Flesh and Symbol: The History of Human Cannibalism

Introduction: The Cannibal as Act and Idea

The act of humans consuming the flesh of other humans, a practice known as anthropophagy, represents one of the most profound taboos in the modern world. It evokes visceral reactions of horror and is often relegated to the realm of monstrous myth or the desperate acts of those pushed beyond the brink of civilization. Yet, a comprehensive history of cannibalism reveals a subject of immense complexity, one that cannot be reduced to a single, monstrous caricature.

It is a history of a spectrum of human behaviors with profoundly different meanings across time and cultures. This report endeavors to trace this dual history: one of a real, albeit varied, set of human practices, and another of a powerful, persistent, and often weaponized myth.  

The very word “cannibal” is inextricably linked to the history of European colonialism. It entered the global lexicon in the late 15th century, derived from the Spanish term Caníbales or Caríbales, Christopher Columbus’s rendering of the name for the Kalinago or Island Carib people of the West Indies. Based on tales from their rivals, the Taíno, Columbus and subsequent European explorers labeled the Caribs as ferocious man-eaters. This accusation, whether based in fact, exaggeration, or misunderstanding, had immediate and devastating consequences.

It was used to construct a narrative of the “savage Other,” a being so fundamentally different and barbaric that their subjugation, enslavement, and exploitation were not only justified but framed as a civilizing mission. Thus, from its inception, the concept of the “cannibal” was as much a political and ideological tool as it was a descriptor of an act.  

To navigate this complex terrain, this report will first establish a clear typology of anthropophagy, distinguishing its various forms and motivations. It will then journey into deep time, examining the paleoanthropological evidence for cannibalism among our earliest hominin ancestors. Following this, it will explore well-documented cases of institutionalized cannibalism, where the practice was integrated into the social and ritual fabric of societies in regions like New Guinea, Mesoamerica, and Oceania.

A critical section will then deconstruct the idea of the cannibal as a colonial myth, analyzing how the accusation was wielded as a tool of empire and exposing the profound hypocrisy of practices like medicinal cannibalism in early modern Europe. Finally, the report will examine cannibalism at the extremes of human experience—as a last resort in the face of starvation and as a manifestation of individual pathology—before concluding with a reflection on the enduring power of the cannibal in the modern imagination. This structured approach aims to move beyond sensationalism to provide a nuanced, evidence-based understanding of one of humanity’s most challenging and revealing behaviors.

Part I: A Typology of Anthropophagy: Classifying the Unthinkable

To comprehend the multifaceted history of human cannibalism, it is essential to move beyond a monolithic definition and establish an analytical framework that can account for its diverse forms and motivations. Anthropological and archaeological scholarship has developed a typology that classifies the practice based on the relationship between the consumer and the consumed, and the underlying reasons for the act. This framework distinguishes between acts of love and acts of war, between sacred rituals and desperate survival, providing the necessary vocabulary to analyze the specific cases that follow.  

Fundamental Distinctions: Endocannibalism and Exocannibalism

The most fundamental distinction in the study of institutionalized cannibalism is between endocannibalism and exocannibalism.  

Endocannibalism refers to the consumption of an individual from within one’s own social group, such as kin, friends, or community members. Far from being an act of aggression, endocannibalism is most often a component of mortuary or funerary rites, driven by sentiments of love, grief, and respect. The primary motivation is often to ensure the continuity of the group and the spirit of the deceased.

By consuming parts of a loved one, the living were believed to incorporate their spirit, virtues, or life force, thus keeping them within the community and guiding their soul to the ancestral realm. A classic and well-documented example is that of the Fore people of Papua New Guinea, who consumed their deceased relatives as an act of mourning and to maintain a spiritual connection between the living and the dead.  

Exocannibalism, in stark contrast, is the consumption of outsiders, typically enemies captured in warfare or members of a rival group. This form is overwhelmingly associated with aggression, domination, revenge, and the humiliation of a vanquished foe. By eating an enemy, a warrior or community could demonstrate ultimate power over them, absorb their strength and courage, and prevent their spirit from taking revenge. This practice has been documented among numerous groups, including the Tupinambá of Brazil, the Aztecs of Mesoamerica, and the Māori of New Zealand, for whom it was a calculated expression of power and a means of settling grievances.  

A Motivational Framework for Cannibalism

Beyond the in-group/out-group distinction, cannibalism can be further classified by its primary motivation. These categories are not always mutually exclusive, but they provide a crucial lens for understanding the context of the act.

Survival Cannibalism: This is perhaps the most widely understood form, involving the consumption of human flesh as a last resort in dire circumstances of famine, siege, or isolation, when all other food sources are exhausted. It is an act born of desperation, undertaken by people who would normally find the idea abhorrent. It often involves necro-cannibalism (eating those who are already dead), though in extreme cases it has led to homicidal acts to procure food. Well-known historical examples include European famines, the ill-fated Donner Party of 1846-47, the 1941-44 Siege of Leningrad, and the survivors of the 1972 Andes flight disaster.  

Ritual or Customary Cannibalism: This broad category encompasses socially sanctioned cannibalism that is integrated into a culture’s belief systems and ceremonies. It is not driven by hunger but by symbolic meaning. It includes:

• Mortuary/Funerary Cannibalism: As a form of endocannibalism, this practice is centered on death rituals. The Fore, for example, ate their dead as a sign of love and to prevent the body from being consumed by insects or rotting in the ground, which was considered a disrespectful fate.  
• Warfare Cannibalism: A form of exocannibalism where consuming the enemy is the ultimate expression of victory and domination. For the Māori, it was an integral part of the concept of utu (reciprocity, balance, revenge), and for some Fijian groups, it was an act of dining with the gods.  
• Sacrificial Cannibalism: This involves the consumption of victims of human sacrifice. Among the Aztecs, captives were sacrificed to deities, and their flesh, considered sacred, was consumed in a ritual act of communion between humans and the gods, meant to ensure cosmic renewal.  

