Read the excerpt below and answer the question. I conceive there is more barbarlty In eating a man alive, than when he is dead; In tearing a body limb from
limb by racks and torments, that is yet in perfect sense; in roasting it by degrees; In causing it to be bitten and
worried by dogs and swine (as we have not only read, but lately seen, not among inveterate and mortal
enemies, but among nelghbors and fellow-citizens, and, which is worse, under color of plety and religion),
than to roast and eat him after he is dead.
What is Montaigne's purpose in saying this?
He is addressing the treatment of animals in his own community
He is explaining why he thinks that cannibalism is a wise idea.
He is criticizing the way his own government treats its enemies.
He is asserting that he thinks it is a bad idea to eat people alive.

He is criticizing the way his own government treats its enemies.

Explanation:

The given excerpt is from the essay Of Cannibals written by philosopher Michel de Montaigne. Here, Montaigne describes the ceremonies of the Tupinambá people in Brazil and how they ate honored their dead enemies by eating their bodies.

In this excerpt, he actually criticizes the way his own government treats its enemies. When he says eating a man alive, he doesn't mean it literally. In fact, he is talking about how his government torments its enemies before they die. He thinks that such treatment is more barbaric than eating the bodies of enemies as a way to honor them.

i believe the answer is: b. mr. head had a long, tube-like face with a rounded open jaw and a short depressed nose.

this is because in the un-revised sentence it said that mr. heads face was long and tube-like, and he had a rounded open jaw. this is not a very grammatically correct because of how it seems to drag on with the and, replaced with, with, makes it sound more fluent in the description.