The Witchcraft Craze: Matthew Hopkins

Active learning helps students confront the emotional weight of the witchcraft craze by moving beyond facts into analysis. Analyzing Hopkins’ methods and the evidence he used makes the hysteria tangible, not abstract.

• Year 10
• History
• 3 activities
• 15 min–40 min

Learning Objectives

1. Analyze the social and political conditions in England that contributed to the rise of the witchcraft craze.
2. Evaluate the methods and motivations of Matthew Hopkins, assessing his impact on the legal proceedings of the time.
3. Explain the role of gender and societal anxieties in the disproportionate persecution of women as 'witches'.
4. Critique the 'evidence' used in witchcraft trials, such as the swimming test and the identification of 'devil's marks'.

Stations Rotation

⏱ 40 min·Small Groups

Stations Rotation: Evaluating 'Evidence'

Stations feature different types of 'proof': the swimming test, the 'watching' method, and the search for marks. Students must explain why each was considered 'scientific' at the time and why it was actually flawed.

Prepare & details

Explain why the English Civil War triggered an increase in witch hunts.

Facilitation Tip: In Station Rotation: Evaluating 'Evidence,' set up clear time limits at each station so students focus on comparing primary sources rather than lingering.

Setup: Tables/desks arranged in 4-6 distinct stations around room

Materials: Station instruction cards, Different materials per station, Rotation timer

• Remember
• Understand
• Apply
• Analyze
• Self-Management
• Relationship Skills

Inquiry Circle

⏱ 30 min·Small Groups

Inquiry Circle: The Hopkins File

Groups examine the 'career' of Matthew Hopkins. They calculate how much money he made from different towns and discuss whether he was a 'true believer' or a 'con artist'.

Prepare & details

Analyze what role gender played in the persecution of 'witches'.

Facilitation Tip: For Collaborative Investigation: The Hopkins File, assign small groups distinct roles to ensure accountability and thorough research.

Setup: Groups at tables with access to source materials

Materials: Source material collection, Inquiry cycle worksheet, Question generation protocol, Findings presentation template

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Self-Management
• Self-Awareness

Think-Pair-Share

⏱ 15 min·Pairs

Think-Pair-Share: Why Women?

Students discuss why over 90% of those accused were women, often elderly or widowed. They share their thoughts on the role of social status and gender in the 17th century.

Prepare & details

Evaluate how the 'Witchfinder General' exploited local fears for profit.

Facilitation Tip: During Think-Pair-Share: Why Women?, circulate to listen for misconceptions and redirect groups that oversimplify gender roles in the trials.

Setup: Standard classroom seating; students turn to a neighbor

Materials: Discussion prompt (projected or printed), Optional: recording sheet for pairs

• Understand
• Apply
• Analyze
• Self-Awareness
• Relationship Skills

Teaching This Topic

Start by acknowledging that students may initially dismiss past beliefs as irrational. Frame witchcraft accusations as a response to fear and uncertainty, not stupidity. Use Hopkins’ career to show how legal systems can be manipulated during crises. Emphasize historical empathy by having students consider how people justified their actions within their own worldview.

What to Expect

Students will demonstrate understanding by connecting political instability to legal actions, evaluating the legitimacy of evidence, and explaining why accusations targeted women. Discussions should show empathy without endorsing the actions.

Watch Out for These Misconceptions

Common Misconception

During Station Rotation: Evaluating 'Evidence,' students may assume witchcraft trials were always led by the Church.

What to Teach Instead

Use the primary source stations to highlight that English trials were secular. Have students identify whether each source mentions church officials or civil authorities and discuss the implications.

Common Misconception

During Think-Pair-Share: Why Women?, students might reduce witchcraft accusations to simple misogyny without context.

What to Teach Instead

Direct students to the Hopkins File materials that include demographic data or witness testimony. Ask them to find specific examples of how gender interacted with accusations, such as marital status or occupation.

Assessment Ideas

Quick Check

After Station Rotation: Evaluating 'Evidence,' present students with three short primary source quotes. Ask them to identify which quote best reflects the motivations of Matthew Hopkins and explain their reasoning in one sentence.

Discussion Prompt

During Collaborative Investigation: The Hopkins File, facilitate a class discussion using the prompt: 'How did the English Civil War create an environment where figures like Matthew Hopkins could thrive?' Encourage students to reference specific aspects of the conflict and societal instability.

Exit Ticket

After Think-Pair-Share: Why Women?, students write down one way gender influenced who was accused of witchcraft and one piece of 'evidence' used against accused witches, explaining why it was flawed.

Extensions & Scaffolding

• Challenge: Ask students to research modern parallels where fear drives legal or social persecution, comparing causes and outcomes.
• Scaffolding: Provide a sentence starter for struggling students: 'The evidence used against witches like [name] is flawed because...'.
• Deeper exploration: Invite students to design a counter-narrative from the perspective of an accused woman using trial records.

Key Vocabulary

Witchcraft Craze	A period of intense persecution and widespread belief in witchcraft, leading to numerous accusations and trials.
Witchfinder General	A title adopted by Matthew Hopkins, who traveled England claiming to find and prosecute witches, often for payment.
Devil's Mark	A supposed physical blemish on a person's body, believed to be a sign of a pact with the devil, used as evidence in trials.
Swimming Test	An ordeal where an accused person was tied up and thrown into water; if they floated, they were deemed guilty, if they sank, innocent.