Confused

Okay, I'll try to keep this simple:

In 1692, Reverend Perris (Whom I believe is depicted in the movie....But I'm not sure, It's been awhile. Sorry) discovered his niece, Abigail and her friends dancing in the woods (Dancing of any kind, and especially in the woods, was considered a sin. This was a HIGHLY religious community). In order to deflect the blame from themselves, they called out the names of others, saying that those people were witches and had caused them to do what they had done. Once they saw just how everyone reacted to the witch-naming (basically, the town went murder happy and held trials (THE SALEM WITCH TRIALS), wherein the accused was asked if they were a witch. If the accused said yes, then they were thrown in prison, and allowed to live after repenting the devil and accepting God. If the accused said no, they were hanged. Very nice and fair, huh?), the girls got a little carried away and began naming as many as they could. These were young girls, and found it all to be a great deal of fun.

In the movie, you can see Tituba (the slave of Reverend Perris, and the first to be accused) obviously lie and 'confess' to being a witch, in order to save her life. Many of those who confessed did this, and in fact it is highly unlikely that there were ANY witches involved in the Salem Witch trials.

As far as the girls flipping out, this is just them play-acting. They needed to do this in order for the accused to be proven a witch.

This is just a quick summery of the reasons and whatnot. For a better view of it, read Arther Miller's "The Crucible". It's quite good.

Hope I clarified some things for you!

Ok, i noticed everyone keeps telling you to read the Crucible - Don't read the Crucible for stuff about Salem! It's historically inaccurate! It was written by Arthur Miller during McCarthyism as a poltical and social statement, not to tell the story of the Salem Witch Trials. Granted, it's a brilliant play - but it does not tell the events correctly

This movie followed history a little closer than Miller did. If you really want to know what was going on in the movie, rent a history channel documentary. It may not be as well acted, but they give you the facts.

Now that I've ranted - to answer your original question, yes, the girls were just calling out random people. They were faking 1) in order to cover up for being caught dancing in the woods & listening to stories of magic by Tituba and 2) because it made them the center of attention. In those times a child's only roles was to obey their elders. Imagine suddenly having every grown up focused on you and you have the power to say who is or isn't going to be put on trial.

Although, there are theories that the girls were actually seeing the stuff they claimed to see thanks to food poisoning caused by moldy rye bread.

The penguins are calling and I can't find my way out of the labyrinth.

Still seeing some errors in difference between facts and fiction. Unfortunately, the movie industry really didn't follow the real documents about this incident; which said documents are available to view, but only a chose few have been allowed to read the full details.
Dancing in the woods was a practice way back in England (Europe even), and was a rite centuries old.

The Puritans, as was their true faith, not pilgrims, who were in such a strict regimented faith founded upon the interpretations of men. (women weren't allowed to speak in public, nor teach: based mostly on Eve "seducing" man into sin. Mix with superstitions (and this sect were steeped like tea in superstitions), out of ignorance and religiosity). Women were the cause of ALL mans ills, and believed to be the easiest of the sex to fall to satan's ploys. Nuts I know!

They were also hated by the catholics, not to mention the King of England of that day. He put a price on their heads, kind of like how the gypsies were treated. England arrested most of the Puritans, which filled their dungeons. The Puritans wanted to travel to America. There's some more details of why England refused to help them. I think they did get on a ship, but it had to turn back due to bad weather? But it didn't go back to England, the ship took them to Holland. Holland hated them too, but some of the dutchies said, "Hey, lets make money off these folks, (the Puritans were a little wealthy folk), so Holland business men paid for their fare. In exchange the Puritans were to establish a home base, buy, sell, farm, dig up whatever they could find. (tabacco, indigo, wildlife, even Indians, etc) was what the Puritans were to send back to Holland within a specified time frame to repay "with interest" for their fare.
I will say this, the Puritans did treat the Natives in the New World well, they paid "rent" so-to-speak to the Natives and traded european goods with them and established treaties that was honored way up until President Andrew Jackson came into power, when he broke all those treatie. He even tried to wipe them out with blankets infected with smallpox. Oh yeah, he was a "real, nice guy"(not)!There was nothing Jackson would not do to stiff folks, a wicked man.

Based on said documents, there were indications and facts that a prominent man in the Village (there were like 3 villages involved, Salem being just one of them. Another village didn't get along with Salemites because their rules were too strict, etc.) But the one man wanted another man's property, there was also a dispute between whose boundaries were whose, and the moving of boundary markers, etc. Citizens of these villages weren't all Puritans. But many non puritans and even members went to the Virginia Company due to the harsh rules. Virginia Company didn't even trade with MA after a while because the Puritans were known for their high prices, and cheating on deals made. Not to mention their Sunday services, or was that Saturdays; the preaching went on for 5 and 6 hours, rarely stopping to eat even. Anyone who didn't go, or left, or didn't give to the church coffers tithes due were disciplined harshly, and even shunned. There was no compassion on the sick and poor.

I do believe what the girls did was to save themselves from punishment. And the truth about admitting to witchcraft, they weren't whipped and sent on their way. They were killed, admittance was their salvation and acceptance into heaven; so they were to thank God and their lucky stars they wouldn't go to hell. Those who denied witchery, were tortured into confession. The dunking stool, not only used in America in that era, came from Europe. The accused were tied into the stools, dunked in water, since witchcraft was the control of the elements they would survive from drowning. NONE, survived drowning. Still nuts!

It was after about 150 people who were hanged, murdered more like it; two of the men who sat on the jury went home and read their Bibles and came across scripture in Deuteronomy (I think it was) about those who kill others simply for the killing were damned to hell. (paraphrasing). SO, they spoke with other jurors and they penned a letter retracting their judgments against those accused, "..in mortal fear of their own damnation." They repented, and things died down, to say the least. There were a few more accusations between neighbors, without any more deaths, and the fellow who was the expert on identifying satan amongst them, too, began to doubt his own part of people dying. I've left out a lot of the details, there's a whole pot full in those documents.

How do I know these things, besides the documents that they don't want people to see? (to protect them from damage, they say). I am a descendant of two of the men, brothers, who penned the letter of repentance for their judgments. Fisk brothers they were. They would be my what, 10 12th Great Uncles? I forget how many greats they were.
I am also a descendant of one of the women who came over on the Mayflower. Numerous times removed, I'm sure.

There's a lot the school history books don't teach our children, or the truth is seriously overstated, exaggerated, etc. Home schooled is the true way to go to teach them the "whole" truth.