In 1995 Seth Nthai, the Minister for Security and Safety in South Africa, admitted that witchcraft accusations in South Africa seemed to be connected to the political situation. This was arguably illustrated by the increase in witch burnings during 1990, when Mandela was released, and in 1994 during the elections. Nthai believed that the South African youth wanted to remove all things evil, because Mandela was freed. The situation described by Nthai in South Africa has certain similarities to the situation in which Hopkins and Stearne worked in East Anglia. Seventeenth century England had a strong popular belief in witchcraft and a history of witchcraft accusations. Moreover, with a legislative structure to process these accusations the road was clear for the indictment and conviction of many innocent individuals. Just like South Africa, England was going through extreme social and political unrest, stirred up by the sweeping events of the Civil War.
[...] All he had to do was to act upon the gossip and grudges within the communities. Hopkins was able to wait for the right moment, when all the remaining support for a victim had diminished. At that point he came in and offered his services to remove the witch from their midst. Arguably the use of local knowledge dictated the range of witchcraft accusations, and explains why all the prosecutions were within a fifteen mile radius of his home in Manning tree. [...]
[...] Lowes' position in the community was further undermined by Hopkins and Stearne. Hopkins would have known about the growing resistance to the Rector and approached the parish to offer his services. When a local woman was accused of witchcraft, the Rector offered her his protection only to have a petition from the Parish presented to the Church asking for his removal. The petition was successful and Hopkins jumped at the chance to accuse Lowes of witchcraft. At Framlingham in 1642, Hopkins managed to gain two confessions from accused witches associating Lowe with witchcraft. [...]
[...] Without a doubt, Hopkins and his colleague John Stearne chose their victims with care, choosing vulnerable women within parishes, which were not only socially breaking down but were also places where the civil authorities were considerably weakened by the Civil War. If the ingredients were right, Hopkins could present himself as an agent of righteousness and offer his services as an official, performing the public duty of finding and bringing witches to justice. Indeed, Hopkins himself admitted that he only entered villages and towns that welcomed and offered thanks in the guise of payment. [...]
[...] Undoubtedly there had never been a recorded witch hunt and blatant exploitation of legislation on the scale of Hopkins and Stearne in England before. The victims were vulnerable individuals within their communities; they might have been accused of witchcraft at any time. However, the English Legal system may not have prosecuted, which indeed happened on numerous occasions pre 1642. The difference lies in the breakdown of the social and legal order of the English Society. I would conclude that there may have been an increase [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
