What do you think?
Rate this book
Captain's Dinner: A Shipwreck, An Act of Cannibalism, and a Murder Trial That Changed Legal History
A Barnes & Noble Best History Book of 2025
Four men in a lifeboat. Two weeks without food. One impossible choice that would reshape the boundaries between survival and murder. “A perfect enunciation of the classic philosophical can you sacrifice one innocent life to save many?" (Yann Martel, author of Life of Pi)
On May 19, 1884, the yacht Mignonette set sail from England on what should have been an uneventful voyage. When their vessel sank in the Atlantic, Captain Thomas Dudley and his crew found themselves adrift in a tiny lifeboat. As days turned to weeks, they faced an unthinkable starve to death or resort to cannibalism.
Their decision to sacrifice the youngest—17-year-old cabin boy Richard Parker—ignited a firestorm of controversy upon their rescue. Instead of being hailed as heroes and survivors, Dudley and his crew found themselves at the center of Regina v. Dudley and Stephens, a landmark murder trial that would establish the legal precedent that necessity cannot justify murder—a principle that continues to shape Anglo-American law today.
In Captain's Dinner, acclaimed journalist, Pulitzer Prize juror, and New York Times bestselling author Adam Cohen masterfully depicts both the harrowing weeks at sea and the sensational trial that followed. "Is killing one innocent person justified if it saves the lives of three others? Cohen's answer—in this riveting account—reads like a thriller" (former U.S. Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken). Through this Victorian tragedy, Cohen reveals an enduring conflict between primal instincts and moral principles. This book will “make you think long and hard about what you might do to survive” (Ezekiel J. Emanuel, M.D., Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania).
Perfect for readers of David Grann's The Wager and Nathaniel Philbrick's In the Heart of the Sea, this pulse-pounding true story has become a real-life example of one of life's greatest moral dilemmas. “Thoroughly researched and impeccably argued” (Martel). Rich with narrative detail and real-life courtroom twists, “brilliant and profound,” (bestselling author Amy Chua), Captain's Dinner strikes at the heart of a question that haunts us When does survival justify murder?
Four men in a lifeboat. Two weeks without food. One impossible choice that would reshape the boundaries between survival and murder. “A perfect enunciation of the classic philosophical can you sacrifice one innocent life to save many?" (Yann Martel, author of Life of Pi)
On May 19, 1884, the yacht Mignonette set sail from England on what should have been an uneventful voyage. When their vessel sank in the Atlantic, Captain Thomas Dudley and his crew found themselves adrift in a tiny lifeboat. As days turned to weeks, they faced an unthinkable starve to death or resort to cannibalism.
Their decision to sacrifice the youngest—17-year-old cabin boy Richard Parker—ignited a firestorm of controversy upon their rescue. Instead of being hailed as heroes and survivors, Dudley and his crew found themselves at the center of Regina v. Dudley and Stephens, a landmark murder trial that would establish the legal precedent that necessity cannot justify murder—a principle that continues to shape Anglo-American law today.
In Captain's Dinner, acclaimed journalist, Pulitzer Prize juror, and New York Times bestselling author Adam Cohen masterfully depicts both the harrowing weeks at sea and the sensational trial that followed. "Is killing one innocent person justified if it saves the lives of three others? Cohen's answer—in this riveting account—reads like a thriller" (former U.S. Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken). Through this Victorian tragedy, Cohen reveals an enduring conflict between primal instincts and moral principles. This book will “make you think long and hard about what you might do to survive” (Ezekiel J. Emanuel, M.D., Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania).
Perfect for readers of David Grann's The Wager and Nathaniel Philbrick's In the Heart of the Sea, this pulse-pounding true story has become a real-life example of one of life's greatest moral dilemmas. “Thoroughly researched and impeccably argued” (Martel). Rich with narrative detail and real-life courtroom twists, “brilliant and profound,” (bestselling author Amy Chua), Captain's Dinner strikes at the heart of a question that haunts us When does survival justify murder?
379 pages, Kindle Edition
First published November 18, 2025
177 people are currently reading
7707 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 110 reviews
July 13, 2025
It's always the books in the middle which are the hardest to review. Captain's Dinner (ew, and you'll know why in a second) by Adam Cohen is one of those books where I have very little to complain about, but I also think could probably have been much shorter. The setup is certainly intriguing, so let's talk about it.
It's 1884 and a rich guy bought a yacht he wants sailed from England to Australia. Four men take the gig and set sail. There are many issues including the fact that yachts at this time are not suited to long voyages across oceans. The boat sinks, and while all four make it into the lifeboat, they are set adrift with no water, very little food, and no hope unless a ship finds them. The cabin boy ends up murdered and eaten. The survivors are found days later and saved. I'm not spoiling anything. All of this information is in the description/summary.
The bulk of the book is about HOW the cabin boy ended up food. The perpetrators never tried to hide what happened. However, they didn't expect to get charged with murder which is precisely what happened. Cohen's narrative hinges on the fact that this entire scenario challenged many people and how they apply their own sense of morality.
