Rethinking Gellner's Segmentary Analysis of Morocco's Ait cAtta

Author(s): Henry Munson, Jr.

Reviewed work(s):
Source: Man, New Series, Vol. 28, No. 2 (Jun., 1993), pp. 267-280
Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2803413 .
Accessed: 05/12/2011 17:22
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Man.

http://www.jstor.org

RETHINKING

GELLNER'S
MOROCCO'S

SEGMENTARY

ANALYSIS OF

AIT CATTA

HENRY MUNSON, JR

University
ofMaine

tribe
ofthelatetwentieth
centurydismissthe conceptofthesegmentary
Many anthropologists
scholars,
as a relicofantediluvian
structural-functionalism.
But itisstilldefendedbysomeprominent
about tribalism
reflecthis conceptionof
notablyErnestGellner.All Gellner'sgeneralstatements
theAit CAtta.
Yet criticsofGellner's
theprecolonialBerbertribesofMorocco'sHighAtlas,especially
of his analysisof the Ait CAttain
views have rarelyattemptedto assessthe empiricalplausibility
SaintsoftheAtlas(1969). In thisarticle,it is arguedthatGellner'sanalysisbearslittleresemblance
to thepoliticalstructures
it was meantto explain.

model will inevitThe verythoughtof yetanothercriticism

of the segmentary
to roll theireyes and groanat the naiveteof
ablyinduce some anthropologists
thosewho seek to prove the indubitable.However, notionsof the indubitable
oftenboil down to empiricallybaselessconventionalwisdom. This was true
when most anthropologists
assumedthat segmentary
lineage systemsactually
existed.And it remainstruenow thatmanybelieve the contrary(Holy 1979;
Kuper 1988; Schneider1984).
whichis by no
modelhad been universally
repudiated,
Even ifthesegmentary
meansthe case (see Kelly 1985), it would stillmeritcontinuedfloggingbecause
fashionratherthanto a studyof
hasbeen due to shifting
muchoftherepudiation
who
the fitbetweentheoryand data. For example,interpretive
anthropologists
have done fieldworkin the lowland villagesand townsof Morocco have remodelwithoutevertestingit
peatedlycriticizedGellner'suse of thesegmentary
in termsof the highlandtribesthathe himselfstudied(Eickelman1989: 131-8;
Geertz1971; 1979: 235; Rosen 1984). Rather,theyhave arguedon thebasisof
individualistic
assumptionsthat Gellner rightlyrejects.1Except for Abdellah
(ratherthanmerely
Hammoudi (1974), no one has attemptedto demonstrate
assert)thatGellner'sdepictionof the AitcAttain Saintsof theAtlas (1969) is
flawed.Even Hammoudi,thoughhispaperis excellent,does not
fundamentally
notionof 'balancedand complemendiscussthe irrelevanceof the segmentary
taryopposition'.
model
Gellner's
conception
ofthesegmentary
As anyone who has taken an introductory
anthropologycourse presumably
knows, order in a segmentarysocietyis maintainednot by the specialized
Man (N.S.) 28, 267-280

