Abstract
Coded data on subsistence dependence in George Murdock’s Ethnographic Atlas have been interpreted as showing that traditional societies face a stark choice between foraging and farming modes of subsistence. Supposedly, scheduling conflicts and the need to stay mobile effectively prevent foragers from supplementing their diet with low-level food production. However, close inspection of Murdock’s data reveals several potential problems with how he arrived at his estimates of subsistence dependence. When his data are corrected to counter these problems, foraging activities appear to rival agriculture in importance in most farming societies. Accordingly, this study infers that foraging and farming tasks do not necessarily pose scheduling conflicts, even though a commitment to farming tends to lead to its increased economic importance over time.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