Here is where my issues with the book come into play. The entire narrative portion of the book is only slightly longer than 200 pages. There is a fair bit of repetition of certain things which means it probably could have come in quite shorter. This is probably too long for an essay, but feels too short for a book. However, I have zero problem with anything in it (with the exception of the aforementioned repetition, which is not egregious). The story flows. Cohen proposes interesting thought experiments.
In summary, if you like stories which have a good bit of history with philosophy applied (and law), then I think this might be a must read. If you are looking for a sea adventure like The Wager or In the Heart of the Sea (two of the best ever), then you may be a bit let down with how little of the narrative is about the survival story. To each their own! I liked it.
(This book was provided as an advance reader copy by NetGalley and Authors Equity.)
It's 1884 and a rich guy bought a yacht he wants sailed from England to Australia. Four men take the gig and set sail. There are many issues including the fact that yachts at this time are not suited to long voyages across oceans. The boat sinks, and while all four make it into the lifeboat, they are set adrift with no water, very little food, and no hope unless a ship finds them. The cabin boy ends up murdered and eaten. The survivors are found days later and saved. I'm not spoiling anything. All of this information is in the description/summary.
The bulk of the book is about HOW the cabin boy ended up food. The perpetrators never tried to hide what happened. However, they didn't expect to get charged with murder which is precisely what happened. Cohen's narrative hinges on the fact that this entire scenario challenged many people and how they apply their own sense of morality.
Here is where my issues with the book come into play. The entire narrative portion of the book is only slightly longer than 200 pages. There is a fair bit of repetition of certain things which means it probably could have come in quite shorter. This is probably too long for an essay, but feels too short for a book. However, I have zero problem with anything in it (with the exception of the aforementioned repetition, which is not egregious). The story flows. Cohen proposes interesting thought experiments.
In summary, if you like stories which have a good bit of history with philosophy applied (and law), then I think this might be a must read. If you are looking for a sea adventure like The Wager or In the Heart of the Sea (two of the best ever), then you may be a bit let down with how little of the narrative is about the survival story. To each their own! I liked it.
(This book was provided as an advance reader copy by NetGalley and Authors Equity.)
December 15, 2025
Pre-Read Notes:
It's a crime that changed forever how we think about murder and cannibalism in survival situations. Also, being at sea is one of my favorite settings for horror. This book may be nonfiction but it's still also horror! And very well researched so far!
-----
what a wild story omg!
"[...I]n the face of this categorical opposition from his able seaman and his first mate’s less defined objection, Dudley reluctantly backed down. “So let it be,” he replied, “but it is hard for four to die, when perhaps one might save the rest.”" p55
"If the men in the Mignonette lifeboat survived, they would be notorious as cannibals for eating Parker’s flesh, but it would be the killing of Parker, rather than the eating of him, that would be the far weightier transgression— and the one that would have the most fateful consequences for them." p69
Final Review
(thoughts & recs) I have complicated feelings after reading this. It's brilliant in form, a potent blend of horror elements and well-researched and -organized nonfiction. It's also fascinating legal history -- a single case of cannibalism at sea helped forever change the way the law thinks about cannibalism in survival situations.
I recommend this to readers who enjoy obscur history, history of horror, and stories of being at sea.
My Favorite Things:
✔️ "Like seawater, urine has high salt levels that can exacerbate dehydration. It also contains waste products and toxins. Urine drinking can also take a psychological toll. As one handbook on emergency medicine warns, drinking urine “will destroy a person’s will to survive and hasten their death.”" p48 I read a lot of nonfiction like this, about dark topics that are still part of everyday human life. Like being at sea. I truly think the most horrible thing that can happen to a person is to be stranded at sea. And this is why -- so thirsty and so many posisons at hand that look like water.
✔️ "[N]ights held the greatest terror. Dudley recalled how the men dreaded “the sky coming dark.” Drifting on the black ocean, they had no way of knowing whether a storm, shark, or other peril loomed. “Our nights were the worst time,” Stephens recalled . “They seemed never to end; we dreaded them very much.”" p50 Just when I think there couldn't possibly be any way to make these men's plight any worse, and then the author remind me of the seemingly simple darkness.
✔️ This book is about being stranded at sea but it includes short histories on so many fascinating and unexpected subjects-- like the drawing of lots. And the custom of the sea.
✔️ "The taboo against eating human flesh and blood is not a product of a particular culture or religious tradition or historical era. It seems to stem from more primitive feelings . Cannibalism evokes not just shame and guilt but a more visceral, even primordial, reaction: disgust." The sociological aspects of this book are interesting and help emphasize how extreme it is to give in to cannibalism, no matter what the situation. p62
Content Notes: sharks, shipwreck, being at sea, being lost, being stranded, starvation and malnutrition, extreme thirst, drinking seawater, murder, blood, cannibalism, violence against animals, animal death, sinking
Thank you to Adam Cohen, Author's Equity, and NetGalley for an accessible digital arc of CAPTAIN'S DINNER. All views are mine.
It's a crime that changed forever how we think about murder and cannibalism in survival situations. Also, being at sea is one of my favorite settings for horror. This book may be nonfiction but it's still also horror! And very well researched so far!