268

HENRY MUNSON, JR

institutions
ofa state,butby thebalancedoppositionofsegmentsthatjoin forces
in thefaceofexternalthreat(Gellner1969: 41-4). Such societieshave a tree-like
on the basis of which groupsdivide into sub-groups,which in turn
structure
further
divide,all groupsat thesamelevel of the treebeingin balancedopposiin an
tion.Individualsfitintothistree-likesystemofsegmentsand sub-segments
unambiguousway and social tiesof any othernatureare eitherabsentor relatively insignificant.Gellner puts particularemphasis on the absence (or
in a segmentary
insignificance)
of ambiguity
societyand contendsthatit ensures
thatforany conflictthatmayarise,therewill be groupsin balancedopposition
each other(1969: 44). Most of thesevarious
whichcan be activatedto confront
and corporate,
butemergeonlyin oppositionto others
groupsarenotpermanent
(1969: 116). Gellnerhas saidthata segmentary
'tree'is not necessarily
structured
in termsof descent(1969: 48). But while concedingthepossibility
of segmentaand
tionin territorial
terms,he writes:'I doubtwhetherthetwo - segmentation
unilinealkinship- can be whollyseparated'(1969: 48).2
model is the presenceof
Anotherdistinctive
featureof Geilner'ssegmentary
Thus the
holyarbitrators,
'saints',who serveto greasethegearsofsegmentation.3
Ahansalashurafa',
putativedescendantsof the prophetMuhammad,servedas
mediatorsin manyof the disputesinvolvingtheprecolonialtribesof the central
High Atlas.These sacredlubricants,
saysGeilner,enabledtheAitcAttato remain
an egalitarian
societyin whichno one groupor individualprevailedpolitically
or
economically(1969:54-5).4
Geilnerrejectsthe idea that the segmentary
model is merelya 'myth' or
divorcedfromwhat flesh-and-blood
'ideology' (indigenousor anthropological)
people actuallydo (1969: 62-3; Peters1967; 1990: 59-83). But he does concede
thatpoliticalbehaviourdoes not invariablycorrespondto it (1969: 63). For
Gellner,the 'segmentary
principle'is an idea embeddedin the mindsof the
membersofa segmentary
societythathasa directimpacton how people behave,
even thoughit does not determineeverything
theydo.
TheAitCAtta:
an overview
Having summarizedGellner'sconceptionof the segmentary
model, I shallnow
itsirrelevance
withrespectto theprecolonialAit CAtta.
attemptto demonstrate
I shallbase myargument
Because ofthedearthofdatain Gellner'sown writings,
on theexcellentethnographies
primarily
of GeorgesSpillmann(1931; 1936) and
David Hart(1981; 1984),and on myconversation
inJune1990 withtheMoroccan who servedas interpreter
and researchassistant
forboth Gellnerand Hartin
the 1950sand 1960s.5
The Berber-speaking
AitcAttadominatea regionof southeastern
Morocco
- from'thescorchedSaharaedge to the
extendingover50,000 squarekilometres
snow-coveredplateaugrasslands
highestregularly
on the northside of theAtlas
watershed'(Gellner1969: 59). Hartestimates
thattheynumberedabout 76,000
in 1939 and 135,000in 1960 (1981: 1, 62). Mostprecolonial(pre-1934)AitCAtta
were sheep or goat transhumants
who spentmuch of each year in three-or
four-storey
buildingsbuiltofsunbakedmudand stone.Some raisedcamelsin the
southerndesert(Lefebure1979: 121). Generallyspeaking,thesouthernAitCAtta
were (and are) morenomadicthanthenorthern
highlandersJoly1951).

HENRY MUNSON, JR

269

in a taqbilt(pl. tiqbilin).
Accessto grazinglandwas determined
by membership
This highlyelastictermis relatedto the Arabic word qabila,which is often
translated
as 'tribe' (Lefebure1979: 119-25). Hart translates
taqbiltas 'clan' or
were foundin just one village
'sub-clan',notingthatin the 1960s some tiqbilin
whereasothers,like theAit Bu Iknifen,were foundin ten (1981: 24, 73). The
dividedinto ighsan(pluralof ighs,or 'bone'), which Hart
were further
tiqbilin
describesas 'lineages' no more than four generationsdeep (1981: 24, 73).
to them.6Membersof
could become membersof ighsanby sacrificing
Strangers
to as aitma,literally
thesametaqbilt,
as well as thoseofthesameighswerereferred
'brothers'(1981: 74, 76).
Commentingon an earlierversionofthisarticle,Geilnersaidhe did not recall
to lineagesofthreeor fourgenerations
in depth.And he
theighsbeingrestricted
therelativity
of thetermstaqbilt
and ighs:
stresses
The Berber termstaqbilt(tribe)and ighs(clan) are indeed used in a proper 'segmentary'way,
i.e., relativeto context:the same unit will be describedas eithertribeor as clan accordingto
whethera contrastis intendedwith a smalleror a largergroup.But thisrelativity
lapsesat the
top and at the bottom.No one would describea partof a villageas a tribe,or a totaltribe(at
the genealogicalceiling,so to speak) as a clan (Gellner1969: 92).

in severalrespects.Firstofall,it suggeststhatDresch
This passageis interesting
is wrongto accuseGellnerofdeviatingfromEvans-Pritchard's
focuson 'relations
between relations'(Dresch 1986: 309). At the same time, however,Gellner
routinely
translates
taqbilt
and ighsas 'tribe'and 'clan', thusobscuringtherelativityhe himself
stresses,
and forcingtheelasticBerberconceptsintothemorerigid
categoriesofstructural-functionalist
theory.Because we do not know how Gellner's informants
use thesewords,we are unable to assessthe fitbetween his
interpretation
and theirs- at leastnoton thebasisofhisdataalone (see Schneider
1984).
Bloodandsoil:thefivefifths
Despite Gellner'sassertionthat 'Berber societyreallyis agnaticthroughout'
between genealogyand segmentation
(1969: 63), the relationship
among the
precolonialAit cAttawas in factoftentenuous.Unlike mostsedentary
tribesmen
in precolonialMorocco, theydid definethemselves
in termsof commonpatrilineal descent(Hart 1981: 8; Munson 1989; 1991a; 1991b). But theirmythof
commondescentfromDadda ('Grandfather')
cAttawas notlinkedto a genealogy
all segments.
The word aitin thenameAitcAtta,can simplymean
encompassing
ofcommondescent,as in Ait Usikis,'thepeople
'people' withoutanyimplication
of thecommunityof Usikis'.Or it can be translated
as 'sons' or 'children'(Hart
1981: xix,74). Thus thenameAitCAtta
could be translated
as 'the Sons ofCAtta'
or 'the People ofcAtta'.Because of thelegendconcerningthe group'sancestry
fromDadda cAtta,the formertranslation
would be more appropriatein this
context.
The precolonialAitcAttawere dividedinto'fivefifths'
as indi(khamskhmas),
cated in table 1 and figure1. These were: 1) the Ait Unir\AitWallal,
in the farwest of AitcAttaterrtory;2) the Ait Wahlim,concenconcentrated
tratedeast and northof the Ait Unir\AitWallal; 3) the Ait Isful\Ait
CAlwan,
in thesouthwestneartheDra Valley;4) theAit Ycazza (calledthe
concentrated