Medicinal Cannibalism: This refers to the ingestion of human body parts—such as blood, fat, powdered bone, or dried tissue from mummies—for therapeutic purposes. This practice was surprisingly widespread in early modern Europe, reaching its peak in the 17th century, even as Europeans were condemning the “savage” cannibalism of the New World. Remedies containing human skulls were used for dysentery, and human blood was thought to treat epilepsy.  

Pathological Cannibalism: This form is not culturally sanctioned but is instead an aberrant act committed by isolated individuals, often linked to severe mental illness, psychopathy, or sexual paraphilias. It is viewed as a criminal and antisocial act within the perpetrator’s own society. Modern cases such as those of Jeffrey Dahmer, who sought to internalize his victims out of a fear of abandonment, and Armin Meiwes, who engaged in “consensual” cannibalism, fall into this category.  

Gastronomic Cannibalism: This is the most controversial and least documented category, referring to the routine, non-ritualistic consumption of human flesh purely for its taste or nutritional value. While there are scattered historical accounts, such as reports of human flesh being sold in markets in Melanesia or considered a delicacy in Yuan-dynasty China, most scholars argue that institutionalized gastronomic cannibalism has been exceptionally rare, if it ever existed as a stable, socially accepted practice at all.  

The following table provides a comparative framework to synthesize these complex classifications.

Type of Cannibalism	Primary Motivation(s)	Relationship to Consumed	Social Context	Key Examples
Endocannibalism (Mortuary)	Grief, love, respect, spiritual continuity, ancestral worship	In-group (kin, community members)	Socially sanctioned, ritualistic	Fore people (New Guinea) , Wari’ people (Brazil)
Exocannibalism (Warfare/Sacrificial)	Domination, revenge, humiliation, absorption of power, religious communion	Out-group (enemies, captives, sacrificial victims)	Socially sanctioned, ritualistic	Aztecs (Mesoamerica) , Māori (New Zealand) , Tupinambá (Brazil) , Fiji
Survival Cannibalism	Starvation, extreme necessity	In-group or out-group (already dead or killed out of necessity)	Transgressive, situational, not socially sanctioned	Donner Party , Siege of Leningrad , Andes flight disaster
Medicinal Cannibalism	Therapeutic, healing	Out-group (executed criminals, mummified remains)	Socially sanctioned (in specific historical contexts)	Early Modern Europe (use of mummy, blood, fat)
Pathological Cannibalism	Psychological compulsion, sexual paraphilia, psychosis	Typically out-group (strangers)	Criminal, taboo, anti-social	Jeffrey Dahmer , Armin Meiwes , Albert Fish

The very act of creating such a typology reveals a fundamental tension in the study of cannibalism. The lines between these categories, while analytically useful, are often blurred in practice. Warfare cannibalism among the Māori was not merely an act of aggression but was deeply imbued with ritual significance related to the transfer of mana, or spiritual power. Survival cannibalism, as seen in the Andes crash, was not a chaotic frenzy but quickly developed its own set of rules and rituals to make the act psychologically manageable and socially justifiable among the survivors.

This demonstrates that these classifications are modern analytical constructs imposed upon diverse cultural logics. While they provide a necessary framework for understanding, they can also be a conceptual straitjacket, oversimplifying the complex interplay of belief, necessity, and power that motivated these acts. The history of cannibalism is not a neat collection of categories but a messy, overlapping continuum of human behavior.  

Part II: Echoes in Deep Time: Paleoanthropological Evidence

The history of cannibalism does not begin with written records or ethnographic accounts; its roots extend deep into the Pleistocene, predating our own species. The discovery of this behavior among our ancient relatives has been made possible by the rigorous science of paleoanthropology and taphonomy, which allows researchers to read the faint but telling stories left on fossilized bones. This deep-time evidence fundamentally challenges popular, progressive narratives of human evolution, demonstrating that a behavior we now consider the ultimate taboo was a recurring feature of the hominin lineage for hundreds of thousands of years.

Reading the Bones: The Science of Taphonomy

Identifying cannibalism in the archaeological record is not a matter of speculation. It relies on a specific set of diagnostic criteria, developed by researchers like Tim White, that allow for the differentiation between marks made by human tools, animal predators, and natural geological processes. The key is to demonstrate that human remains were processed in a manner identical to that of butchered animal fauna found at the same site. The primary indicators include:  

• Cut marks: Fine, linear striations left on bone surfaces by the sharp edges of stone tools, indicating defleshing or disarticulation.  
• Percussion marks: Notches, pits, and impact fractures resulting from the deliberate breaking of long bones with hammerstones to access the nutrient-rich marrow inside.  
• Burning patterns: Evidence that human bones were cooked in a manner consistent with animal bones from the same context.  
• “Pot polish”: A distinctive sheen on bones that results from being boiled in a ceramic vessel, though this is more relevant to later periods with pottery.  
• Anatomical representation: A conspicuous absence of certain bones (like skulls or long bones) that are rich in nutritional content, suggesting they were removed for consumption.
• Human bite marks: Considered the most definitive evidence, these marks show that human teeth were used to consume the flesh from the bones.  