-----
what a wild story omg!
"[...I]n the face of this categorical opposition from his able seaman and his first mate’s less defined objection, Dudley reluctantly backed down. “So let it be,” he replied, “but it is hard for four to die, when perhaps one might save the rest.”" p55
"If the men in the Mignonette lifeboat survived, they would be notorious as cannibals for eating Parker’s flesh, but it would be the killing of Parker, rather than the eating of him, that would be the far weightier transgression— and the one that would have the most fateful consequences for them." p69
Final Review
(thoughts & recs) I have complicated feelings after reading this. It's brilliant in form, a potent blend of horror elements and well-researched and -organized nonfiction. It's also fascinating legal history -- a single case of cannibalism at sea helped forever change the way the law thinks about cannibalism in survival situations.
I recommend this to readers who enjoy obscur history, history of horror, and stories of being at sea.
My Favorite Things:
✔️ "Like seawater, urine has high salt levels that can exacerbate dehydration. It also contains waste products and toxins. Urine drinking can also take a psychological toll. As one handbook on emergency medicine warns, drinking urine “will destroy a person’s will to survive and hasten their death.”" p48 I read a lot of nonfiction like this, about dark topics that are still part of everyday human life. Like being at sea. I truly think the most horrible thing that can happen to a person is to be stranded at sea. And this is why -- so thirsty and so many posisons at hand that look like water.
✔️ "[N]ights held the greatest terror. Dudley recalled how the men dreaded “the sky coming dark.” Drifting on the black ocean, they had no way of knowing whether a storm, shark, or other peril loomed. “Our nights were the worst time,” Stephens recalled . “They seemed never to end; we dreaded them very much.”" p50 Just when I think there couldn't possibly be any way to make these men's plight any worse, and then the author remind me of the seemingly simple darkness.
✔️ This book is about being stranded at sea but it includes short histories on so many fascinating and unexpected subjects-- like the drawing of lots. And the custom of the sea.
✔️ "The taboo against eating human flesh and blood is not a product of a particular culture or religious tradition or historical era. It seems to stem from more primitive feelings . Cannibalism evokes not just shame and guilt but a more visceral, even primordial, reaction: disgust." The sociological aspects of this book are interesting and help emphasize how extreme it is to give in to cannibalism, no matter what the situation. p62
Content Notes: sharks, shipwreck, being at sea, being lost, being stranded, starvation and malnutrition, extreme thirst, drinking seawater, murder, blood, cannibalism, violence against animals, animal death, sinking
Thank you to Adam Cohen, Author's Equity, and NetGalley for an accessible digital arc of CAPTAIN'S DINNER. All views are mine.
November 20, 2025
Very interesting book about a real case of shipwreck where the captain and one of the mates decided that they needed to sacrifice one of the four in the boat to eat him for a chance of survival and of course, the youngest and least important was chosen against the objections of the second mate who refused to countenance a murder. Utilitarianism vs human rights on trial and the author points out the lessons for today and tomorrow. Very gripping end to end and quite thought provoking.
November 28, 2025
Thank you Authors Equity for allowing me to read and review Captain's Dinner, A Shipwreck, An Act of Cannibalism, and a Murder Trial That Changed Legal History by Adam Cohen on NetGalley.
Published: 11/18/25
Stars: 3.5
Thorough. This is a nonfiction book and reads as such or textbook-like. I anticipated and expected a story based on how I saw the cover.
The cannibal act is repeated over and over. Now and at the completion of the book I think it could have been handled differently.
I appreciate the facts, prior situations, similar situations and points of views the author carefully gave. They did make me stop and think.
I would recommend this to a student (lots of options for papers) or an eclectic reader. I found this to be a quick read for a mature reader.
#NetGalleyNovember
Published: 11/18/25
Stars: 3.5
Thorough. This is a nonfiction book and reads as such or textbook-like. I anticipated and expected a story based on how I saw the cover.
The cannibal act is repeated over and over. Now and at the completion of the book I think it could have been handled differently.
I appreciate the facts, prior situations, similar situations and points of views the author carefully gave. They did make me stop and think.
I would recommend this to a student (lots of options for papers) or an eclectic reader. I found this to be a quick read for a mature reader.
#NetGalleyNovember
February 7, 2026
Interesting, but really could have been a third as long as it was. A little tedious.
October 19, 2025
I was really interested in the first part of this book and I thought more of it would be spent on the water considering the cover. But the time on the boat was actually very short and then it was all about the trial and general legality of what happened on the boat and the book really slowed down. It's certainly interesting from a philosophical position but reading about the minutiae of the trial (like the backgrounds of the judge and attorneys etc) really didn't keep me engaged. I felt a bit hoodwinked at times. I'd really prefer it if the cover of this book were a courtroom instead of a boat on choppy seas.
I received this book through NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
I received this book through NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
February 4, 2026
"What? Me Sir?"
A 17 year old is chosen to be the last meal of a crew on the brink of death. This is the law of the sea. And it has always been seemed fit in an extreme survival situation. However, not this time.
The British courts decide that this time, the murder and COSUMPTION of a child is not okay (finally).
