In the strict anthropological sense, a taboo is a prohibition based on the belief that a particular behaviour is either too sacred or cursed to be performed. It is accompanied by the belief that those who break it will suffer some kind of magical, divine or metaphysical consequence, Misiak says.

A theoretical model recently published in the scientific journal PNAS shows how taboos can function as cultural safety fuses. The study, co-authored by Misiak, examines cannibalism as an example of a behaviour that can provide nutritional benefits under some circumstances but carries increasing infection risks when practised repeatedly.

Cannibalism may therefore be energetically profitable in exceptional situations, such as extreme food shortages, but regular consumption of human flesh becomes increasingly risky because of pathogens transmitted through meat.

Giving up cannibalism is an example of cultural evolution. Just as natural selection promotes favourable biological traits, cultural selection can perpetuate norms that restrict behaviours that may be tempting in the short term but costly for the practitioner in the long term.

Misiak says there are many other examples of the health-promoting function of taboos.

‘Research conducted on Pacific islands shows that local communities observe taboos related to the consumption of fish by pregnant women. This taboo also has a protective function, as consuming certain fish can be dangerous and toxic to women and foetuses’, the researcher says.

Contemporary hunter-gatherer populations also have dietary taboos against consuming snakes or turtles.

Another example of a taboo observed virtually everywhere in the world is the incest taboo. Breaking the norms associated with it increases the risk of birth defects and hereditary diseases and is therefore detrimental from a biological perspective.

Some taboos may also protect communities from actions that are ineffective or harmful in particular environments.

Cultural and religious prohibitions against eating pork persist in the Middle East. Some anthropologists have speculated that the taboo surrounding pigs, and the perception of them as unclean animals, may have developed partly because raising pigs in the region was difficult and costly, requiring large amounts of water and shade from the sun.

However, the prohibition against eating pork continues to be observed in the Middle East today. Over time, taboos can take on other functions, including signalling group affiliation.

One hypothesis is that pigs were brought to the region by the Philistines, who were in conflict with the Israelites. According to this interpretation, the prohibition against eating pork was codified after their arrival.

After the arrival of a hostile population that consumed pigs, the prohibition may have become a way of distinguishing the Israelites from the Philistines and a symbol of group affiliation.

‘We can therefore also consider contemporary taboos in terms of their significance for group cohesion’, Misiak says.

Pork is also not eaten by the African Datoga pastoralists in Tanzania.

The Datoga, like the inhabitants of the Middle East, did not raise pigs themselves. However, Germans who colonised the area did eat pork.

‘It seems, therefore, that although after many social changes, various local populations began to accept pork, the Datoga never adopted this norm. It is possible that the pork taboo became an important element of group identity. The Datoga still believe that pork brings bad luck and causes disease if consumed’, the researcher says.

Taboos can also serve to reduce anxiety.

While conducting research in the Trobriand Islands, the renowned Polish anthropologist Bronisław Malinowski observed that populations that practised fishing followed various rituals and taboos before going out to sea.

‘It turned out that there were significantly more of these taboos and rituals when they sailed much further from shore. This means that as the risk of the expedition increased, people began to intensify such behaviour. Hence, the hypothesis is that taboos and rituals associated with them are used to reduce anxiety. When we give control over our fate to metaphysical forces, we feel a little safer. Contemporary research also shows that people are more prone to ritualising various situations when they feel anxious’, Misiak says.

Taboos can also serve as a form of protection for a community by signalling that someone who breaks a taboo is violating accepted norms. This, in turn, can indicate that the person is not trustworthy.

Among the Hadza, hunter-gatherers from Africa, there is an interesting ritual called Epeme. After a hunt, hunters invite older men to consume the internal organs of the hunted animals together. The ritual is surrounded by a taboo related to the presence of women: women are not allowed to watch or even approach it.

Such prohibitions are sometimes interpreted as regulating social roles and access to specific practices, while violating them can be perceived as a deviation from existing norms.

Misiak is leading a broad international study to examine whether people treat taboos as indicators of who might be a valuable ally and who might not.

Funded by Poland's National Science Centre, the research consists of three studies examining how people react to those who break taboos. The first involves an experiment in Poland, while the second consists of cross-cultural studies in several communities, including in Africa and Mongolia. The third part involves thousands of people from dozens of countries around the world.

The researchers want to understand the cultural factors that make some communities more attached to their taboos and more likely to rely on them when choosing allies.

Misiak says the team has already conducted research in Mongolia among a nomadic community where there is a strong taboo against polluting rivers and other bodies of water.

‘We have already conducted research in Mongolia, among a nomadic community where there is a very strong taboo related to polluting rivers and all water bodies. People believe that by bathing or leaving trash nearby, we cause the wrath of a local water god. He is then said to take revenge for river pollution. It turns out that the desire for revenge against members of one's own group who break this taboo is much stronger than against those outside the community who ignore it. If, for example, a newcomer breaks it, people are more lenient. We conclude, therefore, that the specific function of taboo, compared to moral and social norms, is to reinforce intragroup order. When cultivating a taboo, we pay particular attention to whether members of our group break it, but we are much less concerned about whether members of other tribes or groups do’, the researcher says.

Ewelina Krajczyńska-Wujec (PAP)

ekr/ bar/

tr. RL