When these features appear systematically on human remains and mirror the treatment of game animals at the same archaeological level, the inference of cannibalism becomes scientifically robust.  

Case Study: Homo antecessor at Gran Dolina, Spain

The Gran Dolina cave site in the Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain, holds the earliest definitive evidence of human cannibalism, dating back approximately 850,000 years. The remains belong to  

Homo antecessor, a hominin species believed to be a common ancestor to both Neanderthals and modern humans. The evidence from Gran Dolina is remarkable not for a single act, but for its systematic and repeated nature over time, suggesting that cannibalism was an institutionalized and recurring behavior.  

Archaeologists have unearthed the remains of numerous individuals, including adults, adolescents, and even toddlers as young as two years old. The bones exhibit a chilling array of modifications: precise cut marks indicative of deliberate decapitation and defleshing, intentional fracturing of long bones for marrow extraction, and in some cases, human bite marks. Crucially, these human remains were found intermingled with the bones of butchered animals and show identical processing patterns, leading researchers to conclude that these hominins were “processed like any other prey”.

The motivation for this practice is debated, but the evidence points towards a combination of nutritional gain—simple “meat exploitation”—and a more strategic purpose, possibly related to territorial control and competition with other hominin groups or large carnivores like hyenas, whose remains are also found in the cave.  

Case Study: The Neanderthal Enigma

For a long time, Neanderthals were cast as primitive savages, and evidence of their cannibalism was used to support this caricature. Today, a more nuanced picture has emerged from multiple sites across Europe, including Moula-Guercy in France, Krapina in Croatia, Goyet in Belgium, and El Sidrón in Spain. These sites confirm that Neanderthals did practice cannibalism, but the reasons why remain a subject of intense scholarly debate.  

Some evidence strongly suggests survival cannibalism. At Baume Moula-Guercy, the 120,000-year-old remains of six Neanderthals show clear signs of butchery. Analysis of the site’s environmental layers indicates that their consumption coincided with a rapid climate warming event that decimated the large mammal populations (like bison and mammoth) that Neanderthals typically hunted. The local fauna shifted to smaller animals, rodents, and reptiles, and analysis of the Neanderthals’ own tooth enamel reveals stress lines indicative of severe malnutrition. Similarly, remains from El Sidrón in Spain show cut marks and broken bones for marrow extraction, and the teeth show signs of periods of starvation. This suggests that in some cases, Neanderthals resorted to eating their own kind out of desperation to survive.  

However, the survival hypothesis does not explain all cases. At other sites, such as Goyet in Belgium, cannibalized Neanderthal remains were found processed in the same way as the plentiful horse and reindeer bones discovered alongside them. This challenges the idea that they were starving and opens the door to other interpretations:  

• Ritual Cannibalism: At Krapina, some skulls bear strange, consistent markings that do not align with butchery for brain or muscle removal. This has led some researchers to hypothesize that these marks represent a form of ritualistic de-fleshing as part of a mortuary practice, suggesting the cave may have been a sacred or ceremonial site rather than just a diner.  
• Aggressive or Gustatory Cannibalism: If not for survival, then perhaps Neanderthals practiced exocannibalism on rival groups as a strategy to eliminate competition and gain resources. Some researchers have even speculated that it may have become a long-standing gustatory tradition in some groups, passed down through generations.  

The existence of cannibalism in our deep evolutionary past fundamentally disrupts the simplistic, linear narrative of human progress from “savagery” to “civilization.” The systematic practice among Homo antecessor and the varied, context-dependent cannibalism of Neanderthals show that this behavior is not a late-stage anomaly but a recurring element within the hominin behavioral repertoire. It forces us to confront the reality that actions we deem taboo today may have been adaptive strategies or integrated social practices for our ancient relatives.

This evidence shatters the binary of “savage” versus “civilized” and suggests that the capacity for such acts is deeply rooted in our shared evolutionary history. The critical question shifts from “who were these monsters?” to “what ecological, social, or symbolic pressures made this a viable, and at times necessary, behavior?”

Part III: The Rites of Flesh: Institutionalized Cannibalism in Human Societies

Moving from the deep past to the ethnographic present, a number of societies have historically practiced cannibalism not as a desperate measure or a pathological act, but as an institutionalized and meaningful part of their cultural fabric. In these contexts, the consumption of human flesh was governed by strict rules and imbued with profound symbolic weight. Whether an expression of grief, a form of communion with the divine, or the ultimate act of vengeance, institutionalized cannibalism was always more than a meal; it was a medium for communicating core cultural ideas about life, death, spirit, and power.

Endocannibalism as Grief and Continuity: The Fore of New Guinea

Among the Fore people of the Eastern Highlands of Papua New Guinea, endocannibalism was practiced as an act of love and mourning. This form of mortuary cannibalism was a central part of their grieving process. When a person died, their relatives would consume their body to show respect and affection, believing it was a far better fate than being left to rot in the ground or be eaten by worms. The practice was deeply tied to concepts of social and spiritual continuity; by consuming the deceased, the living incorporated the person’s “life force” back into the hamlet, ensuring their spirit remained with the community and was guided into the bodies of their descendants.  

This ritual was distinctly gendered. Fore men, believing that consuming human flesh would weaken them in battle, generally partook sparingly, if at all. It was primarily the women and children who consumed the body, and particularly the brain, which was considered a delicacy. This cultural practice had a devastating and unforeseen biological consequence: the spread of a fatal neurodegenerative prion disease known as  

Kuru. Kuru, which means “to shake” or “tremble” in the Fore language, is a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, clinically similar to Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (CJD). The prions, infectious misfolded proteins, are most concentrated in nervous tissue, especially the brain. The epidemic, which peaked in the 1950s, is believed to have originated from a single individual who spontaneously developed CJD around the turn of the 20th century. When this person’s brain was consumed during their funeral rites, the disease began its deadly transmission cycle through the Fore’s mortuary practices.  

