Historical Debate
The ethnicity of Tituba has been surrounded by controversy from the first historical analysis of her. It was initially assumed that she was of Indian descent. But over time the origins of Tituba have begun to be re-evaluated and old theories have been contested. In Tituba, Reluctant Witch of Salem, Elaine G. Breslaw writes:
According to local legend, Tituba and her husband, John, “were spoken of as having come from New Spain…that is, the Spanish West Indies, and the adjacent mainland,” is borne out by the record of known slave-capturing activities in South America.
Breslaw believes that Tituba was an Arawak Native from The Guianas who was either kidnapped and then brought to Barbados or her tribe had migrated there through South America. Veta Smith Tucker writes:
17th-century Puritans blended the categories Native, African, and slave. In seventeenth century Massachusetts, such discriminations among unregenerate peoples of color were considered unnecessary, especially for slaves. By 1692 (exactly 2 centuries after first contact) Columbus' misnaming had yielded a catchall term variously applied to the Guanahani, the Caribbe, the Aztecs, and West Indies Africans.
We may never know where Tituba was really from. Since there was no clear distinction by the Puritans on the racial differences between Natives, Africans, and slaves, it remains hard to identify Tituba’s origin. This however is not the only reason for the scholarly debate over the identity of Tituba. Hansen states:
Over the years the magic Tituba practiced has been changed by historians and dramatists from English, to Native, to African. More startlingly, her own race has been changed from Native, to half-Native and half-Negro, to Negro…There is no evidence to support these changes, but there is an instructive lesson in American historiography to be read in them.
Read more about this topic: Tituba
Famous quotes containing the words historical and/or debate:
“Religion means goal and way, politics implies end and means. The political end is recognizable by the fact that it may be attained—in success—and its attainment is historically recorded. The religious goal remains, even in man’s highest experiences, that which simply provides direction on the mortal way; it never enters into historical consummation.”
—Martin Buber (1878–1965)
“A great deal of unnecessary worry is indulged in by theatregoers trying to understand what Bernard Shaw means. They are not satisfied to listen to a pleasantly written scene in which three or four clever people say clever things, but they need to purse their lips and scowl a little and debate as to whether Shaw meant the lines to be an attack on monogamy as an institution or a plea for manual training in the public school system.”
—Robert Benchley (1889–1945)