HENRY MUNSON, JR

270

AAWawizaght

Central
A

High

Ahansal

ntZawiya

O Talmast

Msimrir

0
l

O
Imidar

-o

Marrakesh

(xf

2
)

azat

A;x>

Tatlalt
OMsisl

0
A OTazzarin

OAJmu

O*

Taghbalt

ZaguraO |
/
NX??a-

a- Ktowa\

Fizwata

0
Tagunit
MhamldU
A Ait Unir
A Ait Wollol
Ait Isful
* Alt CAIwan
O Alt Wahlilm

* Ait Y5azza
0 Ait Khobbash)
0E)Alt Umnoaf aAtUnibg
-- Alt 0Atto exclusive terrItory

Sahara

km

0g

Q
oTazulait
O Bu Dib

Nqub
Al
A

Erfoud

/
I

as-Suq

Usikis

>N

Atlas

50

FIGURE 1. The Ait cAtta(adaptedfromHart 1981: 34).

Towz0

HENRY MUNSON, JR

271

of theAit cAtta.(Numbersreferto householdsaccording

TABLE 1 Segmentation
to Spillmann1936: 74, 81. Detailsare shownonlyfortheAit Zimru of
theAitWahlim.)
FifthI:

AitUnir (550)
AitWallal (1020)

FifthII:

AitWahlim(2200) -AitZimnru
(1370)
-AitHassu (830)
Ait Isful(700)
Ait CAlwan(400)

FifthIII:

FifthIV:

AitYCazza(1000)
Ait Khalifa(370)
Ait al-Firsi(70)

FifthV:

AitUnibgi (1250)

-AitBu Iknifen(500)
-AitCAisau Brahim(340)
-Ilimshan(290)
-Ignawen(240)

-AitKhabbash(460)
-AitUmnasf(790)

Ait CAisaMzin by Hart), concentrated east of the Ait Wahlim; and 5) the Ait
Unibgi, concentrated in the far east and southeast (Spillmann 1936: 74-103).
Geilner suggeststhatthese five fifths
were representedboth at the political centre

oftheAit cAtta,IgharmAmazdar,wheretheconfederation's
'supremecourt'was
held,and alongthevariousbordersof AitcAttaterritory.
He sees thisdispersion
as havingbeen an importantsource of the over-allcohesion of the AitCAtta
(1969: 173). But,as fig.1 demonstrates,
thefifths
were definitely
not as dispersed
as Geilnerclaims(see Hart 1970: 535; Spillmann1936: 74-95).
Geilnerspeaksof thefivefifths
as 'clans' (1969: 173). But Geilner'sinterpreter
contendsthatthe fivefifths
and the smallersegmentswithinthemwere by and
June17, 1990). Two
largenot genealogically
defined(personalcommunication,
of the fifths(the western Ait Unir\Ait Wallal and southwesternAit
Isful\Ait
CAlwan)did not even have a singlename,bearinginsteadthenamesof
their genealogicallyunrelatedprimarysegments.In the case of the Ait
Isful\Ait
CAlwan,foundalong the Dra River, the name of the firstof its two
Ait Isful,is generallytranslated
as 'Sons of the Foundling'.In
primarysegments,
the early1930s,the AitcAttain generalspoke of theAit Isfulas ait al-haram,
or
'bastards'(Spillmann1936: 85-6). As fortheAitCAlwan,the otherprimarysegmentof the fifthof the Ait Isful\Ait
CAlwan,one legendstatesthattheirname
means 'People of the Aid' and was giventhemby Dadda CAttabecause of the
helptheygave him (Spillman1936: 88). This tradition,
likethoseconcerningthe
theabsenceof an overallgenealogypluggingall
name of theAit Isful,illustrates
segmentsof theAitCAttaintoa singlelineagesystem.
The fifthof the Ait Wahlim is sometimessaid to have been named aftera
was not
grandsonof Dadda CAtta(Hart 1981: 39). But itsinternalsegmentation
in termsofagnation- actualor 'ideological'- at leastnotat thehigher
structured
levels.The AitWahlimwere dividedintotwo primary
segments:theAit Zimru