The link between Kuru and funerary cannibalism was established through the groundbreaking research of scientists like D. Carleton Gajdusek and anthropologist Shirley Lindenbaum in the mid-20th century. Their work not only solved the mystery of the disease but also provided one of the most conclusive cases of institutionalized cannibalism. Following the establishment of this link, Australian colonial authorities and Christian missionaries worked to end the practice, and by the mid-1960s, rates of Kuru began to decline dramatically.  

Exocannibalism as Power, Revenge, and Ritual

While endocannibalism was an act of incorporation and love, exocannibalism was an act of aggression and power, directed at those outside the social group.

The Aztecs of Mesoamerica

Aztec cannibalism was inextricably bound to their practice of large-scale human sacrifice, a central pillar of their state religion and cosmology. According to Aztec belief, the gods had sacrificed themselves to create the world, and human sacrifice was a necessary act of reciprocity to nourish them—particularly the sun god Huitzilopochtli—and ensure the continued existence of the cosmos.  

Victims were typically prisoners of war captured from enemy states. After being ritually sacrificed atop the great pyramids, often by having their hearts extracted, their bodies were not simply discarded. The flesh of the victim was considered sacred, a manifestation of the god to whom they were sacrificed. It was cooked and consumed by nobles, warriors, and other important members of the community in a solemn, ceremonial feast. This was not a daily meal to supplement their diet but a profound act of religious communion—eating the flesh of the victim was akin to eating the god itself.  

Archaeological evidence from sites like the Templo Mayor in Mexico City provides stark confirmation of these accounts. Discoveries include the sacrificial stones (téchcatl) upon which victims were stretched, obsidian and flint sacrificial knives, and massive skull racks (tzompantli) displaying the heads of the sacrificed. Human remains found in association with these structures bear cut marks consistent with dismemberment and defleshing.

While a minority of scholars have argued that Aztec cannibalism was primarily driven by a need for protein in their diet or that the accounts are entirely Spanish propaganda to justify the conquest , the overwhelming weight of evidence from archaeology, iconography, and ethnohistorical sources points to a deeply embedded, highly complex system of ritual and sacrificial cannibalism at the heart of Aztec society.  

The Māori of New Zealand

In traditional Māori society, warfare cannibalism, known as kai tangata (“eat man”), was a customary and feared aspect of inter-tribal conflict. This was a pure form of exocannibalism, practiced exclusively on enemies slain in battle. The motivations were not nutritional but were deeply rooted in the cultural concepts of  

utu and mana.

Utu is a complex principle of reciprocity, balance, and justice. If a person or group was wronged, utu demanded that the balance be restored, often through an act of revenge. Consuming an enemy was the ultimate form of utu, inflicting the greatest possible humiliation and degradation upon them and their kin.  

Mana refers to a person’s spiritual power, authority, and prestige. It was believed that by consuming parts of a powerful enemy warrior, the victor could absorb their mana, enhancing their own power and diminishing that of the enemy’s group. The practice was a symbolic assertion of dominance, with the bones of the consumed sometimes fashioned into fishhooks or other utensils as a final, enduring insult.  

The Tupinambá of Brazil

Much of what is known about Tupinambá cannibalism comes from the dramatic, and often sensationalized, 16th-century accounts of European captives, most famously the German gunner Hans Staden. According to these sources, the Tupinambá practiced a highly ritualized form of exocannibalism directed at their enemies. Captives were reportedly taken in battle and held for a period, sometimes being treated well, before being ritually executed in a public ceremony.

The act was a means of enacting revenge for past grievances against the enemy’s group and was central to the social and political life of Tupinambá warriors. The accounts of Staden, along with those of André Thevet and Jean de Léry, were instrumental in shaping the European imagination, contributing to the enduring and dualistic myth of the “savage cannibal” and the “noble savage”.  

These cases demonstrate that institutionalized cannibalism, far from being a simple act of eating, operated within a complex cultural logic. It was a symbolic language through which societies articulated their most profound beliefs about social relationships, spiritual power, and the cosmic order. To dismiss these practices as mere savagery is to ignore their intricate functions and meanings within their own worlds, a failure to engage with the very challenge that cannibalism poses to cultural relativism.  

Part IV: The Cannibal as Colonial Myth

While the physical act of anthropophagy has a real and documented history, the idea of the cannibal has arguably had a far greater impact on the world. This idea, born in the crucible of colonial encounter, quickly became a potent myth—a tool used to define, dehumanize, and dominate non-European peoples. A critical examination of this history reveals that the figure of the cannibal often says more about the accusers than the accused, highlighting a profound hypocrisy at the heart of the European colonial project.

Inventing the “Cannibal”: Columbus, the Caribs, and Colonial Policy

The word “cannibal” and its associated imagery of savagery were born of a misunderstanding that served a colonial purpose. In his diaries from his first voyage in 1492, Christopher Columbus recorded stories from the Taíno people of Hispaniola about their aggressive neighbors, whom he called the “Caniba” or “Carib,” believing them to be subjects of the Great Khan of Asia. He noted their reputation as man-eaters, likely misinterpreting or embellishing accounts of inter-island warfare.  

