limits her own analysis of the material she is presenting. Does the preponderance of citations suggest well-supported, documented, and validated research? Her interpretations and conclusions drawn from these sources hold up well to criticism. However, she weakens her assertions and loses me when she interminably quotes statistical references that are present in her statistical tables. A simple reference to the data instead of repeated assertions of the data would clear up some of the repetitious thought processes noted in her work. Pages 66, 67, and 102 illustrate her repetitious tendency to quote and reference tables containing the quotes. These examples are particularly illuminating because often the quote and the table are contained on the same page. The inference I received from this repetition is that Karlsen feels that I am too stupid to look at her sentences and connect them to the table references.

Karlsen approaches her study sequentially and appropriately. She discusses the historical evolution of witchcraft and suggests conclusions as to why witchcraft suddenly became epidemic and then subsided. Key to her theory is the demographic, economic, religious, and colonial experiences of early American society. The transformations in society and the resulting conflicting ideologies further increased the likelihood of witchcraft accusation. The move from a culture dominated by Puritanism and one ideal to different interpretations of the tenets of the faith inexorably led to the resulting conflicts that surfaced through the medium of witchcraft accusation. Karlsen sufficiently discusses these concepts and implications in the main body of her text. In the chapters on demographics and economics, she cites credible evidence that confirms her emphasis on the concentration of women out of proportion to their representation in society accused of witchcraft. Specifically, she ascertains that a special category of woman risked accusation. These women tended to be over 40, married or single, and in one way or another did not conform to societal expectations of the role of women.

Karlsen notes that three characteristics predominated among people accused of witchcraft. Age, sex, and marital status had a special significance in relationship to the likelihood of accusation and the risk of prosecution. Karlsen comments, "Like their age, the marital status of women was crucial in determining their relationship to . . . families and . . . society." Thus, a woman alone or a woman outside the normal status of wife and mother was more likely to be accused, tried, and convicted.

Karlsen determines that economic and societal conflict characterizing the Puritan ideal of providing for children and inheritance issues increased the likelihood of witchcraft accusation against women. Widows, women over 40 and past their child-bearing years, and heiresses without husbands or male relatives risked accusation of witchcraft. Those outside the societal norms for women were much more likely to be accused, tried, and convicted of witchcraft. Essentially, Karlsen contends that the role of women in Puritan society, limited to a "helpmeet" demanded the scapegoat of witches.

Karlsen touches on an incredible array of facets of the characterization of women and the linkage of the "woman-as-witch" ideology in early American society. Accordingly, I looked forward with interest to her conclusion. I was disconcerted when I had to return to the preface and reread it to find what she concluded from her research. Revealingly Karlsen concludes, "We see witchcraft, finally, as a deeply ambivalent but violent struggle within women as well as an equally ambivalent but violent struggle against women." I discovered in writing this paper and rereading the book that her conclusion, stated in the preface, could easily be mistaken for her premise. She supports her conclusion strongly and credibly. I am convinced that she has argued validly that the struggle and the role of women is crucial in understanding the phenomenon of witchcraft in colonial New England. Her implications for modern thought, however, would need more fleshing out to validate her short remarks. Overall, Karlsen presents an accurate and compelling justification of the critical importance of women in studying witchcraft.

© 1997 [email protected]

This page hosted by Get your own Free Home Page