272

HENRY MUNSON, JR

and theAit Hassu,theformerbeingmuchmorepowerfulthanthelatter(Spillmann 1936: 81; Hart 1981: 39). Neither Hart nor Spillmannmentionsany
genealogicaltiebetweenthesegroups,or betweenthemand thesmallersegments
'nested'withinthem(Spillmann1936: 81-3; Hart 1981: 41-5). And the interdeniedthe existenceof any such
preterwithwhom I spokein 1990 specifically
genealogicalties.We thussee once againthatanyattemptto view theAitCAtta
in termsof a segmentary
as beingstructured
systemin the senseof a segmentary
lineage
systemwould be futile.
tree-like
structure
On theabsence
ofan unambiguous
Geilnerstressesthe unambiguouscharacterof segmentary
treesand the 'moral
But
no
such treesgrewin
claimsand expectations'theygenerated(1969: 43).
the
the
Dra Valley,
precolonial'Attaland.Along the banksof
qsur(themultistoriedbuildingsof the region,sgl., qsar)controlledby the AitCAttawere in
as in thenorthern
principlecontrolledby specifictiqbilin,
highlands.Many of the
clientsof
inhabitants
of the qsuralong theDra were haratin,
blacksharecropping
the AitCAttaand othertribes(al-Buzidi 1988: 223-4; Spillmann1931: 95-6).
to a specificgroupof theAitCAttato obtainitsprotection.
They would sacrifice
Anyone who attackeda protectedqsarwould be attackedby the men of the
protecting
group,some ofwhom took up residencein theqsaror in tentsnearit
theinhabit(al-Buzidi1988: 295; Spillmann1931: 100-8; 1936: 62-3). In return,
antsof the qsarwould providetheirprotectors
witha shareof theirdatecropsor
even a share of all theirbelongings- as much as a fourth(al-Buzidi 1988:
298-300). This was, in short,a Mafia-likeprotectionracketwherebytranshumanttribesmenextortedregularpaymentsfromthe residentsof sedentary
communities.

In some cases, the inhabitants

of a qsarwould sacrificeto severaldifferent
segmentsof the AitCAtta.Thus in thelate nineteenthcentury,the qsarof Bani
andJews,was protectedby the
Hayyun,whichwas inhabitedprimarily
by haratin
Ait Khardi,the Ilimshan,and theAit Isful(Spillmann1931: 178). Accordingto
levels of segmentation
of
Hart, thesethreegroupsbelongedto threedifferent
fifths
oftheAitCAtta(1981: 24, 36). Yet theyjointly
threedifferent
protectedthe
same qsarand shareditsdatecrop.
In a few cases,membersof the AitCAttalivingin a qsarof the Dra Valley
andJewswould sacrifice
alongsideharatin
alongwiththesegroupsto segmentsof
the AitCAttaotherthantheirown. In the qsarof the AitCAisau Brahimin the
Fizwata oasis of the Dra Valley,therewere thirtyfamiliesof the AitCAisau
Brahimtaqbilt(of the Ait Zimru segmentof the Ait Wahlim fifth)and twenty
Both groupssacrificed
familiesofharatin.
to, and wereprotectedby,a segmentof
theMsuffataqbilt
of theAit Unir\AitWallal fifth
(Spillmann1931: 153-4; 1936:
to and being pro75). Thus we findAitCAttasegmentsof one fifth
sacrificing
tectedby a segmentof anotherfifth.
And we even findmen of one AitCAtta
theIlimshan,sacrificing
to and beingprotectedby othermen of thissame
taqbilt,
taqbilt!
(Spillmann1931: 154). It is of courseimpossibleto reconcileall thiswith
theunambiguoustree-likepyramidof equivalentsegmentsimaginedby Geilner.
tribalstructures
tendedto decay
Some scholarsmightargue thattraditional
amongtheAit CAttain thelowlandqsurof theDra Valleyand thatGeilnerwas

