The Gruesome History of Eating Corpses as Medicine
The question was not “Should you eat human flesh?” says one historian, but, “What sort of flesh should you eat?”
- By Maria Dolan
- Smithsonian.com, May 07, 2012, Subscribe
(Page 2 of 2)
The idea also wasn’t new to the Renaissance, just newly popular. Romans drank the blood of slain gladiators to absorb the vitality of strong young men. Fifteenth-century philosopher Marsilio Ficino suggested drinking blood from the arm of a young person for similar reasons. Many healers in other cultures, including in ancient Mesopotamia and India, believed in the usefulness of human body parts, Noble writes.
Even at corpse medicine’s peak, two groups were demonized for related behaviors that were considered savage and cannibalistic. One was Catholics, whom Protestants condemned for their belief in transubstantiation, that is, that the bread and wine taken during Holy Communion were, through God’s power, changed into the body and blood of Christ. The other group was Native Americans; negative stereotypes about them were justified by the suggestion that these groups practiced cannibalism. “It looks like sheer hypocrisy,” says Beth A. Conklin, a cultural and medical anthropologist at Vanderbilt University who has studied and written about cannibalism in the Americas. People of the time knew that corpse medicine was made from human remains, but through some mental transubstantiation of their own, those consumers refused to see the cannibalistic implications of their own practices.
Conklin finds a distinct difference between European corpse medicine and the New World cannibalism she has studied. “The one thing that we know is that almost all non-Western cannibal practice is deeply social in the sense that the relationship between the eater and the one who is eaten matters,” says Conklin. “In the European process, this was largely erased and made irrelevant. Human beings were reduced to simple biological matter equivalent to any other kind of commodity medicine.”
The hypocrisy was not entirely missed. In Michel de Montaigne’s 16th century essay “On the Cannibals,” for instance, he writes of cannibalism in Brazil as no worse than Europe’s medicinal version, and compares both favorably to the savage massacres of religious wars.
As science strode forward, however, cannibal remedies died out. The practice dwindled in the 18th century, around the time Europeans began regularly using forks for eating and soap for bathing. But Sugg found some late examples of corpse medicine: In 1847, an Englishman was advised to mix the skull of a young woman with treacle (molasses) and feed it to his daughter to cure her epilepsy. (He obtained the compound and administered it, as Sugg writes, but “allegedly without effect.”) A belief that a magical candle made from human fat, called a “thieves candle,” could stupefy and paralyze a person lasted into the 1880s. Mummy was sold as medicine in a German medical catalog at the beginning of the 20th century. And in 1908, a last known attempt was made in Germany to swallow blood at the scaffold.
This is not to say that we have moved on from using one human body to heal another. Blood transfusions, organ transplants and skin grafts are all examples of a modern form of medicine from the body. At their best, these practices are just as rich in poetic possibility as the mummies found in Donne and Shakespeare, as blood and body parts are given freely from one human to another. But Noble points to their darker incarnation, the global black market trade in body parts for transplants. Her book cites news reports on the theft of organs of prisoners executed in China, and, closer to home, of a body-snatching ring in New York City that stole and sold body parts from the dead to medical companies. It’s a disturbing echo of the past. Says Noble, “It’s that idea that once a body is dead you can do what you want with it.”
Maria Dolan is a writer based in Seattle. Her story about Vaux's swifts and their disappearing chimney habitat appeared on Smithsonian.com in November 2011.
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.









Comments (26)
+ View All Comments
It's interesting that we can feel confronted by corpse eating for medicine when we thoroughly enjoy corpse eating for the taste.
Posted by Maxwell on October 15,2012 | 08:33 AM
I'll pretend I ain't read that
Posted by Eragon Shadeslayer on October 6,2012 | 06:21 PM
Nummy num nums
Posted by zed - in his big flying head on July 24,2012 | 03:13 PM
Horace, pardon me but I do believe this article is about the Europeans not being exempt from partaking in cannibalism. I didn't think it was political at all, I think that one was in the interpreter. The comment about the eater and the eaten is very true. If you've ever done any research on the subject you will find that many cultures who chose to eat human flesh did so for spiritual reasons. They truly believed they were consuming the spirit, the power, the energy of the previously existing human life. It is still practiced in some tribes as a matter of fact. Don't look for conflict, look to dissolve it.
