Tax Comparisons:
1695
| Pro-Parris Tax | Anti-Parris Tax | ||
| Mean | 10.88 | Mean | 15.14 |
| Median | 8.00 | Median | 11.25 |
| Mode | 7.00 | Mode | 7.00 |
| Range | 37.00 | Range | 54.00 |
| Minimum | 3.00 | Minimum | 4.00 |
| Maximum | 40.00 | Maximum | 58.00 |
| Sum | 566.00 | Sum | 545.00 |
| Count | 52.00 | Count | 36.00 |
Filtering the taxpayers into pro- and anti-Parris groups and using descriptive statistics, the 1695 results sharply contrast to the comparisons found in 1690, just prior to the witchcraft outbreak. The distinctions between the pro- and anti-Parris groups on the 1695 tax list explain why Boyer and Nissenbaum emphasized economic conflict between wealthier anti-Parris and poorer pro-Parris villagers as underlying the witch hunt.
The average (mean) tax assessment for the anti-Parris petitioners was not only considerably higher than that of the pro-Parris petitioners but, unlike 1690, the anti-Parris group's median assessment is also higher. Both measures indicate the higher wealth of members of witchcraft's opponents. The evidence is even more compelling because it is based on a larger representation of petition signers than in 1690. Fifty-two pro-Parris petitioners are found on the 1695 tax list and thirty-six anti-Parris signers. This smaller group of anti-Parris taxpayers, however, was assessed nearly as much money as the larger pro-Parris contingent (see "Sum" in the descriptive statistics chart).
Users can also gain additional perspective on each faction's situation by comparing these findings with Salem Village as a whole.
We can also investigate the factional identity of wealthy and poor Salem Villagers in 1695. Click Next.