The Answer to Our Burning Question of the Week:
Now where were we? Oh yes. Conspiracy theory, the term, that’s right. We were talking about the etymology and what-not. Well, here goes-the answer to those burning questions: When was it coined? Who coined it? Why was it coined to begin with? Etc. Well, sit back and relax.
You’re about to find out.
The Oxford English Dictionary states that the term “conspiracy theory” was first used in 1909, having been printed in Volume 14, of The American Historical Review in article Number 4 entitled “The Repeal of the Missouri Compromise: Its Origin and Authorship”, page 836 by P. Orman Ray. (You can check out the whole article here.)
Now, I’m sure I don’t have to give you a textbook definition of the term, since you’re probably picturing crazies sitting in an RV out in New Mexico trying to communicate with extraterrestrials. But by today’s definition that’s essentially hitting the nail on the head, regardless of which definition you shove at someone. However, the term didn’t always mean what we use it for today (surprise, surprise, most terms don’t). Upon reading what some of the article-as if reading the title wasn’t enough to ascertain the gist of it’s contents-it was overwhelmingly obvious that there were no dastardly deeds to report in the Missouri Compromise’s review. Because that’s all the article was about; a thorough review of the historical document, nothing more, nothing less. The only manner in which the term actually HINTED at any misgivings was to say that the claim that one of the men in question might have originated the appeal of the document was not a new claim at all, only a rehashing of what someone else had previously theorized. And even then, the author termed the assertion in question as a “conspiracy theory” in a way that would suggest that it was merely unfounded (having no solid, concrete evidence) and more along the lines of rumor with little tangible proof to hint that it may or not be true. There were pieces that supported the dude’s theory, and they were all right there in the review, but there just wasn’t enough to extrapolate a fully supported consensus on the topic as to the veracity of his claim. Not a huge government cover-up by any means. I’ll even copy the exact lines from the original text for those of you too busy (or lazy, like me) to see for yourselves.
“The claim that Atchison was the originator of the repeal may be termed a recrudescence of the conspiracy theory first asserted by Colonel John. A. Parker of Virginia in 1880. No new manuscript material has been found to support the theory, but the available bits of evidence have been collated carefully in this volume.”
But, we didn’t just stop there.
We found another source that predates the aforementioned use by at least 40 years, in The Journal of Mental Science. The specific article in question appeared in the journal’s Fifth Quarterly Meeting of the Medico-Psychological Association, as a report of its conference held on January 27, 1870. That psychological association is known today as the Royal College of Psychiatrists. Here is the link so you can see the context in which it’s used for yourself and here is the excerpt we found:
"It was at least more plausible that the conspiracy theory of Mr. Charles Reade, and the precautionary measure suggested by Dr. Sankey of using a padded waistcoat in recent cases of mania with general paralysis-in which mental condition nearly all these cases under discussion were-seemed to him of practical value."
Now in order to fully understand what was going on for this author to use the term in this way, we had to figure out who the Charles Reade character was first. Turns out he’s a reporter who had used a little sensationalism in his article that reviewed the treatment of some of the patients in the asylum the author was talking about. The way the phrase was used suggests that the author was discrediting Mr. Reade’s journalistic abilities at relating the truth to the public, and so called his article a “conspiracy theory”. Again, it wasn’t being used to uncover an Earth shattering political agenda-at that particular time anyway.
And that brings us to our next item on the agenda. When was “conspiracy theory” used in the way that we know it to mean today? Answer: the mid 1960’s. That’s right. Amidst all the turmoil and chaos happening during that time in the U.S. (with John F. Kennedy being assassinated in 1963 and Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968) it’s no wonder people began using the term to relate to secretive sinister plots and hidden political agendas (and of course later to describe alien and Bigfoot enthusiasts). After doing some more thorough research it wasn't entirely crystal clear as to the very first “documented and labeled” conspiracy theory. Soon after Kennedy’s assassination, along with the assassination of a host of other well-known that had been movers and shakers of their time that suddenly and tragically stopped moving and shaking, the term was used more widely. Especially since 1969 was the peak of the counterculture movement-a.k.a. hippies, man. With that in mind, it cannot be said that the very first conspiracy theory can be attributed to the unfortunate events that occurred in the ‘60’s. That would not be entirely true. While it is the first time the term itself was in popular use by the masses given the political implications of the time, the term could be applied to just about anything else in history.
So the next time you get the urge to call someone out on some information that seems too good to be true, or sounds like more political rumors, remember that calling them conspiracy theorists isn't necessarily the most apt term. Despite the evidence we've found pinpointing the phrase's etymology, it has come a long way. Words change over time. They evolve. Just like this one will. So maybe, eventually, the stigma that goes along with it will become more of a compliment than an insult. We're not sheep. It's only natural (not to mention smart) to question rules and regulations when they become oppressive and/or outdated. The same can be said of those in charge. An authority that is threatened by the idea of being questioned, examined and tested is not fit to govern a body..
Just think about it: people speculate and argue about creation, religion, wars, government, politics, relationships-you name it. From the beginning of time there has always been a conflict or difference in opinion about how things are and the motive behind the actions of others. It’s a natural defense mechanism to speculate and be wary of those in authority. Imagine what revolutionary thinkers of old would have been touted as. The Renaissance men, the free thinkers, the artists, the philosophers, the activists-the list goes on and on. Do you think the founders of this country were always viewed as model citizens who stood in line and did what they were told? If you know anything about history you would know the answer to that is no-duh. All the great men and women of history stood up to stand out. They were all conspirators: they questioned authority, sought justice for the victims of the corrupt and fought against the rule of those with malicious motives.
That’s why we’re doing this. That’s why we here at History Hunters Anonymous have made it our solemn vow to the world to never remain silent. That’s why we chose this particular topic to be our very first feature post. One major part of what we intend to uncover has to deal with conspiracy theories, and sorting out the fact from fiction is just a part of the job-a pretty big one at that. We will always find a way to get the truth in the hands of the people. The people deserve to know the truth, no matter how bad it is.
Sources: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1837085?seq=2 http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=VsRMAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22conspiracy%20theory%22&pg=PA141#v=onepage&q=%22conspiracy%20theory%22&f=false http://free-texture-site.blogspot.com/2010/10/free-leather-book-spines-texture.html
