MICHEL DE MONTAIGNE AND THE ESSAY OF CANNIBALS BY SILVIA RIZZETTO

INDEX: 1.Philosophy: An Introduction 2.Montaigne: Life and Works 3.Les Essais 4.Des Cannibales 5.Montesquieu: Persian Letters 6.Bibliography

1-2: Philosophy: An Introduction and Montaigne: Life and Works

The Philosophy is is the study of general and fundamental problems that questions the world and men, examines the meaning of human existence and aims to study the nature, defining the possibilities and limits of knowledge. Since the earliest, the human race puts itself in front of the limitations of his time, trying to overcome them with reason and logic. So, great minds from all over the world mark the course of history, influenced by their different fields of study, and one of these great minds of the modern era is undoubtedly Michel Eyquem de Montaigne, who analyzed himself to implement his studies through a Humanistic philosophy. Born in French Aquitaine on the family estate Chteau de Montaigne, not far from Bordeaux in 1533 from a merchant family, he spent his first 3 years with a nurse in a poor village to draw the boy close to the people and to the lifes conditions of the people, who need our help.

Since he was a child, he started to study humanistic subjects: he learned fluently Latin and ancient Greek besides French. He studied at the Oratory and graduated in law from Bordeaux. Montaigne embodies the ideal of the diplomatic intellectual, his career was brilliant and his rethoric well-cured but, in 1570, after his retire, he devoted himself to study and meditation, choosing the man as the focus of his main work: the Essays. Expounding some Greek classic authors as Plutarch, Seneca and Lucretius, Montaigne analyzed the human condition and everyday life with a talented introspection without prejudices. His plan was to remove the masks and artifices to reveal the true self. An unheard-of work based on sincerity and introspection, it was a portrait of a skeptic for which the doctrines too rigid and blind certainties were meant to be condemned. His influence was huge on French and Western philosophy. At the root of this attitude, some scholar focused on a certain laziness, natural in a spoiled man from an early age, and used to a quiet life. Some scholars also focused on philosophical motivations: for example, his stoicism could be linked with epicureanism and the skepticism could prelude to the Enlightenment period (it is certain that Montaigne was the teacher of the Enlightenment, long before Montesquieu and his Persian Letters). His point of view was strongly influenced by French Wars Of Religion between Catholics and Calvinists (Huguenots), with peaks of horror as the massacre of Huguenots in the "Night of St. Bartholomew" (1572) During the Wars, Montaigne, Catholic, acted as a moderator, he was highly respected by both the Catholic Henry III and the Protestant Henry of Navarre (a close friend to him) and later, in 1577, the latter became king of France, and appointed Montaigne gentilhomme de sa Chambre. Montaigne wrote the Essays with a clever and rhetorical technique: he intended to captivate and engage the reader, sometimes giving the impression of drifting into a flow of ideas from one topic to another, sometimes using a more structured style which aims to focus towards the didactic nature of his work, full of classics references because of his rich cultural background. The remarkable modernity of the evident ideas in the Essays, made them probably the most conspicuous work of French philosophy until the time of the Enlightenment. Their influence on French culture is still strong today.