This book focuses on the ethos and moral dilemma if killing for survival is legal. The utilitarian approach vs the greater good approach is literally what the rest of the book is about. Interesting history and legal discussions spawned from this event. It does get a bit repetitive.
A 17 year old is chosen to be the last meal of a crew on the brink of death. This is the law of the sea. And it has always been seemed fit in an extreme survival situation. However, not this time.
The British courts decide that this time, the murder and COSUMPTION of a child is not okay (finally).
This book focuses on the ethos and moral dilemma if killing for survival is legal. The utilitarian approach vs the greater good approach is literally what the rest of the book is about. Interesting history and legal discussions spawned from this event. It does get a bit repetitive.
February 5, 2026
I loved the pathos of the story (survival cannibalism at sea!), the reporting was top-notch (especially for an event so long ago), and the legal case and the lasting precedent it provided were fascinating and clearly impactful. Basically, this had all the elements I look for in a quality non-fiction book!
P.S. if you take a shot every time he mentions the “custom of the sea” you will be dead. It is a very entertaining phrase which I have integrated into my vocabulary posthaste ❤️
P.S. if you take a shot every time he mentions the “custom of the sea” you will be dead. It is a very entertaining phrase which I have integrated into my vocabulary posthaste ❤️
December 24, 2025
This was one of the craziest books I have read in a very long time. It was also one of the best I have read, but it IS also one of the hardest to review.
If you love history, especially sea-faring history, and you enjoyed "In the Heart of the Sea" [similar circumstances occur at the end of each of these voyages], then this one should easily be a "must read" for you. Filled with some very thought-provoking actions [what would YOU do? Be honest now...], and one of the craziest drawn out stories [with a very unexpected ending], this one will keep you enthralled from beginning to end.
**A NOTE: The narrator for this book is George Newbern, who is one of my absolute favorites and I must add to this review just how amazing he is in the narration of this book. He truly makes the story come alive [both for the good AND the bad IYKYK], and I highly recommend listening to this audiobook. I am so grateful my library had this one!!
Thank you to NetGalley, Adam Cohen, and Author's Equity for providing this ARC in exchange for an honest review.
If you love history, especially sea-faring history, and you enjoyed "In the Heart of the Sea" [similar circumstances occur at the end of each of these voyages], then this one should easily be a "must read" for you. Filled with some very thought-provoking actions [what would YOU do? Be honest now...], and one of the craziest drawn out stories [with a very unexpected ending], this one will keep you enthralled from beginning to end.
**A NOTE: The narrator for this book is George Newbern, who is one of my absolute favorites and I must add to this review just how amazing he is in the narration of this book. He truly makes the story come alive [both for the good AND the bad IYKYK], and I highly recommend listening to this audiobook. I am so grateful my library had this one!!
Thank you to NetGalley, Adam Cohen, and Author's Equity for providing this ARC in exchange for an honest review.
November 17, 2025
rest in peace richard parker
November 16, 2025
I picked this up because I'd found The Wager: A Tale of Shipwreck, Mutiny and Murder to be really interesting. I was expecting something similar, and this makes sense to market toward that audience, but it depends on which aspect of that tale caught your primary interest. For me, it was the seafaring part and the aftermath of the shipwreck. The trial portion was practically an afterthought. In this case, the ratio is reversed--the shipwreck and its sensational result felt like merely a setup for the extensive coverage of the legal case. Apparently, that trial established important precedents and is a famous case taught to legal students everywhere. I won't say that I found the trial completely uninteresting, but it did get rather repetitive after a while, and it definitely got mired down in legalities that just are not up my alley. So if you're looking for adventure on the high seas, this isn't really that, but if you're interested in legal cases, then this should be right in your wheelhouse.
I received this ARC from NetGalley.
I received this ARC from NetGalley.
January 22, 2026
A sailing adventure, cannibalism and the trial of the century. What more could you ask for? Well, the writing was repetitious and could benefit from more editing, but the compelling story saves it.
A small yacht is wrecked while trying to sail from England to Australia in 1884. Four men ages 17 to 40 were delivering the boat for an Australian businessman who purchased it in England. It wrecked in the south Atlantic, more than a thousand miles from land in any direction, and they were stranded in a flimsy 13-foot lifeboat with no water at all.
As told on the cover and the first pages, the captain decides after 20 days of starvation and drinking their own urine that the 17 year old will be killed to save the others - at least for a few more days. By that point the teenager is delirious and lethargic, lying on the floor of the boat, so there’s no resistance, although he is still talking. They’re picked up by a passing ship 4 days later.
That’s the first 20% of the book. The other 80% discusses the arrest and trial of the survivors after they return to England. This is a world-famous legal case still taught in law schools today and a precedent still cited in arguments 140 years later because it’s a clean real-life example of utilitarianism versus moralism, ie greatest good for the greatest number versus inalienable human rights. Murder is ok if it saves others versus murder is always wrong no matter what.