HENRY MUNSON, JR

273

primarily
concernedwiththeAitCAttain theHigh Atlas.But thekindofunamanymorethanit did
biguoustreeGellnerimagineddid notexistin thehighlands
in theoasesalongtheDra River. We mayconsider,forexample,thenorthwestern highlandcommunityof Usikis, where in the 1960s two-thirdsof the
summercamps(Hart1984:
populationstillspentthegrazingseasonin temporary
27).
in Usikiswere theAitBu Iknifen,theAitYcazza,
The threedominanttiqbilin
and the Ait Unibgi (Hart 1981: 138-9; Spillmann1936: 48). The last of these
threegroupsbore the same name as the easternfifthof Ait Unibgi. Alreadyin
1936, Spillmannnotedthattheyhad onlythevaguestnotionof anykinshiptie
to theeasternAitUnibgiand could notspecifyto whichoftheprimary
segments
of thisfifth
theywerelinked(1936: 48). The Ait Unibgiand theAit Bu Iknifen
or 'agnates',althoughtheybelonged
of Usikisreferred
to each otheras imyisaten,
of theAitcAttaand no agnaticlinkbetweenthemwas recogto different
fifths
nized by the Ait cAttaas a whole (Hart 1981: 103). Moreover,the 'lineage
withinthe Ait Unibgi of Usikiswas radicallyunlikethatfound
segmentation'
1990). No neat
amongtheAitUnibgiin theeast(Hart,personalcommunication,
unambiguoustreeshere.
of theAitcAttaas iftheywere corporateclans
Gellnerspeaksof thefivefifths
dispersedby a hiddenhandforstrategic
purposes(1969: 173). But whatwe find
in factis thatnames of specificsegments,includingfifths
(khmas),tiqbilin,
and
'levelsof segmentation'
ighsantendedto pop up in different
regionsat different
and thattherewere oftenno structurally
tiesbetweensuch dispersed
significant
('People of the
groups(see Berque 1954). If we considerthe name Ait Umnasf
the
two
primary
segments
of thefifth
of
Half'), forexample,thename of one of
Ait
the
by thisname listedas
Unibgi,we findsmalllocalized ighsanand tiqbilin
of theAitcAttaby Spillmann(1931: 130-4;
segmentsof all the otherfourfifths
1936: 78, 85, 87). Thereis no recordofanyeconomicor politicallinksbetween
to whichGellnertendsto attribute
thesevarioussegments,
an illusorycollective
volition(1981: 228).
On theabsence
ofbalanced
opposition
amongthefivefifths
ensuresthat
Geilnercontendsthatin a segmentary
society,'thetree-likestructure
foranyconflictthatmayarise,thereare some groupsthatcan be activatedand
whichwill "balance" each other'(1969: 44). We findno suchbalancedopposiof the AitcAttaelecteda
tion among the Ait cAtta.In principle,the fivefifths
as a whole everyyearby a systemof rotationand
chiefforthe confederation
weresupposedto take
complementarity
(Geilner1969: 59, 81). That is,thefifths
turnsprovidingparamountchiefs,who wereelectedby themembersof thefour
fifths
not eligibleto nominatea candidatein a givenyear.However,sucha chief
was actuallyonlyelectedwhen therewas a generallyrecognizedneed forone if war were imminent,forexample (Geilner1969: 91; Hart 1981: 79). Given
as cohesivecorporateclans,it shouldbe
Gellner'stendencyto see thefivefifths
theprincipal
thattheelection
stressed
(ifnot
ofthetopchief
oftheAit cAttawasactually
thesole)function
ofthefiveffths
(Hart1981: 30, 76).
Gellnersees the AitCAtta'smethodof electingchiefsas epitomizingthe segmentarysystemof balanced oppositionwherebyany group or individualwas

274

HENRY MUNSON, JR

preventedfromamassingpower (1981: 118-19). However,thesystemwas considerablyless balancedthanGellnersuggests.The veryfactthatfiveis an odd

