On Cannibals, By Michel De Montaigne

← Doyle, William. The French Revolution: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc. 2001

Louis XIV, the ruler of France from the late seventeenth century to the early eighteenth century, claimed, “I am the state.” He considered this to be absolutism. His goal, also acquainted with absolutism, was, “one king, one law, one faith;” Furthermore, Louis wanted to promote religious unity, royal dignity, and security of the state. In order to achieve this goal, he had to rule with a firm hand, laying down the law for all to see. Louis XIV’s absolutism fostered in four major parts: the building of Versailles to control the nobility, the breeding of a strong military, the improvement of France’s economy, and, while quite harsh, the brutal extinction of religious toleration.

Throughout the history of civilization, there have been many great thinkers and philosophers who lay claim and offer their theory of the world around them. Michel de Montaigne, a prominent philosopher of the French Renaissance, argued in his essays of the habitual inconsistency of man and how it is nearly impossible for man to correct these everyday irregularities and contradictions. To say that man is flawed and utterly irregular are statements not particularly surprising or revelatory for philosophers to make, even in Montaigne’s time. However, what can be considered unique about Montaigne, aside from his sharp perceptions of the everyday man, are his sharp—and honest—perceptions of himself, never bragging about his intellectual prowess or

In the On Cannibals Montaigne begins the essay by introducing, or describing, a man that he has met who has lived in Antarctic France. He describes him as being crude, and like many others, can't help but change history through his own interpretation. Montaigne continues by going into how each person has their own definition of barbarism. Those who are seen as being barbarians are those who don't have the same practices and beliefs as the other.

The era of France Enlightenment and religion have a misconception that leads one to believe that they were enemies. The Enlightenment was not against religion but it was against the superstitions and the supernaturalism of religion. Philosophes during the era of France’s Enlightenment did not look to abolish religion or the Catholic Church of France. They simply wanted a separation of religion and state because it was believed that the state was based on reason and religion was based on morality. Religion and the Enlightenment were compatible and Dr. Sorkin argues: “the Enlightenment was not only compatible with religious belief,” it actually generated new formulations of that belief. One goal that was a reflection of the

Acceptance and understanding into a persons society is one of the major goals that people strive to achieve. There is a natural tendency for the individual to be compelled to join the majority. Many times, however, a person will change themselves to fit into the group instead of having the group change itself for the person. This forces a person to take action, form opinions or adopt customs that do not reflect their own beliefs. Montaigne addresses the differences between two distinctly different forms of society in his essay Of Cannibals. Montaigne’s comparison between the recently discovered aborigines of the new world and his European society compels a person to reconsider what an ideal society should be. Should a natural state be the

In his essay “Of Cannibals”, Michel de Montaigne presents Native Americans as a mirror image of European racial and cultural superiority, placing their barbarous cannibalism in context in order to critique the widely-held belief of their inferiority. Montaigne’s comment on the European perception of Native Americans as uncivilized is ultimately undermined by the extreme nature of the arguments used in his critique.

With newfound challenges of the Renaissance, the Protestant Reformation, and the increase in the Enlightenment’s rationalism and liberalism, an undermining of the Church began to set forth a new era and problems for the Church that they tried to come back from. Reorganizing at Trent set a new grim determination for the Church that catapulted their morale against ideas of modern culture. The last of these increasing troubles being the French Revolution, after which an immense religious revival manifested into the conversion of the elite in Europe, and extended their reach to every corner of the world, but mostly focusing on the moral problems taking place in the 19th century influenced by the Industrial Revolution. In the 20th century, the Church’s opposition to modernism came to an end when Pope John XXIII, with extreme boldness, turned its back on four centuries of extreme

Importance of the Weaknesses of the French Crown in Explaining the Outbreak of the French Wars of Religion in 1562

A glint of good news came to the now-impoverished family when the merchant heard that a ship containing his merchandise had just arrived in port. The merchant was overjoyed and went to claim his wealth, only to find that there had been a legal ordeal and he had, indeed, lost it all. Here, the author tries to illustrate the French government’s inadequacy in meeting the needs of the people. In the 1850s, great minds, including the Swiss/French political philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, were writing that the authority to rule came from the people themselves. Furthermore, philosophers argued that the government’s duty was not to serve their own decadence but rather to serve the people. The French government, being an absolute monarchy, was ruled by only the word of Louis XV, and the royal Bourbon family had a history of ruling to meet their own selfish desires. The French monarchy did not uphold the intrinsic promise and duty of any government to protect, feed, and serve its people. De Beaumont symbolizes this by failing to deliver the goods to the impoverished former merchant. In other words, just like the merchant’s undelivered goods, the

This extract from Montaigne’s ‘Des Cannibales’ is found near the beginning of the essay. It is pivotal in setting the precedent for the rest of the essay since it establishes how Montaigne came to his viewpoints on the Tupinambá since they are different to those held by many of his contemporaries. When Montaigne wrote, people were only beginning to learn about other areas of the world. People on the whole had not travelled and so held ethnocentric views regarding culture. They failed to understand the people of the New World, thus labeled them as ‘sauvage’ and ‘barbare’ something which Montaigne challenges in this essay, and specifically sets out in this extract.

In regards to Montaigne 's statement on page 23 in Apology for Raymond Sebond, I would deduce that he was using the metaphor of nature and natural tendencies in opposition to man 's vain, self-seeking façade that displaces God the creator. Montaigne 's statement appears to (on the surface at least) value mans naturalistic tendencies and graces in a much better light than our own vain-striving presumptions that claim that our "competent utterances" hold the very answers to the "right" way in which to conduct oneself. Montaigne constantly uses the contrast of animals and humans with the former representing a more pure, natural existence that I assume is to be

Some people think that King Louis XIV did more harm to France than good. They cite his lack of moderation in managing his money. They also point out that Louis denied religious liberties to the Protestants of France and tightened control over his Roman Catholic subjects by revoking the Edict of Nantes. They also claim Louis’ war efforts were very costly and drained the treasury of France. Some say his arrogance, including his emblem of the “Sun King”, turned “his” people away from him. They think that Louis only cared about himself and what he wanted and didn’t think about future France.

The nobility of the Kingdom of France has been evaluated by various scholars of history. There is something to be said, however, for those who chronicled their impressions while living them in the 17th and 18th centuries. The excerpts of Charles Loyseau’s A Treatise on Orders, written in 1610, and Isabelle de Charriere’s The Nobleman, written in 1763 provide two very different glimpses on the French nobility from differing time periods. From these two accounts, it is clear that there was a marked shift in the way some viewed the nobility and their role in the operation of the French state. While Loyseau praises the nobility nearly wholeheartedly,

Michel de Montaigne was a writer of the French Renaissance who was as influential as he is unique. With his remarkable ability to write about himself in such a way where nothing is off limits, Montaigne manages to “pull the veil” off of individual consciousness. In the mind of Montaigne, every single emotion and thought is worth writing down. Montaigne is