This labeling had immediate and catastrophic consequences. In 1503, Queen Isabella of Spain issued a decree that, while generally forbidding the enslavement of indigenous peoples, made a specific exception for “a people called cannibals,” who could be captured and enslaved for resisting Christianity and eating human flesh. This royal edict created a powerful economic and political incentive for colonists to apply the “cannibal” label to any indigenous group that resisted Spanish authority or occupied desirable land. The term was transformed from a dubious ethnographic observation into a legal justification for violence and exploitation. As a result, the accusation of cannibalism became a self-fulfilling prophecy and a key piece of propaganda in the conquest of the Americas.  

The “Man-Eating Myth” Debate: Did Customary Cannibalism Even Exist?

The role of cannibalism as a colonial trope led to a major scholarly reckoning in the 20th century, spearheaded by anthropologist William Arens’s provocative 1979 book, The Man-Eating Myth. Arens mounted a radical critique, arguing that there was no reliable, first-hand, verifiable eyewitness evidence for the existence of socially sanctioned, customary cannibalism anywhere in the world, at any time. He systematically deconstructed famous accounts, such as Hans Staden’s narrative of his time with the Tupinambá, highlighting logical contradictions and the likelihood of fabrication.  

Arens’s central thesis was that the accusation of cannibalism is a “universal phenomenon” used by virtually all societies to define themselves against a “savage” Other. By conjuring an image of an opposite culture that breaks the most fundamental taboos, a society reinforces its own sense of identity and moral superiority. He argued that anthropologists, inheriting a colonial mindset, had uncritically accepted these accusations, eager to study and explain the “primitive” customs of the peoples they studied without first rigorously proving the customs existed.  

Arens’s book was met with a firestorm of controversy. Many anthropologists and archaeologists rejected his sweeping dismissal of all evidence as a form of denialism that ignored a vast body of ethnographic and, especially, archaeological data. However, his work had a lasting and valuable impact, forcing the discipline to confront the deep-seated colonial biases in its historical sources and to apply a much more critical lens to any claims about cannibalism. The debate he ignited underscored that any account of cannibalism, particularly one recorded by an outsider, must be examined not only for what it says about the accused, but for what it reveals about the political and cultural motivations of the accuser.  

The Complication of New Evidence: The Carib Skull Study

While the “cannibal as propaganda” framework has been influential, the story remains complex. A 2020 study published in Scientific Reports used 3D morphometric analysis on over 100 ancient skulls from the Caribbean. The results upended previous assumptions about migration patterns, suggesting that a group identifiable as Carib had indeed migrated much farther north than previously believed, reaching Hispaniola, Jamaica, and the Bahamas by around A.D. 1000.  

This finding does not prove that the Caribs practiced cannibalism. However, it lends new credibility to Columbus’s reports that the Taíno people he encountered were in active conflict with these specific invaders. It suggests that his accounts, while filtered through his own biases and expectations, may have been based on a real and violent inter-group dynamic. This complicates a simple dismissal of the historical records as pure fabrication and highlights the ongoing need to integrate archaeological science with critical analysis of historical texts.  

Europe’s Hypocritical History: Medicinal Cannibalism

Perhaps the most glaring evidence of the cannibal idea as a construct of Othering is the widespread practice of medicinal cannibalism within Europe itself. During the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries—the very period when Europeans were decrying the “savagery” of New World cannibals—many Europeans, including royalty, priests, and scientists, were routinely consuming remedies containing human body parts.  

This “corpse medicine” included ingredients like powdered human skull, often taken with chocolate to treat apoplexy or headaches; human fat, used in ointments; and, most prized of all, mummia, a powder made from ground-up ancient Egyptian mummies, believed to be a panacea for a host of ailments. Human blood, fresh from the executioner’s block, was considered a potent remedy for epilepsy. This practice continued in some forms into the 19th century, with pharmaceutical catalogs still listing mummy as late as 1910.  

This history reveals a profound cognitive dissonance. The consumption of human flesh was framed as medicinal, rational, and “civilized” when practiced by Europeans, but as barbaric, irrational, and “savage” when practiced by non-Europeans for ritual or warfare purposes. The term “cannibal” was never applied to the European consumers of corpse medicine.

This demonstrates that “cannibalism” functions as a floating signifier: its meaning is not inherent in the act of eating human flesh but is assigned based on the power dynamics of who is doing the eating and who is doing the labeling. The term was a tool for creating a moral and political boundary between the “civilized” self and the “savage” Other, a boundary that was essential to the ideology of colonialism.  

Part V: Beyond the Pale: Cannibalism as a Last Resort and a Pathology

While some societies integrated cannibalism into their cultural fabric, its more common appearance in the historical record is as a profound transgression, an act committed at the absolute extremes of human experience. These instances fall into two broad categories: survival cannibalism, where the social contract is broken under the immense pressure of starvation, and pathological cannibalism, where the transgression stems from the fractured psyche of an individual. Both serve as powerful, albeit disturbing, explorations of the boundaries of social norms, biological imperatives, and individual autonomy.

Survival Cannibalism: When the Taboo is Broken

Famine cannibalism, the consumption of human flesh in situations of extreme necessity, has occurred throughout history and across cultures where the practice is otherwise abhorred. These are not acts of cultural choice but of biological imperative.  