3: Les Essais The Essays focus on the variety and the contrasts that animate them. There are some shorter (especially in Book I) that are only reading notes, but others are real philosophical stoic essays (<<Philosophize is to learn how to die>>, I, 20) or skeptical (Apology of Raymond Sebond , II, 12), full of personal confessions (About vanity, III, 9; About experience, III, 13). Sometimes, deceptive titles mask the bolder chapters: Tradition of the island of Ceos (II, 3) and discuss about the legitimacy of suicide; About the resemblance of children to their fathers (II, 37) is a criticism against the doctors while About the verses of Virgil (III, 5) hides the confessions of Montaigne about his experience of love and sexuality. Eventually, About carriages (III, 6) denounces the barbarity of the conquerors of the New World. The three editions of the Essais (1580, 1588 and 1595) represent very well the development of thought and art of Montaigne from the Renaissance, of which Montaigne makes own its tradition to display through writing their knowledge, resulting from old books a few anecdotes and digressions, to the Enlightment. For most aspects of the work of M., he may be the skeptical outcome of Renaissance culture. His reflection is emblematic of the profound crisis of European culture in the late sixteenth century: the discovery of the New World and its inhabitants, the fall of geocentrism, the critique of the principles of Aristotle, the innovations in medical and scientific field called for a revision of the old certainties and values passed on by tradition. In the Essais, he outlines a positive assessment of the skeptical position: the teaching of ancient skepticism supplies weapons to the controversy of M. against any presumption of reason, against dogmatism, against the claim asserted as universally valid scales that were actually related to certain historical conditions. The skepticism of M. wasnt fed by only Sextus Empiricus but also by the diversity of the manifestations of the human spirit, whose diversity was also attested by the readings of the ancient philosophers and the reports of the travelers and explorers over the peoples called "savages.. Pages in which in which M. detects the relativity of the concept of "barbarity" are popular, especially the ones about the customs of the peoples of the New World, so different from those in Europe, taken as a

measure of absolute judgments. Everyone defines barbarity - says M. everything is not in his customs and it seems that we have no other point of reference for the truth, and the reason that the example and idea of the opinions and practices of the country where we are. The stated objective of Montaigne was describing the man, and especially himself, with complete frankness, through the thought <<I am the object of my thought>>. Whatever was the subject, the goal was the self-knowledge, the evaluation of the own capability of judgment, the in-depth analysis of own inclinations. Beyond this unprecedented project, which reveales the tastes and opinions of a gentleman of the sixteenth century, as his most secret habits and his manias, Montaigne explains that <<Each man bears in himself the entire form of the human condition>> (III, 2) and exposes the implementation of the Socratic precept, "Know thyself" as the result of the enigmas of our condition, of the misery, vanity and inconstancy, but also the dignity. According to Montaigne, the variety and inconsistency are the fundamental characteristics of the human nature. For example, he wrote: <<I have never seen a monster or a miracle greater than myself>> (III, 11); describing his weak memory and his ability to solve problems or mediate conflicts without real emotional involvements, but also his disapproval of the search of a long-lasting fame, and his attempts to detach himself from temporal things for prepare himself to death. Humanist for his passion for ancient literature, Montaigne was Humanist in a philosophical sense, but also for his ideas of the human person and its respect. His writing show a cultural and modern relativism, recognizing that the laws, customs and religions of different human cultures can be equally valid. He judges negatively the conquest of the New World by Europeans, criticizing the sufferings of the natives of those lands: disgusted by the violent conflicts between Catholics and Protestants, takes inspiration by them, as already mentioned and, although he believes in God, he avoids to speculate about Its nature e between. Citing the case of Martin Guerre as an example, he supports that human beings cannot have a certain knowledge and rejected the general and

absolute claims and any form of dogma. This skepticism is better explained in the long essay "Apology of Raymond Sebond" (II, 12). According to Montaigne, we can't trust our thinking skills because they are spontaneously in us and we can't really control them; so, we have no reason to think ourselves as superior to the animals Speaking of his skepticism, it drives him in the direction of tolerance, notably for religious dissidents, witches, the same ones for who the torture was an established practice in 16th Century: Montaigne himself has serious doubts of confessions obtained thanks to it: they could be invented by the suspect only to avoid the pain. (On Coscience, II, 5) Montaigne considers marriage as necessary for the raising of the children but also disapproves the strong feeling of romantic love which he considers as damaging to freedom. He wrote, for example: "Marriage is like a cage, you can see the birds locked out trying furiously to get in, and those locked inside trying furiously to get out" (III, 5). About the childrens education, he prefers teaching the concrete experience than the abstract knowledge: <<For a son of a good family ... if we want him to be a prudential man and not only an erudite, it is necessary to choose a preceptor who had his head pretty well-done than full-well>> (I, 26). The remarkable modernity of the evident ideas in the Essays, made them probably the most conspicuous work of French philosophy until the time of the Enlightenment and, for that, their influence on French culture is still strong today.

