Mapping the middle ground between foragers and farmers

The terminology and definitions for farmers, foragers and those who undertake in-between subsistence strategies have attracted recurrent debate by archaeologists, anthropologists, geographers and others. These debates are plagued by semantic and conceptual confusions in terms of the definitions proffered to the 'middle ground' between foragers and farmers, as well as in terms of how categories are applied in the past and the present. In broad terms, perspectives diverge between considering the adoption of agriculture to be an 'all-or-nothing' commitment or a continuum representing various types of 'middle ground'. A careful unpacking of data from traditional societies in Murdock's Ethnographic Atlas reveals geographical structuring of the global dataset, as well as considerable differences based on local crop assemblages. In sum, agro-pastoral, cereal-based societies in Africa and Eurasia exhibit a stronger tendency with respect to subsistence dependence on farming, while soci-eties in North America and those reliant on root crops and arboriculture in the wet tropics tend more towards a 'middle ground' that incorporates aspects of farming without abandoning foraging.

Automated summary

The terminology and definitions for farmers, foragers, and those who undertake in-between subsistence strategies have been a topic of debate among archaeologists, anthropologists, geographers, and others. The debates are characterized by confusion in terms of definitions and how categories are applied. Different perspectives exist regarding the adoption of agriculture, ranging from an 'all-or-nothing' commitment to a continuum representing various types of 'middle ground'. The analysis of data from traditional societies in Murdock's Ethnographic Atlas reveals geographical differences and local crop assemblages that influence subsistence strategies.