numberprecludedthe kind of balancedoppositionpositedby the segmentary
model. Moreover,the overallchiefwould oftenretainhis positionforseveral
yearsin succession(Spillmann1936: 61). Hart providesa list of top chiefs,of
whom overhalfwere fromthefifth
oftheAitWahlim(1981: 78, 229-32). Hart
were
says thisimbalancemay have been due to the factthathis informants
themselves
of theAit Wahlim(1981: 78). But otherscholarswho workedwith
othergroupshave also notedthedominanceof theAitWahlim(al-Buzidi1988:
301; Lefebure1979: 119, 121; Spillmann1936: 42, 82).
One could of course dismissall thisby arguingthatthe segmentary
model
represented
an ideal to which actualpracticedid not necessarily
conform.But
imbalanceswere embeddedin fundamental
politicalinstitutions.
Only segments
theAitWahlimand theAitYcazza, were represented
on
oftwo ofthefivefifths,
the 'supremecourt' of the AitcAttaat IgharmAmazdar(de Monts de Savasse
of the Ait Isful/Ait
on
cAlwanhad no representatives
1951a: 12, 46). The fifth
thiscourt,despitethe factthatsome Ait Isfullived in the communitywhereit
was held (Hart1981: 170, 173). Of thesixmembersofthecourt,fourwerefrom
local tiqbilin
belongingto the fifthof the Ait Wahlim and two fromtiqbilin
belongingto theAit Ycazza (Hart 1981: 170; Spillmann1936: 56). Thus tiqbilin
belongingto one fifthof the AitcAttaprovidedtwo-thirdsof the supreme
court'sjudges,while threeof the fivefifths
providednone. It is in factpossible
affiliation
of thelocal tiqbilin
thatprovidedthejudges forthe court
thatthefifth
Be thatas it may,Geilner's
at IgharmAmazdarwas actuallyaltogether
irrelevant.
contentionthatall the fivefifths
were, or were supposedto be, equallyrepresentedin the basic politicalinstitutions
of the AitCAttais mistaken(see 1969:
173).
Anotherproblemariseswithrespectto Gellner'sdepictionof the AitCAtta's
as a 'masterpiece
ofsegmentary
electoralsystem
organisation'
(1981: 228). Not all
in theseelections,
were represented
segments
participated
just as not all segments
on thesupremecourt.Ifwe takethefifth
to as 'AitY Cazza',Hart
usuallyreferred
saysthatitwas composedoffourprimary
segments(1981: 24). But threeofthese
neverhad therightto providea top chief(Hart1981: 61; Spillmann1936:
tiqbilin
57, 88, 91). Similarpoliticalimbalances,at the level of both practiceand prinof theAit Atta(de la Chapelle 1931: 59; Hart
ciple,existedin all the fivefifths
1981: 37-9, 51-3; Spillmann1936: 57, 75-9, 86-8). One findsnothingremotely
balancedoppositionat anylevel of segmentation.
resembling
scaleofsolidarity
On theirrelevance
ofthesegmentary
In a segmentary
society,closersegmentsare of coursesupposedto unitewhen
facedwiththreatsfrommore distantones. The availableevidencesuggeststhat
thisrarelyhappenedamong the AitCAtta.Geilnerobservesthatthe lodge of
'saints'which he studiedwas ideallysituatedto mediate the annual disputes
betweenthenorthern
segmentsof theAitCAttawho livednearthechoice sumwho came to thehighlandseach springto graze
merpasturesand thesoutherners
theirflocks(1969: 32-3). But he glossesover the factthat this conflictwas
theAitBu Iknifen('thepeople of
betweenagnatesof thesame taqbilt,
essentially

HENRY MUNSON, JR

275

theblackburnouses'),some of whom were usuallysupportedby genealogically

unrelatedallies(Hart1981: 39; 1984: 19-20).
northtoldhimthattheAitBu Iknifenin theneighbouring
Hart'sinformants
ern communitiesof Usikisand Msimrirfoughteach otherforfouryearsbefore
the Frenchsubjugationof the AitcAttain the 1930s (1981: 138). The Ait Bu
IknifenofMsimriraskedmenofthenon-AitcAttatribesoftheAitMurghad,the
Ait Hadiddu,and two segmentsof theAit Sukhmanto help themfighttheAit
behaviour
unsegmentary
Bu IknifenofUsikis(Hart1981: 204). This thoroughly
is striking
in a numberof respects.Firstof all, the Ait Murghadand the Ait
the traditional
enemyof
Hadiddu belongedto the Ait Yafalmanconfederation,
the Ait cAtta(Hart 1981: 13, 135). Moreover,the Ait Bu Iknifenof Msimrir
were surroundedon most sides by non-AitcAtta(the Ait Sukhman,the Ait
Hadiddu,theAit Murghadtribes,and theAhansala'saints')and yetcalledupon
hostilegroupsto help themfighttheirown
men of theseforeignand ostensibly
principle'
agnatesin thevillagenextto theirs(Hart1981: 135). 'The segmentary
to discernin all of this.
is difficult
toFrench
conquest
modelbymeansoftheAitCAtta'sresponses
Testing
thesegmentary
model in the central
Geilnersuggeststhatthe applicability
of the segmentary
High Atlascould be tested(althoughhe does not do so himself)by examining
how tribesrespondedto theFrenchconquestin the 1920sand 1930s (1969: 63).
This is an excellentidea, since thereare detailedaccountsof the AitcAtta's
and submission
to theFrench(Dunn 1977; Hart1984; Spillmann1931;
resistance
forexample,to thecase oftheAitBu
1936; 1968; al-Susi1961). We mayreturn,
feudsin theprecolonialperioddid not end in theface
Iknifen,
whoseinternecine
of the Frenchthreat.Rather,theybecame partof the divisionof the AitCAtta
into pro- and anti-French
forces.The Ait Bu Iknifenof Usikis (alongwiththe
the
forcesled by a 'saint'of the
restof
community)supportedthe anti-French
Zawiya Ahansal,whereasmanyof theAit Bu Iknifenof Msimrirsupportedthe
pro-Frenchforcesled by a leaderoftheAitBu Iknifenin thenearbycommunity
of Imidar (Hart 1981: 203-4). Even withinImidar,the Ait Bu Iknifenwere
dividedintopro- and anti-French
factions(Beaurpere1931: 259).
toand
This failureto unitein thefaceofexternalfoeswas typical.Bothresistance
support
forthe Frenchamong the northernAitcAtta(the AitCAttaas a whole
neverunitedagainstthe French)were led by men of theAit Zimru segmentof
intopro- and
theAit Wahlimfifth(Hart 1984: 166-8). Such divisionof tiqbilin
to keep on
anti-French
forceswas not simplythe resultof theirleaders'efforts
did occur. We know this
good termswith both sides- althoughsuch efforts
This was
men oftheirown taqbilt.
becausemanymen on bothsidesdiedfighting
the case,forexample,at thefamousbattleof Bu Gafrin 1933 (Spillmann1936:
140-4).
behaviourin thefaceoftheFrenchconquest
These examplesofunsegmentary
of theAit Wahlim.It
have involvedthe northern
highlandAitcAttaof thefifth
mightbe thoughtthatthe relativelymore pastoralAitCAttaof the southern
manner.This was not the case. The first
desertbehavedin a more segmentary
Ait CAttato resistthe French(in 1901) and thelastto submitto them(in 1934)
AitKhabbash,one ofthetwo primary
were men ofthesoutheastern
segmentsof