4. Of Cannibals Des Cannibales, narrated from a real encounter of Montaigne in Rouen and written in the sixteenth century in the midst of religious wars and the expansion of Europe towards the New World, shows the comparison between the New World, varied and slightly paradoxical (the world beyond the so-called "Pillars of Hercules"), and the Old World, based on the habit of the Occidental tradition.

Starting from a historical excursus with the Pyrrhic War, Montaigne shows us the art of war of such distant worlds, both by location and by the mind, from France. It shows also the relativity of judgments and criticizes the European ethnocentrism. Montaigne applies himself to make a clear comparison of the two parties, saying that several evidences from people, sometimes unreliable but always useful, enriches the knowledge of the philosopher. Montaigne once had the pleasure of welcoming a stranger with an incomprehensible language and this match of ways of life completely different is the synthesis of the journey, its the desire to venture into unexplored worlds, discovering the differences without scorn is the first step to self-knowledge. Montaigne has presented with frankness the ars belli of people of the New World, which had its apotheosis in cannibalism: eating the enemy means to capture his intelligence, the enemys head hung at the entrance of the tent means the contempt of fear. Many right-thinking of Montaignes entourage found these habits vile practices, but Montaigne denounced these reactions of those who claimed as the only reason a mind grew on Greek philosophy. Even the modus vivendi of foreigners is a custom to be respected. "Civilization" and "barbarism" are thus relative concepts that can be easily reversed in each other; it seems that even the wildest people of America are also the most simple and pure of heart, capable of renewing the spirit of ancient golden age (on these issues, see the essay On Cannibals, I, 31, the new world "naive and child", see too III, 6). The lesson that can be drawn from the contemplation of the world and the study of history is that none of our opinions has strong roots and it is a mistake to try to base them on nature, so its pointless claiming to have the truth in hand. The skeptical position - also carried out with the regular comparison between man and animal in order to settle any differences between the two orders radical - joins in M. a cautious fideism, because God alone is able to show man recognized the truth: all apologetic arguments, in fact, are the same and only impress those who have the grace. Historically, the lesson is especially skeptical of M. who has had no luck, either directly or through the Sagesse of Charron.

The diffusion of the Essais was far-reaching and long-lasting, especially in France, England, Germany. In Italy, a first partial translation appeared in Ferrara (1590) and a complete in Venice (1633-34). The first step depicts the Indios in their rituals and habits, especially the fate they reserve to their enemies during the war as trophies; this practice is justified by extreme social vengeance (L.18). He observes, compares their customs and tries to acquire a maximum objectivity and freedom from prejudices. The second step sees Montaigne adopting the point of view of the Indios against the Portugueses that are seen as "the people of the other world,": they describe their atrocities, saying that "this kind of revenge should be more sour than theirs. and define the Europeans as more refined on cruelty. He says it's a pity that it wasn't Greeks or Romans discovering America because they would be able to civilize smoothly the Indios and making grow the good seeds of the Nature being in them. Equally wise his method both to report the rumors about the anthropophagy of an unknown Carribean tribe ( from that he coined the term cannibals) - used to demonize the Indios - and to think about the cases of anthropophagy reported during the French Wars of Religion. The Indios make a value judgment in torture and describe the Portugueses saying that they are "much greater masters in malice and they have many vices" This raises the question: who is the barbarian? Montaigne simply moves the problem of ethnocentrism, the point of view from the Barbarians to Europeans, leading then the way to the third part itself, which sees appearance of the pronoun "I" for Montaigne while the one "we" is referred to European and readers. He says that we wont be able to recognize our own barbarism and he highlights the fact that the Indians will kill and eat their enemies, while Europeans will torture them before killing them. Montaigne literally leads an anthropological fact to a higher level and, eventually, one of a major generalisation; some other elements of accusation are added, as for, still during the wars, the extraction, by Catholics, of the Huguenots' hearts and how they devour them out of hatred and disregard, unconcerned of the common origin and traditions.