Famine and Siege

• The Great Famine of 1315-1317: A catastrophic period of climate change in the early 14th century, marked by relentless rain and cold summers, led to successive crop failures across Northern Europe. The resulting famine was so severe that it killed millions, leading to mass death, disease, and social collapse. Chronicles from the time document extreme desperation, with people eating their own children, digging up freshly buried corpses, and consuming the bodies of executed criminals.  
• The Siege of Leningrad (1941-1944): During World War II, the German army’s 872-day siege of Leningrad was a deliberate policy of extermination through starvation. As food supplies dwindled to nothing, the city’s residents were reduced to eating wallpaper paste, leather, and eventually, human flesh. The horror became so commonplace that the Russian language developed a distinction between   trupoyedstvo (corpse-eating, i.e., necro-cannibalism) and the more heinous lyudoyedstvo (people-eating, which implied murder for food). The theft of a ration card became an act of murder, as it condemned the victim to starvation. Over a million civilians perished in what remains the most lethal siege in modern history.  

Stranded: Modern Case Studies

• The Donner Party (1846-1847): This group of American pioneers heading for California became trapped by heavy snows in the Sierra Nevada mountains. As their food ran out, they consumed their pack animals, their pet dogs, and even boiled rawhide hides into a glue-like substance. Finally, faced with certain death, the survivors began to eat the bodies of those who had succumbed to starvation and cold. The diary of survivor Patrick Breen provides a chilling, contemporary account of the group’s descent into desperation, though he is notably reticent on the details of cannibalism. Accounts from rescuers and other survivors confirmed the practice, which became a sensational and cautionary tale of the American West.  
• Uruguayan Air Force Flight 571 (1972): When a chartered plane carrying a Uruguayan rugby team crashed high in the Andes, the survivors faced a similar ordeal. Stranded for 72 days in freezing conditions, their meager food supplies quickly ran out. After hearing on a transistor radio that the official search had been called off, they were forced to make a collective, agonizing decision to consume the flesh of their deceased friends and teammates to stay alive. The survivors, mostly devout Catholics, rationalized the act not as cannibalism but as a form of communion, akin to the Eucharist. They felt they were taking the bodies of their friends into their own so that they might live on, a sentiment the families of the deceased later accepted. This conscious reframing was crucial to their psychological survival.  

Pathological Cannibalism: The Criminal Mind

Distinct from both ritual and survival cannibalism is the pathological form, which is not driven by culture or necessity but by individual psychological compulsion. These acts are almost always linked with serial murder, sexual fantasies, and severe personality disorders, and are condemned as monstrous within the perpetrator’s own society.  

• Case Study: Jeffrey Dahmer (The Milwaukee Cannibal): Dahmer murdered and dismembered seventeen men and boys between 1978 and 1991. His crimes frequently involved necrophilia and cannibalism. Psychological analysis revealed that his motivations were not primarily sadistic but stemmed from a profound personality disorder and an overwhelming fear of abandonment. He attempted to create “zombies” by drilling holes into his victims’ skulls and pouring in acid, hoping to render them permanently submissive. When this failed, he killed them and consumed parts of their bodies, later stating that he did so in an attempt to make them a permanent part of himself, so they could never leave him. Diagnosed with borderline and schizotypal personality disorders, his case highlights a form of cannibalism driven by a desperate and twisted need for connection and possession.  
• Case Study: Armin Meiwes (The Rotenburg Cannibal): This German case from 2001 presents a unique and legally confounding scenario of “consensual cannibalism”. Meiwes, who harbored a lifelong fantasy of consuming another person to cure his intense loneliness, posted an advertisement on the internet seeking a willing victim. He was answered by Bernd Brandes, an engineer who shared a corresponding fantasy of being eaten. The two met, and Brandes gave his full, repeated, and videotaped consent to be killed and consumed. The case created a legal conundrum in Germany, which, like most countries, had no specific law against cannibalism. Meiwes was eventually convicted of murder, but the case powerfully tested the limits of legal and philosophical principles of consent and bodily autonomy.  

These extreme cases, both of survival and pathology, probe the very foundations of the social contract. Survival cannibalism reveals how the biological imperative to live can override our most deeply ingrained social taboos, forcing groups to improvise new, micro-social contracts to manage the unthinkable. Pathological and consensual cannibalism, on the other hand, pushes modern liberal ideals of individual autonomy to their breaking point. They pose the deeply uncomfortable question: in a society that values consent above all, where does an individual’s right to self-determination end, and society’s right to enforce its most fundamental taboos begin? These are not merely grisly stories; they are natural experiments that expose the fragile boundaries of our moral, legal, and social worlds.

Conclusion: The Enduring Power of the Cannibal

The history of cannibalism is a study in contrasts: a practice that has been both a sacred act of love and the ultimate expression of hatred; a desperate means of survival and a tool of colonial oppression; a real, documented human behavior and a powerful, persistent myth.

Over the centuries, institutionalized cannibalism has largely vanished from the globe, a decline driven by a confluence of factors including the suppression by colonial powers, the influence of Christian missionaries, and the inexorable spread of globalized Western norms that hold the practice as the ultimate taboo. As the actual practice receded into the remote past or the world’s most isolated corners, its power as a symbol—a marker for the absolute limit of acceptable human behavior—only intensified.  

In the modern imagination, the cannibal has been unmoored from its specific ethnographic contexts and repurposed as a potent and mutable cultural metaphor, particularly in literature and film. The figure has migrated from the colonial frontier to the heart of the modern world, where it serves to articulate contemporary anxieties. In films like  

Soylent Green or the novel Tender is the Flesh, cannibalism becomes a stark critique of consumer capitalism, a literalization of a society that devours its own people. In the “hillbilly horror” subgenre, exemplified by  

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, the cannibal represents an atavistic, rural decay, a terrifying regression from modernity into pre-industrial savagery. Perhaps most famously, the character of Hannibal Lecter in  

The Silence of the Lambs completely inverts the colonial stereotype. He is not a primitive savage but a hyper-civilized, aristocratic monster whose cannibalism is an expression of a superior, amoral intellect and refined taste, a terrifying fusion of high culture and primal transgression.  