The upshot is that it was decided murder is murder, regardless of circumstances, except for self defense. This was a new idea at the time. For centuries before, the captain’s word was law at sea. It was also tradition to draw lots and sacrifice the loser in cases of starvation. Curiously, though, it was usually the foreigner or weakest or most annoying that lost the drawing. The victorian reformers recognized the system was rigged and that the weakest and lowest of society are protected by making law less subject to interpretation and more absolute.
That’s the problem with utilitarianism. There will always be a tension between what’s best for society and individual human rights. But who decides what’s best for society? Or decides what individual sacrifice is worth it? By which individuals? How is it decided? Every dictator justifies their actions by utilitarianism. Lenin, Mao and others justified their mass murders as a sacrifice necessary to provide a greater good for society at large.
But if the captain’s primary concern was really saving the most people, he could have sacrificed himself to save the others. Doesn’t the captain go down with his ship? He could at least make it more fair by drawing lots (but we know who’d lose). Utilitarianism also assumes we can predict the future. But the captain couldn’t know for certain they wouldn’t be rescued even the very next hour, or that cannibalizing the boy would definitely save the rest of them.
Nonetheless, utilitarianism still tries to sneak back into society when we ration healthcare, argue for just wars, ignore due process and so on. Personally, I’m thankful to the lawyers that work every day to protect our individual rights. As a side note, the new TV series Pluribus explores this question of whether sacrificing individuality and individual rights is a worthwhile exchange for a more efficient and safer society. Check it out.
A small yacht is wrecked while trying to sail from England to Australia in 1884. Four men ages 17 to 40 were delivering the boat for an Australian businessman who purchased it in England. It wrecked in the south Atlantic, more than a thousand miles from land in any direction, and they were stranded in a flimsy 13-foot lifeboat with no water at all.
As told on the cover and the first pages, the captain decides after 20 days of starvation and drinking their own urine that the 17 year old will be killed to save the others - at least for a few more days. By that point the teenager is delirious and lethargic, lying on the floor of the boat, so there’s no resistance, although he is still talking. They’re picked up by a passing ship 4 days later.
That’s the first 20% of the book. The other 80% discusses the arrest and trial of the survivors after they return to England. This is a world-famous legal case still taught in law schools today and a precedent still cited in arguments 140 years later because it’s a clean real-life example of utilitarianism versus moralism, ie greatest good for the greatest number versus inalienable human rights. Murder is ok if it saves others versus murder is always wrong no matter what.
The upshot is that it was decided murder is murder, regardless of circumstances, except for self defense. This was a new idea at the time. For centuries before, the captain’s word was law at sea. It was also tradition to draw lots and sacrifice the loser in cases of starvation. Curiously, though, it was usually the foreigner or weakest or most annoying that lost the drawing. The victorian reformers recognized the system was rigged and that the weakest and lowest of society are protected by making law less subject to interpretation and more absolute.
That’s the problem with utilitarianism. There will always be a tension between what’s best for society and individual human rights. But who decides what’s best for society? Or decides what individual sacrifice is worth it? By which individuals? How is it decided? Every dictator justifies their actions by utilitarianism. Lenin, Mao and others justified their mass murders as a sacrifice necessary to provide a greater good for society at large.
But if the captain’s primary concern was really saving the most people, he could have sacrificed himself to save the others. Doesn’t the captain go down with his ship? He could at least make it more fair by drawing lots (but we know who’d lose). Utilitarianism also assumes we can predict the future. But the captain couldn’t know for certain they wouldn’t be rescued even the very next hour, or that cannibalizing the boy would definitely save the rest of them.
Nonetheless, utilitarianism still tries to sneak back into society when we ration healthcare, argue for just wars, ignore due process and so on. Personally, I’m thankful to the lawyers that work every day to protect our individual rights. As a side note, the new TV series Pluribus explores this question of whether sacrificing individuality and individual rights is a worthwhile exchange for a more efficient and safer society. Check it out.
November 21, 2025
May 1884 - 4 British sailors, stranded for two weeks on a lifeboat in the middle of the ocean, starving. Three were men, including the captain and one was a boy - the cabin boy. Discussions of drawing straws, but nothing was done but hope each day for a rescue, suffering from extreme hunger and thirst with the darkest of nights being long and fearful of every bump and splash.
Cannibalism sounds like something horrific you hear about from ancient cultures, but what if extreme starvation was making you think about doing something horrible?
There was trial that really left me thinking and the Afterword was excellent. I was so compelled reading & listening to this book. The narration was very well done and pairing it with the book made the story come alive in my mind. Still thinking about it....
My thanks to Net Galley and Author's Equity for an advanced copy of this e-book.
Cannibalism sounds like something horrific you hear about from ancient cultures, but what if extreme starvation was making you think about doing something horrible?
There was trial that really left me thinking and the Afterword was excellent. I was so compelled reading & listening to this book. The narration was very well done and pairing it with the book made the story come alive in my mind. Still thinking about it....
My thanks to Net Galley and Author's Equity for an advanced copy of this e-book.
