(of ἀνθρώπους, a man, and φάγειν, to eat, Men-Eaters). That there have been, in almost all ages of the world, nations who have followed this barbarous practice, we have abundance of testimonies.

The Cyclops, the Lestrygons, and Scylla, are all represented in Homer as Anthropophagi, or man-eaters; and the female phantoms, Circe and the Sirens, first bewitched with a show of pleasure, and then destroyed. This, like the other parts of Homer's poetry, had a foundation in the manners of the times preceding his own. According to Herodotus, among the Essedonian Scythians, when a man's father died, the neighbours brought several beasts, which they killed, mixed up their flesh with that of the deceased, and made a feast. Among the Massagetae, when any person grew old, they killed him and ate his flesh; but if he died of sickness they buried him, esteeming him unhappy. The same author also assures us that several nations in the Indies killed all their old people and their sick, to feed on their flesh. He adds, that persons in health were sometimes accused of being sick, to afford a pretence for devouring them. According to Sextus Empiricus, the first laws that were made were for the preventing of this barbarous practice, which the Greek writers represent as universal before the time of Orpheus.

Of the practice of anthropophagy in later times, we have the testimonies of all the Romish missionaries who have visited the interior parts of Africa, and even some parts of Asia. When America was discovered, this practice was found to be almost universal, insomuch that se veral authors have supposed it to be occasioned through a want of other food, or through the indolence of the people to seek for it; though others ascribe its origin to a spirit of revenge.

It appears pretty certain, from Dr Hawkesworth's account of the voyages to the South Seas, that the inhabitants of the island of New Zealand, a country unfurnished with the necessaries of life, eat the bodies of their enemies. It appears also to be very probable, that both the wars and anthropophagy of these savages take their rise from irresistible necessity, and owe their continuance to the dreadful alternative of destroying each other by violence, or of perishing by hunger.

Mr Marsden informs us that this horrible custom is practised by the Battas, a people in the island of Sumatra. "They do not eat human flesh," says he, "as a means of satisfying the cravings of nature, owing to a deficiency of other food; nor is it sought after as a glutinous delicacy, as it would seem among the New Zealanders. The Battas eat it as a species of ceremony; as a mode of showing their detestation of crimes, by an ignominious punishment; and as a horrid indication of revenge and insult to their unfortunate enemies. The objects of this barbarous repast are the prisoners taken in war, and offenders convicted and condemned for capital crimes."

It may be said, that whether the dead body of an enemy be eaten or buried, is a matter perfectly indifferent. But whatever the practice of eating human flesh may be in itself, it certainly is relatively, and in its consequences, most pernicious. It manifestly tends to eradicate a principle which is the chief security of human life, and more frequently restrains the hand of the murderer than the sense of duty or the dread of punishment. Even if this horrid practice originates from hunger, still it must be perpetuated from revenge. Death must lose much of its horror among those who are accustomed to eat the dead; and where there is little horror at the sight of death, there must be less repugnance to murder.