Then, speaking of the Indios, he speak about us all because everyone defines barbarity everything is not in his customs. And even better, if the reasons of our customs would be deepened, we'll discover thet their bases are insubstantial and that they last because of the force of laws and example.

Analysis from line 1 to line 30

Theres a diptych or comparative description of the two war-like practices. (1-18) The first part allows Montaigne to establish his thesis. Barbarism is there to represent extreme vengeance. No modalisateur is used, there is therefore no judgment and no position. The tone of the speech is generalizing. He compares several Indios to Europeans, analyzing their primitive weapons and putting them in comparison with the Western ones, then he highlights their extreme attitude and fierce in battle adding that they dont know the feeling of fear. He later adopts their point of view to explain cannibalism as both a social interest and a symbolic interest: the prisoner is presented as a human being and Montaigne considers them as reasonable beings since they operate according to internal principles of their society; they respect their customs and they are rational, as stated in the phrase 'its not like you think." They are capable of rational judgment because they dont do it for food but for revenge, its a sort of ritual to strengthen the groups cohesion. Lines 18-30 speaks about the manners of Europe through the eyes of the Indians, which is a practice widely used in the eighteenth centurys literature. The expression "other world", takes its value: Montaigne put himself in their place to understand them, he describes the Portuguese in their practices of vengeance with an even more critical spirit, his judgment is clear and the Indios seem justified because they can discern right from wrong: they establish a hierarchical judgment of evil and "vices", showing that they have a moral concept of good and evil. Imitation of evil is thus explained

rationally and they are presented in their barbarity more human than Europeans. In the end, the contradictions. point of view refers to expose Europeans own

Montaigne reports that barbaric practices dont come from a distant past but from his contemporaries: the religious conflicts are the real barbarism The Europeans ethnocentrism can turn a blind eye, not seeing our mistakes and contradictions. 5. Montesquieu: Persian Letters Famous for his articulation of the theory of separation of powers, which is taken for granted in modern discussions of government and implemented in many constitutions throughout the world, Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de La Brde et de Montesquieu was born on 18 January 1689 at the Chteau de la Brde. Largely responsible for the popularization of the terms feudalism and Byzantine Empire he became counselor of the parliament of Bordeaux in 1716, after the death of an uncle from whom he inherited the office and the barony of Montesquieu, becoming later its president. In the same year he was elected member of the Academy of Bordeaux. Lived in Paris from 1721 to 1725, in 1726 he sold his president and, in 1728, he was elected member of the Acadmie franaise. He traveled to Austria, Italy, Germany, Holland, England, returned to France in 1731, from 1734 to the expectations his major work, De l'esprit des lois, which appeared in Geneva in 1748. His Persian Letters are worldwide recognized as a great example of foreigners point of view such as Montaigne done in his Essais, pointing out, as if it were necessary, the tight bond between the two works. The plot is around the experiences of two Persian noblemen, Usbek and Rica, who are traveling through France and sees, through their eyes, the differences between two, distant cultures. In a similar way to the one who Montaigne followed, he comments numerous aspects of Western, Christian society, particularly French politics and mores, ending with a biting satire of the System of John Law. Using the ploy of the epistolary novel, although this reference is not something he has done, Montesquieu writes down a social commentary through the words of

the two travelers, who have both their attitudes towards the different lifestyles they meet during the journey. The idea that the letters were actually written by Persians its a sort of a device Montesquieu uses to force us to see ourselves as others might see us, much as Montaigne does in his essay "On Cannibals.". This permits Montesquieu to criticize French ways responsibility for making that criticism in his own person. without taking

And this is the junction point between Montaigne and Montesquieu, the very one which chains together two otherwise different eras and authors. The indirect critique Montesquieu makes to European ways also permits him to portray his characters not only as men who are, in their own way, civilized, sophisticated, and capable of acute observations about European foibles but also as men who have distinct limitations, both morally and intellectually. Something which it could be applied to us too.