February 4, 2026
I listened to the audiobook version of this book. What an interesting case. I find it fascinating that so many other known events of cannibalism occurred and yet nothing happened and then all of a sudden this crew is being charged with murder. It’s also a very interesting moral dilemma, and it’s hard to answer what one would do if in a similar situation. Of course we all know murder is wrong and cannibalism is taboo, but in situations of starvation are either ever okay? Overall I thought the story was really interesting and brought up a lot of good points about murder and cannibalism, and why it’s wrong. The case was fascinating with who was charged and the punishment. It’s strange to think how things were back then, and then to realize “back then” really wasn’t all that long ago. An interesting read from beginning to end.
October 17, 2025
"People have always liked stories about people eating other people."
Adam Cohen very much calls me out with that line alone. I've been interested in stories of cannibalism, but nonfiction and fiction alike, since reading ALIVE as a teenager. The recent surge in cannibalistic fiction has been interesting to see but it's nonfiction narratives like this that continue to be the most engaging for me. CAPTAIN'S DINNER tells a story that I actually didn't know, and Cohen delves into it very effectively. Weaving in the history of cannibalism and highlighting certain aspects of the culture and society at the time, Cohen unfurls the story of the Mignonette and its sailors expertly, never shying away from the bloody details or softening the violence that occurred.
The book is, at its core, about the legal proceedings, and how groundbreaking it was to prosecute sailors for committing cannibalism, though really it doesn't ever feel like it was their cannibalism that they were condemned for. It very much focuses on the murder of it all, centering Parker as a victim chosen for his age and illness, and this is what struck me the most about the book: Cohen's compassion for the 'underdog'. It surprised me when the narrative actually explored Europe's history of cannibalism, acknowledging that historically we tend to think of it as something done by 'primitives' instead; Cohen directly challenges the racist notion that places like Africa needed to be colonized and "civilized" due to their "cannibalism" while highlighting the British hypocrisy with mummy shops and the indifferent attitude towards the 'custom of the sea'. Citing examples of shipwrecks prior to the Mignonette, Cohen recognizes an uncomfortable pattern: how often the one 'destined' to be sacrificed is the helpless child, the only slave present on the boat, the foreigner, the outsider. In this way, what happened aboard the Mignonette was true to 'the custom of the sea'.
And in this way, this book is about so much more than just the trial, which admittedly doesn't take up as much space in the narrative as I thought it would. Cohen's exploration of this act of cannibalism seems mostly focused on the moral and philosophical aspect, and in some ways, this doesn't leave room for much of a neutral presentation of the subject, which I do think is best in books like this, but I simultaneously appreciate Cohen's perspective; especially with how he relates what happened to Richard Parker to what happens even today to the disabled and the sick. The afterword explores instances where the ruling of this case was used in modern times in very interesting ways. But the entire narrative is really soaked in compassion and abhorrence at the mistreatment of those deemed lesser by society due to health or skin color or wealth. And that's a very important takeaway to have from the story as a whole.
Though some passages of the book end up feeling repetitive, I really enjoyed this perspective of this story; Cohen is clearly an author with a lot of passion and presented the legal proceedings in a way that even I, someone who isn't great with that type of jargon, found easy to follow.
Thank you to NetGalley and Authors Equity for the ARC in exchange for an honest review.
Adam Cohen very much calls me out with that line alone. I've been interested in stories of cannibalism, but nonfiction and fiction alike, since reading ALIVE as a teenager. The recent surge in cannibalistic fiction has been interesting to see but it's nonfiction narratives like this that continue to be the most engaging for me. CAPTAIN'S DINNER tells a story that I actually didn't know, and Cohen delves into it very effectively. Weaving in the history of cannibalism and highlighting certain aspects of the culture and society at the time, Cohen unfurls the story of the Mignonette and its sailors expertly, never shying away from the bloody details or softening the violence that occurred.
The book is, at its core, about the legal proceedings, and how groundbreaking it was to prosecute sailors for committing cannibalism, though really it doesn't ever feel like it was their cannibalism that they were condemned for. It very much focuses on the murder of it all, centering Parker as a victim chosen for his age and illness, and this is what struck me the most about the book: Cohen's compassion for the 'underdog'. It surprised me when the narrative actually explored Europe's history of cannibalism, acknowledging that historically we tend to think of it as something done by 'primitives' instead; Cohen directly challenges the racist notion that places like Africa needed to be colonized and "civilized" due to their "cannibalism" while highlighting the British hypocrisy with mummy shops and the indifferent attitude towards the 'custom of the sea'. Citing examples of shipwrecks prior to the Mignonette, Cohen recognizes an uncomfortable pattern: how often the one 'destined' to be sacrificed is the helpless child, the only slave present on the boat, the foreigner, the outsider. In this way, what happened aboard the Mignonette was true to 'the custom of the sea'.
And in this way, this book is about so much more than just the trial, which admittedly doesn't take up as much space in the narrative as I thought it would. Cohen's exploration of this act of cannibalism seems mostly focused on the moral and philosophical aspect, and in some ways, this doesn't leave room for much of a neutral presentation of the subject, which I do think is best in books like this, but I simultaneously appreciate Cohen's perspective; especially with how he relates what happened to Richard Parker to what happens even today to the disabled and the sick. The afterword explores instances where the ruling of this case was used in modern times in very interesting ways. But the entire narrative is really soaked in compassion and abhorrence at the mistreatment of those deemed lesser by society due to health or skin color or wealth. And that's a very important takeaway to have from the story as a whole.
