Seeing the word "cannibal" one might think of the stereotypical representation of an uncivilized, animalistic, barbaric and malicious creature that crawls in the shadows of the night, waiting for the moment to arrive just to feed on its prey. As theatrical as it may seem, this thought is common among most people. But what really makes someone a cannibal, beyond the basic act of eating human flesh? Must a cannibal be someone who lives a barbaric lifestyle, mangy in complexion and unaware of normal social mores, with cannibalism their normal mode of nourishment? Or if the act of cannibalism is caused by external forces, such as improper supplementation of food by one's government, does that automatically make that person as barbaric and evil in nature as a cannibal? Michel de Montaigne and Jonathan Swift both hold the contrasting view of cannibalism as behavior habitual to a barbaric lifestyle, with one author Montaigne sharing his second-hand experience with the natives of the New World in the area now known as Brazil. From the story of his trusted traveler Durand De Villegagnon, who spent twelve years with the natives in the New World, Montaigne proclaims that "there is nothing savage or barbaric in those people, but that every man calls barbaric everything to which he does not he's used to it." a” (Montaigne 61). Europeans harbored a negative prejudice towards the customs of the native peoples they encountered during exploration, just because they were different from their own. With this the Europeans declared that it was their duty to change the lives of the natives "for the better" by showing them how people should live, although blinded by their own ignorance they failed to realize that their way of life was more savage than that " savages” were trying to do so