How soon after the Salem witch trials did people realize it was not about witches?

Ok- there's a lot to unpack in this question, so I'm going to start with "not about witches" because it both is and it isn't about witchcraft. Witchcraft was a reality in the 17th century world. A witch was someone who made a deal with the Devil, and they could then send their supernatural form- their specter- out into the world to cause harm. New England in 1692 was very much a world of wonders- the devil was fighting to dominate the Puritan world and lure people into temptation, thus gaining their souls for Hell. This battle between good and evil happened daily in large and small ways. Individually, it was your responsibility to adhere to Puritan tenets, and collectively, everyone needed to ensure each individual did. One person's spiritual failings could bring tragedy to a town by invoking a storm sent by God as punishment. It was a scary world, and even scarier when your neighbors might betray you and your community for the devil. In this way, it was about witchcraft.

But finding a witch is where it gets to not be about witchcraft. I'll focus on the Putnam family to explain this. Thomas Putnam Jr.'s daughter Ann Putnam Jr. named more people than anyone else with 83 confirmed accusations. I've counted 893 unique accusations against 177 people so she makes up a fair amount as a twelve year old. There is a long history of the Putnam family's decline in local politics and a number of family and community feuds that pit the Putnams against a lot of other people. Many of Ann Jr.'s accusations line up with people on the other sides of those feuds- allies of local opponents to Thomas' political agenda, people on the wrong side of a lawsuit with the Putnams, easy targets that have some benefit for Thomas if accused. Thomas Putnam Jr. had the most to gain from a lot of the accusations and his daughter often pointed the finger, if not pointing the finger first.

However, this isn't to say the accusations are a premeditated conspiracy. Yes, Thomas and his allies all have daughters and family making accusations along political factions. But this doesn't mean Thomas, Rev. Samuel Parris, and others had meetings to say 'lets accused her, her, and her, so then we can accuse him.' Its not a pre-planned witch hunt because you can't plan this. Witch hunts most often found 1 or 2 suspects at a time, but in 1692, its a conspiracy of witches in the minds of these overzealous and self-righteous murderers. They build a narrative as they go by taking confessions naming others and running with it. Other towns had political issues and family feuds where someone nearby realized 'hey, we can do that too'. But this doesn't mean they didn't think Sarah Good or Rebecca Nurse weren't witches. They might have, although we can't be certain and I'd guess not everyone on the accusing side fully believed it. This is what the thought process became- witches are real, there are witches here, who are they? We don't like this person, they must be a witch because why else would they oppose us in local church politics. The people you hate are the people you believe are witches.

This is the scenario I imagine for how the accusations take off- the afflicted person started to suffer, people in the room begin to ask "who is afflicting you? Is it Martha Corey?" This offers the accuser a name that they can just agree to, or in the case of younger accusers like Ann Jr., they probably know someone the parents hate. Houses were small, often one or maybe 2 rooms. If mom and dad sat up late by the fire complaining about Sarah Osborne, the children will hear the name and at the right time, Ann Jr. knows what her parents want to hear. In many of the cases, its reasonable to believe the names were indirectly fed to the accusers to start an accusation. After an arrest, more of the afflicted would jump onto an accusation since a accused witch was implied to be inherently guilty- specters of witches could only appear if you were a witch- so naming them gave credibility to other accusations. It was a self-reinforcing cycle of accusations.

Now onto the question of when people realized it wasn't about witches, and simply put, there were always people who knew. On the day of the first examinations (a pre-trial hearing after an arrest to decide if a trial is necessary) Martha Corey tried to prevent her husband Giles from attending because she disagreed with the idea (she later hanged for witchcraft and Giles was infamously pressed for standing mute at his trial). The Porter family, the leaders of the faction opposed to the Putnam faction, mounted a defense for their friend and ally Rebecca Nurse immediately writing a letter to the magistrates. Nurse's sister Sarah Cloyce walked out of church when the minster referred to Rebecca's infiltration of the church as a witch. Another sister, Mary Easty helped the Porters circulate petitions on Nurse's behalf. Cloyce was accused and arrested. Easty hanged alongside Martha Corey, a few months after Rebecca hanged. From the outset, people knew but accusations followed outspoken advocates.

It was only as the increasing number of trials and executions continued that public sentiment grew more and more against the trials. By September, the Court of Oyer and Terminer started to rush through cases because of the number accusations and because it seemed like their popularity was draining fast. 11 executions over the summer followed by 8 more and a pressing that month helped turn the tide. There were also figures in Boston beginning to pushback- ministers like Revs Willard and Moody in Boston's Third Church even helped Philip and Mary English escape. Critics like Thomas Brattle started to write down their thoughts, some things were published during the fall but many of the critiques were published much later. Brattle, Calef, Maule, and Willard all have publications from the era that were critical of the trials.

These critiques also came as more members of the Boston elite faced accusations. Rumor even spread through the city that Lady Mary Phips, wife of Gov. William Phips, was named. We know the rumor spread but not if anyone actually accused her. But with that rumor, with a feeling that King William III would disapprove, and with public sentiment changing as influences like Rev. Increase Mather started to call for more caution, Gov. Phips paused the trials to reevaluate spectral evidence. When the trials resumed without it in January 1693, convictions were virtually impossible. There were no witches.

Some people did apologize years later. In 1697, Judge Samuel Sewall apologized for his role on the court. His repentance was lasting and generally true. He even wrote against enslavement later on after realizing his mistakes. (However, his brand of anti-slavery was based on keeping races separate so we shouldn't be too impressed with him.) Ann Putnam Jr. confessed in 1706 that the accusations were a deception by the Devil. Her apology is much more of a non-apology since it seems to be more about protecting her local standing by fighting the stigma of her involvement. Still, she is the only accuser to seek forgiveness, but she placed the blame on Satan and not herself, other accusers, or the family members that pushed her to accuse.

In 1711, a Reversal of Attainder exonerated many of the convicted suspects- most of those executed and those convicted but in jail at the time of the pause and reprieved. It also gave some reparations to families of the victims related to money spent for jail fees and other related expenses. In 2001, Massachusetts exonerated the remaining victims who were not previously granted a reversal.

Now, one last note to respond about the land- sorta. There were financial motives for some people, but not many. Accusers and their families had no direct access to land or property, but the sheriff certainly did. George Corwin arrested a lot of the accused suspects, but was also responsible for collecting jail fees (you basically rented you spot in jail and the chains used to hold you). When suspects were convicted, Corwin didn't always stop looting property- the Elizabeth Procter escaped death due to a pregnancy while her husband hanged. Corwin took almost everything from the house. Essentially, movable goods were up for grabs to him but the land itself was rarely at stake except if there would be no heirs. But accusations in no way guaranteed anyone could get land if someone hanged for witchcraft.

I can give a lot of recommended readings and citations here, but I'll give a selected list for what I think most AH readers would enjoy and be most relevant:

Baker, Emerson W. A Storm of Witchcraft.

Boyer, Paul and Stephen Nissenbaum. Salem Possessed.

Norton, Mary Beth. In the Devil's Snare.

Reis, Elizabeth. Damned Women.

Roach, Marilynne K. Six Women of Salem.