Final answer:
Harris proposed that the pig taboo might stem from the economic inefficiency of raising pigs in environments with limited resources, where pigs may compete directly with humans for food. This ecological rationale for the taboo is supported by the practical concerns of agricultural productivity, hence influencing cultural practices and religious beliefs. His analysis provides a materialist perspective on the development of food taboos and sacredness of animals in cultures.
Step-by-step explanation:
Harris has suggested that the pig taboo arose because pigs, in certain circumstances, are economically inefficient to raise as compared to other livestock. Examining various historical and cultural contexts, Harris suggested that in environments where resources for livestock are scarce, maintaining pigs may not be the most sustainable option. For instance, pigs compete with humans for food, unlike ruminant animals like cows and sheep, which feed on grass.
In societies where arable land is limited and should be used for the cultivation of human food, raising pigs that require valuable human-edible resources could be seen as wasteful. Similarly, in some dense forest habitats, pigs might destroy crops and be hard to rear, which would lead to the discouragement of pig farming and potentially to a taboo against consuming pigs. Thus, the pig taboo can be seen as a cultural adaptation to particular environmental constraints that favor other forms of livestock or agricultural practices.
Harris's theory builds on and complements previous anthropological work by scholars such as Marvin Harris, Mary Douglas and others who have looked at the economic, environmental, and social underpinnings of food taboos and the sacredness of certain animals in various cultures. This perspective bridges material and spiritual explanations, showing how practical concerns can be expressed through religious beliefs and practices.