Cannibalism, in both its real and imagined forms, continues to exert a profound fascination and horror because it forces a confrontation with the most fundamental questions of human existence. It challenges us to define what separates humans from animals, to question the stability of the “civilized” self, and to probe the limits of cultural understanding. The long, complex, and often brutal history of cannibalism is not merely a catalog of a forbidden act. It is a mirror reflecting our deepest fears about ourselves and our most potent strategies for defining others. It is, ultimately, a history of how we, as a species, have continually drawn and redrawn the precarious boundaries of humanity itself.  

Of course. I have verified the links, cleaned up the formatting, removed duplicates, and organized the citations into a standardized, alphabetized list.

---

Works Cited

• “850,000-Year-Old Remains Suggest Prehistoric Child Was Decapitated And Eaten By Its Own Kind.” IFLScience, July 4, 2025. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.iflscience.com/850000-year-old-remains-suggest-prehistoric-child-was-decapitated-and-eaten-by-its-own-kind-80164.
• Alimentarium. “Anthropophagy.” Alimentarium. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.alimentarium.org/en/fact-sheet/anthropophagy.
• “Ancient human relative cannibalized toddlers, 850,000-year-old neck bone reveals.” Live Science, July 1, 2025. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.livescience.com/archaeology/human-evolution/ancient-human-relative-cannibalized-toddlers-850-000-year-old-neck-bone-reveals.
• An investigation into the association between cannibalism and serial killers.” PubMed Central (PMC), National Library of Medicine, July 11, 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10360974/.
• “Armin Meiwes.” Wikipedia. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armin_Meiwes.
• Brown, Jennifer. Cannibalism in Literature and Film. Scribd. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.scribd.com/document/699284870/Cannibalism-in-Literature-and-Film-by-Jennifer-Brown.
• “Cannibal.” Etymonline. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.etymonline.com/word/cannibal.
• “Cannibal.” Merriam-Webster. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cannibal.
• “Cannibalism.” Anthropology – iResearchNet. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://anthropology.iresearchnet.com/cannibalism/.
• “Cannibalism.” Encyclopedia.com. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences-and-law/anthropology-and-archaeology/customs-and-artifacts/cannibalism.
• “Cannibalism in New Zealand.” Hardman Trust Directory. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://directory.hardmantrust.org.uk/fetch.php/browse/V69767/CannibalismInNewZealand.pdf.
• “Cannibalism in Oceania.” Wikipedia. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism_in_Oceania.
• “Cannibalism, Ritual, or both: The Neanderthal debate continues at Krapina Cave.” College of Liberal Arts Magazine, Colorado State University, July 2, 2025. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://magazine.libarts.colostate.edu/article/cannibalism-ritual-or-both-the-neanderthal-debate-continues-at-krapina-cave-in-croatia/.
• Cárdenas, Fabricio. “A decapitated child: new evidence of cannibalism in Atapuerca.” Ara, July 2, 2025. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://en.ara.cat/culture/decapitated-child-new-evidence-of-cannibalism-in-atapuerca_1_5454162.html.
• Conklin, Beth A. “Cannibalism.” Open Encyclopedia of Anthropology, May 21, 2019. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.anthroencyclopedia.com/entry/cannibalism.
• “Cross-Cultural Cannibalism Throughout Human History.” Digital Commons @ Cal Poly, 2011. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent?article=1107&context=socssp.
• “Decapitation of a child 850,000 years ago reveals new evidence of cannibalism at Atapuerca.” Archaeology Magazine, July 2, 2025. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://archaeologymag.com/2025/07/decapitation-of-a-child-850000-years-ago-atapuerca/.
• “Did the Donner Party really resort to cannibalism?” HISTORY, August 21, 2018. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.history.com/articles/did-the-donner-party-really-resort-to-cannibalism.
• “Donner Party.” Wikipedia. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donner_Party.
• “Donner and Reed Wagon Train Incident.” National Park Service. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.nps.gov/cali/learn/historyculture/donner-reed-party.htm.
• The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Cannibalism.” Britannica. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.britannica.com/topic/cannibalism-human-behavior.
• The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Donner party.” Britannica. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Donner-party.
• Enrich, David. “Cannibalism: The Andes flight disaster, 50 years later.” EL PAÍS English, October 14, 2022. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://english.elpais.com/international/2022-10-14/the-andes-flight-disaster-50-years-later.html.
• “Evidence of Neanderthal cannibalism found in Spanish cave.” HeritageDaily, June 29, 2023. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.heritagedaily.com/2023/06/evidence-of-neanderthal-cannibalism-found-in-spanish-cave/147832.
• “Exocannibalism.” Wikipedia. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exocannibalism.
• Geggel, Laura. “Columbus’ Claims of Cannibal Raids May Have Been True After All.” Live Science, January 15, 2020. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.livescience.com/are-columbus-carib-cannibal-claims-true.html.
• Gershon, Livia. “Europe’s Hypocritical History of Cannibalism.” Smithsonian Magazine, April 22, 2022. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/europes-hypocritical-history-of-cannibalism-42642371/.
