Analysis Of Michel De Montaigne's On The Cannibals

Seeing the word “cannibal” one would think of the stereotypical depiction of an uncivilized, animal-like, barbaric, and malicious creature slithering through the shadows of the night, waiting for the right moment to feed on its prey. As theatrical as it sounds, this thinking is customary among most people. But what really makes someone a cannibal, besides the basic act of eating human flesh? Must a cannibal be someone who lives a barbaric lifestyle, mangy in complexion and ignorant to normal societal customs, with cannibalism their normal way of nourishment? Or if the act of cannibalism is brought on from outside forces, such as improper supplementation of food by ones government, does that automatically make that person barbaric and evil in nature as a cannibal? Michel de Montaigne and Jonathan Swift, both argue the conflicting view of cannibalism being an accustomed behavior to a barbaric lifestyle, with one author

Montaigne shares his second-hand experience with the natives from the New World in the area now known as Brazil. From the account of his trusted traveler Durand De Villegagnon, who spent twelve years with the native people in the New World, Montaigne proclaims that, “there is nothing savage or barbarous about those people, but that every man calls barbarous anything he is not accustomed to” (Montaigne 61). The Europeans formed a negative prejudice towards the customs of the native people they stumbled upon during exploration, only because they were different from their own. With this the Europeans declared it their job to change the natives lives “for the better” by showing them how people ought to live, however blinded by their own ignorance they failed to realize that their own way of living was more savage-like then the “savages” they were trying to