276

HENRY MUNSON, JR

thefifth
ofAitUnibgi (Dunn 1977: 182-3; Spillmann1936: 92-93, 148). But the
AitKhabbashwereneversupportedby therestoftheAitCAttaas thesegmentary
model would predict.Even among the Ait Khabbashthemselves,
therewas no
unificationin the face of the Frenchthreat(Lefebure1986; Spillmann1936:
92-3, 148).
The otherprimarysegmentof the easternfifthof the Ait Unibgi, the Ait
as did mostofthe
Umnasf,notonlyfailedto supporttheAitKhabbashresistance,
othersegmentsof the AitcAtta,but some of thembegan to negotiatetermsof
submissionto the Frenchin 1911, thirteen
yearsbeforeAit Khabbashresistance
was finally
crushed(Dunn 1977: 239). In otherwords,whereassome men of the
Ait Khabbashwere thelastAitcAttato submit,some membersof theircollateral
segment,theAit Umnasf,were thefirstto do so (Dunn 1977). In fact,some of
theAitUmnnasf
actuallyfoughtfortheFrenchagainsttheAitKhabbash(Lefebure
1986: 141). Both groupswere rivenby pro- and anti-Frenchfactions(Dunn
1977: 239; Spillmann1936: 94-5).
While theAit Khabbashwere unableto mobilizeall theirown men,let alone
the restof the Ait cAtta,in theirstruggleagainstthe French,theywere often
Arabtribeof theBani
supportedby non-AitcAttagroups.The largelysedentary
Mhammad,to whom theAit Khabbashwere bound by a pact of 'milkkinship'
in long-distancetrade,generallysupportedthe Ait
as well as by partnership
Khabbash,as did segments
ofvariousothertribessuchas thenomadiccArib(Dunn
1977: 182-3, 197). Thus we findmen of the same segmentsand tribesfighting
each otheralongsidemenwithwhom theyhad no agnaticor tribalconnexionof
anykind.Ratherthanunitein thefaceofthethreatofcolonialrule,theAit CAtta
tendedto splitintopro-and anti-French
factions
alonglinesthatwould neverbe
foundon a segmentary
diagram.(For further
examples,see al-Buzidi1988: 370;
Lefebure1986: 139; Spillmann1936: 120-1, 126).
tosalvagethemodel
Gellner's
attempt
In respondingto the cn'ticsof his segmentary
view of Muslimtribalism,
Gellner
contendsthat:
- the feud, collectiveoath, a legal systemrelying
a wide range of well-attestedinstitutions
heavilyon arbitration,
marriagepatterns,
pastureuse - onlymakessense on the assumptionsof
somethinglike the model propounded(1983: 446).

to which Gellnerrefersactually
But in the case of theAitCAtta,theinstitutions
model. By farthe best documented
attestto the irrelevanceof the segmentary
feudamongtheAitCAttainvolvedmen of theclan of theAit Bu Iknifenkilling
each other- oftenwiththehelp of men fromgenealogically
unrelatedclansand
tribes(Hart1981: 204; 1984: 19-20). Thereis no recordofanyAitAttafeud(or
model (Hart 1981: 203-6). As forthe
war) thatconformedto the segmentary
collectiveoath,it did usuallyinvolvea man's agnates,but thereis no evidence
thatit ever involved the balanced and complementary
oppositionof groups
tree. Hart makes this clear, even
generatedby an unambiguoussegmentary
model
thoughhe too imaginesa link between the oath and the segmentary
(1981: 158-67).
Gellner'scontentionthatthe legal systemof precolonialtribes'only makes
modelis patently
inaccuratewithrespectto the
sense'in termsofthesegmentary

