The article outlines the substantial frames of the anthropology of security as an independent anthropological (humanistic) sub-discipline and the anthropological approach to security. The multidisci- plinary character of sources of the anthropological knowledge makes the anthropology of security a field of integration of biological and socio-humanistic facets of the knowledge of security aspects. The focus of the discipline is the entirety of human dispositions and accomplishments in the creation of the conditions for safe and satisfying existence, development and survival of both individuals and communities. Security, as well as the norms and patterns of human actions (i.e. cultural patterns of security) serving security creation, become the supreme category. Hence, the anthropology of security concentrates on the individual and collective natural protective and defensive dispositions (properties). Thus its attention focuses on creating technologies of security and the wholeness of the human artefacts stemming from their applications. In the anthropological perspective, security appears a sphere of creation and—simultaneously—its ultimate result. Therefore, it is more than a condition/process (a mere prelude to analyses). It is an intentionally created construction of human thought and an entity of practical activities. The presented reflections are only a broad, overall outline in both diachronic and synchronic areas. The aim of the article is to specify and promote an integrative approach in understanding the essence and structuring of the anthropology of security.

This editorial presents a brief review of pandemics from antiquity to COVID-19. Although all large-scale epidemic diseases ("pandemics") can be considered ecological "checks" on human population size, and although COVID-19 is the biggest such pandemic since HIV/AIDS emerged it is not likely to approach the deathtoll of earlier pandemics, such as the plague. There are two major hypotheses to explain the origin of COVID-19. One is the "natural origin" hypothesis, the other is that it might have escaped from a laboratory, with its origin subsequently hidden. Although most scientists support the natural origin idea the other cannot yet be dismissed. Evidence for each hypothesis is presented. If the first theory is correct then it is a powerful warning, from nature, that our species is running a great risk. If the second theory is proven then it should be considered an equally powerful, indeed frightening, signal that we are in danger, from hubris as much as from ignorance. More pandemics are inevitable, but their severity can be reduced by greater transparency, international co-operation, and retreat from planetary boundaries.

Traditional farming in South East (SE) England is presented as a highly-evolved form of sustain- able farming. The carrying capacity of traditional farming on a 2.75 ha family smallholding in SE England is assessed from production data recorded over a period of 8 years. The key elements of the farming system were mixed farming (livestock, dairy, arable and horticultural), self-sufficiency in terms of inputs and organic principles. Ten types of food were produced with the aim to comprise all the elements of a balanced diet. The holding and farming system are described and an analysis of the food produced is presented, in terms of weight and energy content, for the years 2010 to 2017. An average carrying capacity of 0.64 people ha−1 was demonstrated on the basis of food energy content alone. Carrying capacity increased to 1.09 people ha−1 when production was re-proportioned to align with the UK Government’s currently recommended balanced diet. The latter figure is similar to carrying capacity estimates, derived from national statistics, for the UK’s total farmland in the middle part of the 20th Century but significantly lower than theoretical predictions of national carrying capacity.