Though some passages of the book end up feeling repetitive, I really enjoyed this perspective of this story; Cohen is clearly an author with a lot of passion and presented the legal proceedings in a way that even I, someone who isn't great with that type of jargon, found easy to follow.
Thank you to NetGalley and Authors Equity for the ARC in exchange for an honest review.
December 10, 2025
Entertaining, informative and illuminating! I loved reading about this incident and the legal case that shaped how we view and treat necessity in dire circumstances. I loved how easy the author made the book to read and how the writing kept me on my toes to see how the judgement of the crewman would play out; despite knowing about it via a google search. The author made me care about every single person that was part of the incident and, though I have my own opinions, really made me question what I would do if I was in the same situation as the crewman. This is a must read for anyone that loves history but also for anyone who loves to be informed of precedents and how they still shape us today.
March 4, 2026
This was a good fit with my insatiable, if slightly sick, fascination with adventure stories of seafaring trips gone bad. I just love them. Captain's Dinner did not disappoint, and I think it has broad appeal for readers like me of adventure novels. It might also be of interest to readers of courtroom dramas, particularly those who have a more sophisticated interest in the law and how it has been shaped by historical events. I am not such a reader, so I quickly scanned through the second half of the book, but the book combines a fascinating story with an important historical record. Finally, I listened to an interview with the author on NPR with Scott Simon and I think Adam Cohen is an engaging speaker.
Thank you to my Lewes DE Public Library and The History Book Festival for providing a copy of this book for my review.
Thank you to my Lewes DE Public Library and The History Book Festival for providing a copy of this book for my review.
January 19, 2026
As much as I love a shipwreck story The Captain's dinner was not as much a ship wreck as it was legal story.
"The On May 19, 1884, the yacht Mignonette set sail from England on what should have been an uneventful voyage. When their vessel sank in the Atlantic, Captain Thomas Dudley and his crew found themselves adrift in a tiny lifeboat. As days turned to weeks, they faced an unthinkable choice: starve to death or resort to cannibalism."
But the story is more about the trial for cannibalism which was not crime at sea.
The story is little dry, I wanted a good ship wreck.
"The On May 19, 1884, the yacht Mignonette set sail from England on what should have been an uneventful voyage. When their vessel sank in the Atlantic, Captain Thomas Dudley and his crew found themselves adrift in a tiny lifeboat. As days turned to weeks, they faced an unthinkable choice: starve to death or resort to cannibalism."
But the story is more about the trial for cannibalism which was not crime at sea.
The story is little dry, I wanted a good ship wreck.
February 19, 2026
This book does a fantastic job of concisely putting a fairly simple murder (or was it murder?) in its proper historical, legal and moral context. I would recommend this book to anyone with an interest in the sea travel/ the Age of Sail, law, moral philosophy, or, I suppose, cannibalism.
Also! If you read this book, stick around for the Afterword. Want to know what one guy stabbing another guy in the middle of the ocean 150 years ago has to do with the ethics of AI? You’re going to have to wait until about page 250 to find out, but it’s worth it.
Also! If you read this book, stick around for the Afterword. Want to know what one guy stabbing another guy in the middle of the ocean 150 years ago has to do with the ethics of AI? You’re going to have to wait until about page 250 to find out, but it’s worth it.
January 8, 2026
A fascinating and thought provoking account of a sacrificial murder in a lifeboat in 1884 that resulted in a judicial opinion that marks a triumph of individual rights over utilitarianism with continuing relevance. “Captain’s Dinner” isn’t just a book that lawyers can love. It’s a book all thinking and caring people should read and ponder.
December 21, 2025
"Captain's Dinner " doesn't focus on the survival story of the Mignonette crew, but rather the changing customs and laws that were occurring at the time of the shipwreck. A harrowing read, but one that I was glad to take.
January 14, 2026
The first half of this book was incredibly interesting however once the men got back from sea it was the most long-winded story. Felt like he needed to hit a word count or something. Just completely lost me and was no longer compelling.
January 24, 2026
Probably the first nonfiction in a while to hold my attention
February 5, 2026
Library Book/Overall: 3/5
Audiobook/Narration: 3.5/5
Research: 3.75/5
Enjoyment: 3.5/5
Audiobook/Narration: 3.5/5
Research: 3.75/5
Enjoyment: 3.5/5
Read
February 21, 2026A fascinating deep dive into one of the most memorable cases of 1L!
Did not finish
March 1, 2026I quit at 27%. Listen, I thought I could handle this, I read the story about the Andes Mountain survivors. You know that plane crash in the 70s? Somehow this was worse and I just can't do it 🤢I'll just google the story.
February 19, 2026
4-1/2⭐️Book! Although the story involves 4 surviving seaman of a ship wreck in 1884 - the book portrays societal utilitarianism versus an individual’s rights. In the story- three of the surviving seaman decide to kill the young cabin boy to cannibalize his body, reasoning that it is better for three to survive at the expense of the 4th’s life. English courts tried two of the three survivors for murder, which resulted in convictions. The main holding in the case “about the need to protect individual rights in the face of utilitarian calculations highlights an important moral and legal touchstone.” Hitler and Stalin insisted that their human atrocities were necessary to build a better world for their nations.