Posted by Danielle on May 25,2012 | 11:43 AM
Mr. Powell's criticism is apt. We can also note that the cannibalism criticized by Europeans involved killing the eaten person, often in horrific rituals that elevated cruelty to art. European medicinal cannibalism, while callous to the dead, involved a corpse that wasn't killed to be eaten. There's a great difference between what we now consider disrespect for the dead and murder. While non-European cannibalism was also, at times, done with the already dead, to characterize their cannibalism as "social" reeks of the condescension that runs through multiculturalism. Something horrific when practiced by a Jeffrey Dahmer is just a wonderful bit of diversity when practiced by someone in a loincloth and placed in a religious context. This would be a quaint peculiarity of academia but for the fact that it helps justify and excuse the cannibalism being practiced today by non-Westerners. The albinos being killed in Africa for magical purposes aren't the only victims. Non-albino children are being killed to magically gain wealth and health. This is even being done in countries where the populace should know better. In Britain, young children have been killed for similar purposes by non-European immigrants. The police, fearful of being called racist, didn't investigate till the body count got too high to ignore. Just because a murderous practice is accepted by the members of a non-European culture doesn't elevate it to an acceptable "social" custom and guilt about our great grandparents' "social" custom of dismissing other cultures as inferior doesn't justify sugarcoating grotesque customs to compensate.
Posted by Ed on May 24,2012 | 11:17 AM
I have heard that human placentas is a commonplace ingredient in cosmetics today? When I first read Horace's comment, I was like 'oh please'. But Horace got me thinking. When I worked as a chemist in a hospital, I heard that the hospital sold human placentas to corporations for use as an ingredient in cosmetics. I saw little clear plastic bags of them going out on a skid into a truck. If it's true, then not just in Europe, but just about everywhere, women are smearing cosmetics, that contain human placenta, on their faces, today. I did just now find this article on time.com ... http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1000192,00.html Talk about gruesome.
Posted by Wilson on May 17,2012 | 11:14 PM
It's still going on today. There was a recent artical (no not in the tabloids) relating the South Korean customs officials found smuggled energy pill made of children. Guess where they came from.
Posted by Rob on May 17,2012 | 06:21 PM
Embryos are not humans.
Posted by Sam on May 17,2012 | 01:47 PM
This article seems to be a hatchet job against Europeans, and seems to be more "anti-racist" racist drivel, as can be gleaned from the quote: “The one thing that we know is that almost all non-Western cannibal practice is deeply social in the sense that the relationship between the eater and the one who is eaten matters,” says Conklin. “In the European process, this was largely erased and made irrelevant. Human beings were reduced to simple biological matter equivalent to any other kind of commodity medicine.” When Europeans eat you, it is presumed, it is impersonal and cruel. When non-Europeans eat you, it is "deeply social", as if that matters to the one consumed.. baffling. Though this article makes passing and apologetic references to cannibalism outside of Europe (notably India), it makes no mention of the ritualized cannibalism in Nigerian black magic (for instance), or the current and ongoing killing and dismemberment of albino's in Tanzania for the procuring of fetishes.. Maybe they can be forgiven because, it as the author believes, "social". Lastly, human body parts are still used today, either as stem cells, or as treatment for pituitary disorders, where freeze-dried human pituitary glands are used. This article is too political for my taste, though mildly interesting..
Posted by Horace Powell on May 16,2012 | 12:53 AM
Thanks, Steve, for pointing out the staunch/stanch error in the story. (And congratulations on being the first to point it out!) We've fixed that mistake. Matthew Unger, the books listed under Related Books are filled with details on this topic. Beth A. Conklin, quoted in the story, has written a book called Consuming Grief: Compassionate Cannibalism in an Amazonian Society, which addresses a different topic, funerary cannibalism.
Posted by Maria Dolan on May 15,2012 | 06:53 PM
>The answer, at first, was Egyptian mummy, which was crumbled into tinctures to staunch internal bleeding. I think you mean "stanch."
Posted by Steve on May 14,2012 | 10:15 PM
Makes me wonder what kinds of completely idiotic and harmful behaviors seem reasonable to us, today? Because people surely haven't gotten any smarter. Perhaps exposure to chemicals and engineered foods will be close to the top of the list?
Posted by Wilson on May 14,2012 | 09:42 PM
I'm surprised that the consumption of human brain disease didn't lead to widespread outbreaks of Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease and other forms of spongiform encephalitis. In short, ewww.
Posted by Julieann Wozniak on May 13,2012 | 06:52 PM
of course once the body is dead it can be used for whatever, why not?
Posted by doctor gooddard on May 13,2012 | 11:26 AM
+ View All Comments