• “Great Famine of 1315–1317.” Wikipedia. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_of_1315%E2%80%931317.
• Harding, Luke. “Victim of Cannibal Agreed to be Eaten.” The Guardian, December 4, 2003. (Excerpt via Loyola University Maryland). Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.loyola.edu/_media/department/catholic-social-thought/documents/Lecture%20Handout.pdf.
• “History Re-written: Christopher Columbus and the cannibals.” Florida Museum, May 2, 2019. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/history-re-written-christopher-columbus-and-the-cannibals/.
• “How brutal was it during the great famine of 1315-1317?” Reddit, r/history, November 2018. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.reddit.com/r/history/comments/9vigdz/how_brutal_was_it_during_the_great_famine_of/.
• “Human cannibalism.” Wikipedia. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_cannibalism.
• “Human sacrifice in Aztec culture.” Wikipedia. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Aztec_culture.
• Isaac, Gwyneira. “The European Invention of Aztec Human Sacrifice.” Museum of Anthropology at UBC, August 2, 2022. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://moa.ubc.ca/the-european-invention-of-aztec-human-sacrifice/.
• “Jeffrey Dahmer.” Wikipedia. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Dahmer.
• Jones, Sarah E. “Cannibalism, Consumerism, Colonialism and Love in Contemporary Western Media.” Master’s Thesis, James Madison University, 2020. JMU Scholarly Commons. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1018&context=rhettech.
• Kennedy, Lesley. “Flesh of the Gods: 10 Facts About Aztec Human Sacrifice.” History Hit, August 11, 2023. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.historyhit.com/flesh-of-the-gods-facts-about-aztec-and-human-sacrifice/.
• Krystal, K. Kris. “Cannibalism: Archaeological and Anthropological Studies.” ThoughtCo, August 2, 2019. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.thoughtco.com/cannibalism-definition-170317.
• “Kuru (disease).” Wikipedia. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuru_(disease.
• Lindenbaum, Shirley. “Cultural factors that affected the spatial and temporal epidemiology of kuru.” Royal Society Open Science, December 6, 2017. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.160789.
• Lloyd, Nathaniel. “Anthropophagi: The Myth of Cannibalism.” Historical Blindness, October 14, 2019. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.historicalblindness.com/blogandpodcast/anthropophagi-the-myth-of-cannibalism.
• MacDonald, James. The Great Famine: Europe’s Dark Years.” Medieval History, March 20, 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://historymedieval.com/the-great-famine-europes-dark-years/.
• Magueta, Sabrina. “Jeffrey Dahmer, also baptized by the media as the ‘Milwaukee Cannibal’…” University of Coimbra. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.uc.pt/site/assets/files/1265516/sabrinamagueta.pdf.
• McGinness, Anne B. “Christianity and Cannibalism: Three European Views of the Tupi in the Spiritual Conquest of Brazil, 1557-1563.” World History Connected, October 2010. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://worldhistoryconnected.press.uillinois.edu/7.3/mcginness.html.
• Miller, Richard W. “Chapter 5. Ritual Cannibalism: A Case Study of Socially-Sanctioned Group Violence.” In Toward a Theory of Peace: The Role of Moral Beliefs. Cornell University Press, 2017. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://cornellpress.manifoldapp.org/read/0a9c919e-58ef-4dde-affb-26ace8154b3a/section/242b3048-dd27-40ae-8042-e240202a5d8d.
• Morales, Jorge. “Scientist Just Learned Our Ancestors Ate Toddlers.” VICE, July 1, 2025. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.vice.com/en/article/scientist-just-learned-our-ancestors-ate-toddlers/.
• Park, Madison. “Neanderthals Were Cannibals, Study Confirms.” Live Science, December 23, 2010. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.livescience.com/1187-neanderthals-cannibals-study-confirms.html.
• Prut-Preuss, John-Paul. “Cannibalism, Consumerism, Colonialism and Love in Contemporary Western Media.” ResearchGate, May 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/370026965_Cannibalism-overview_and_medicolegal_issues.
• Rehn, Dana K. “Myth-Making in Cannibalistic Portrayals of Native Americans.” Dana K Rehn Blog, November 14, 2021. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://danakrehnblog.wordpress.com/2021/11/14/myth-making-in-cannibalistic-portrayals-of-native-americans/.
• Stewart, Charles. “Cannibalism in Early Jamestown.” Colonial Williamsburg Journal, Winter 2007. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://research.colonialwilliamsburg.org/Foundation/journal/Winter07/jamestown.cfm.
• “Study puts the ‘Carib’ in ‘Caribbean,’ boosting credibility of Columbus’ cannibal claims.” Florida Museum, January 10, 2020. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/carib-skulls-boost-credibility-of-columbus-cannibal-claims/.
• “The Man-Eating Myth.” Wikipedia. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man-Eating_Myth.
• “Tupinambá people.” Wikipedia. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupinamb%C3%A1_people.
• “Uruguayan Air Force Flight 571.” Wikipedia. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruguayan_Air_Force_Flight_571.
• “What is Cannibalism in Anthropology?” Anthroholic. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://anthroholic.com/cannibalism.
• Wilford, John Noble. “The Worst of Times.” The American Scholar, Spring 2000. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://theamericanscholar.org/the-worst-of-times/.
• Zink, Stephanie. “Cannibalism and Aztec Human Sacrifice.” Senior Project, University of Wisconsin, May 2008. Minds@UW. Accessed July 26, 2025. https://minds.wisconsin.edu/bitstream/handle/1793/37566/Zink,%20Stephanie%20-%20Cannibalism%20Aztec%20Human%20Sacrifice.pdf.