September 29, 2025
Worth the Read
I read a pre-released version from NetGalley and was asked to provide comments. The book read well though certain situations of English law or trail presidencies seemed to be repeated multiple times as if the reader may have forgotten the salient point being made (e.g., special verdict).
Since there were no supplies in the inadequate life boat, I'm surprised that no preventative regulatory changes were made to require an adequate number of sea worthy vessels available for both crew and passengers and to ensure they are appropriately supplied?
I thought the "Afterwards" was a bit tedious and could have been condensed, though I'm not one to spend an inordinate amount of time in academic, philosophical debate. Just my opinion.
Below are some editing concerns. BTW, the Kindle version I downloaded did not have page numbers.
In Chapter 6 there is an inconsistency in the formatting of literary titles. Examples - italicized titles of writings by Brantlinger, Dickins and Kingsley; quotes used for writings by Kipling and Stead's and no formatting for Mearns’s non-fiction report.
In Chapter 7 the author wrote. "Brook’s refusal also undermined the defense’s argument that it was better for one person to die so four could live" should say "... so three could live".
In Chapter 9 a sentence reads "When the time came for the jury’s response, the foreman said that it was their view that the men the men “would have died if they had not had this body to have fed on" with a double "the men".
I read a pre-released version from NetGalley and was asked to provide comments. The book read well though certain situations of English law or trail presidencies seemed to be repeated multiple times as if the reader may have forgotten the salient point being made (e.g., special verdict).
Since there were no supplies in the inadequate life boat, I'm surprised that no preventative regulatory changes were made to require an adequate number of sea worthy vessels available for both crew and passengers and to ensure they are appropriately supplied?
I thought the "Afterwards" was a bit tedious and could have been condensed, though I'm not one to spend an inordinate amount of time in academic, philosophical debate. Just my opinion.
Below are some editing concerns. BTW, the Kindle version I downloaded did not have page numbers.
In Chapter 6 there is an inconsistency in the formatting of literary titles. Examples - italicized titles of writings by Brantlinger, Dickins and Kingsley; quotes used for writings by Kipling and Stead's and no formatting for Mearns’s non-fiction report.
In Chapter 7 the author wrote. "Brook’s refusal also undermined the defense’s argument that it was better for one person to die so four could live" should say "... so three could live".
In Chapter 9 a sentence reads "When the time came for the jury’s response, the foreman said that it was their view that the men the men “would have died if they had not had this body to have fed on" with a double "the men".
January 21, 2026
A book about a shipwreck – sign.me.up! However, this story doesn’t end with shipwreck. In fact, that’s shockingly the most explainable and normal part of this story. With attention to detail and a keen sense of narration, Adam Cohen describes the ensuing survival of three of the four men. Unfortunately for the fourth man, he succumbed to death and then was consumed in one of societies’ most taboo acts: cannibalism.
Cohen’s story spans from start to finish – The hiring of crew members to the legal precedent established by the action of those three ailing crewmembers, adrift and hopeless. While quite gross, the story itself may prompt the reader to consider their actions should they face similar situations. How does their moral compass align when faced with near-certain death.
Overall, Cohen’s writing flows eloquently, supported by a topic he has researched thoroughly. I remained engrossed thorough the story and enjoyed learning more about topic. To that end, I rate this book solidly at 3.75 stars, rounded down to 3 stars. It didn’t change my life, but it’s certainly well-above your average read. For fans of shipwreck, survival stories, or strange taboo acts, I encourage you to pick up this book!
Thanks to NetGalley, Adam Cohen, and the publisher in exchange for an honest review of this book.
Cohen’s story spans from start to finish – The hiring of crew members to the legal precedent established by the action of those three ailing crewmembers, adrift and hopeless. While quite gross, the story itself may prompt the reader to consider their actions should they face similar situations. How does their moral compass align when faced with near-certain death.
Overall, Cohen’s writing flows eloquently, supported by a topic he has researched thoroughly. I remained engrossed thorough the story and enjoyed learning more about topic. To that end, I rate this book solidly at 3.75 stars, rounded down to 3 stars. It didn’t change my life, but it’s certainly well-above your average read. For fans of shipwreck, survival stories, or strange taboo acts, I encourage you to pick up this book!
Thanks to NetGalley, Adam Cohen, and the publisher in exchange for an honest review of this book.
December 13, 2025
I’d like to thank NetGalley and the publishers of this book for allowing me to read this most interesting book about a legal precedent (is taking of a life at sea acceptable and then eating the victim in order to survive?) and historical case in Britain in the late Victorian Era that created a new precedent. The author does a first rate job in detailing what changed from past acceptance of events of cannibalism at sea to setting in motion a review of this long precedence. Most importantly the case came at a time was Britain was enacting reforms especially those that affected the vulnerable in their population. You have to read the book to find out what the decision was and this affected not only Britain but other countries as well.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 110 reviews