HENRY MUNSON, JR

277

society'lacksagenciesto 'punAitCAtta.He has stressed

thata 'puresegmentary
of rulesin theabstract'so thattransgressions
are onlypunished
ish transgressions
by thegroupsto whichthevictimsbelong (1969: 45). And he sees theAitCAtta
societiesin
and similarBerber groupsas being among the purestsegmentary
human history(Gellner 1969: 64; 1981: 118, 228). But the AitCAttahad a
of rulesin the abstract'on the
hierarchy
of courtsthatpunished'transgressions
basisof utterly
unsegmentary
writtenpenal codes (al-Buzidi1988; Duclos 1967;
Hart 1981: 155-82, 219-27; Mezzine 1987; de Monts de Savasse 1951a). Thus
we readin theprecolonialpenalcode ofthe 'supremecourt'of IgharmAmazdar
that'ifone man killsanotherwithinthelimitsof theTafrawt(n-IgharmAmazdar), he mustpay 8 iguryan
(one-year-oldsheep)' (Hart 1981: 221). This rule
betweentransgressor
and victim.
appliedregardless
oftherelationship
In commenting
on an earlierversionofthisarticle,Gellnerraisedthequestion
of how muchpower theAitCAttacourtsactuallyhad to enforcetheirdecisions.
a crucialpoint,and itwould be a mistaketo equate theAitCAtta
This is certainly
judicial systemwith thatof a modem state.We know, forexample,thatthe
courtsdid not eliminatetheblood feud(Hart1981: 25). But thishasbeen trueof
manystatejudiciariesas well (Verdier1984; Wormald1980). And theAitCAtta
courtsdid impose 'veryseveresanctions'on thosewho violatedthe confederation's 'customarylaw' (de Monts de Savasse 1951a: 48-9; cf. Hart 1981;
Mezzine 1987). This was definitely
could
not a societyin which transgressors
onlybe punishedby thelineagesof theirvictims.
As for the 'marriagepatterns'and 'pastureuse that Gellnersees as being
withoutreference
to thesegmentary
model,theywere once again
unintelligible
any linkbetweenthe notionof
unrelatedto it. No one has ever demonstrated
ofmarriageand pastureuse
balancedand complementary
oppositionandpatterns
among the Ait CAtta.Both certainlywere linked to membershipin specific
descentgroups(tiqbilin),
but not to the segmentary
scale of solidarity(see Hart
1981; 1984; Lefebure1979; de Monts de Savasse1951b). It shouldbe kept in
mind thatthe internecinefeudsof the Ait Bu Iknifenofteninvolveddisputes
overaccessto pastureland (Hart1984: 19-20).
Conclusion
It is true that the precolonialpolitical order of the Ait CAttawas relatively
when comparedwitha full-fledged
state.Ifthiswere
'acephalous'and egalitarian
all the termsegmentary
implied,therewould be no reasonnot to apply it to
model is more specific
groupssuch as the Ait cAtta.But Gellner'ssegmentary
thanthis.It positsthe existenceof an unambiguous'tree' of segments,the balanced and complementary
oppositionof which was the linchpinof political
order.Such a treedid not existamongtheAitcAtta.
model can be
One could of courseargue,as manyhave,thatthe segmentary
salvagedby depictingit as a model of an 'ideology'ratherthanof actualbehaviour (Evans-Pritchard
1940: 212; 1945: 63; Seddon 1979). But thereis simply
no evidence of such an 'ideology' among the AitCAtta.The precolonial
Ait cAtta,likemostpeople everywhere,
generally
acceptedtheprinciplethatone
and so on.
shouldhelp close kin againstdistantkin,distantkin againststrangers,
to qualifya societyas
Ifwidespreadacceptanceofsucha principleweresufficient

278

HENRY MUNSON, JR

'segmentary',then one cannot imagine a societyanywherethat would not

deservethelabel.But Geilner'smorespecificmodel ofa polityin whichorderis
oppositionof groups
maintainedprimarily
by the balancedand complementary
in theminds
generatedby an unambiguoustreedoes not correspondto anything
of theprecolonialAitCAtta.We are not speakingof a fewdeviaorthebehaviour
'baseline',we arespeakingofa societywherethe
tionsfroman idealsegmentary
kindof 'base line' imaginedby Geilnerdid not exist.
NOTES
I thankHastingsDonnan, Paul Dresch,ErnestGellner,David Hart,Emanuel Marx and David
Seddon fortheircommentson earlierversionsof thisarticle.(Dresch and Seddon revealedtheir
identitiesafterreviewingthe articleanonymously
forMan.) I am indebtedto ProfessorGeilnerin
waysthatgo farbeyondhis patienttolerationof my criticismover the years.I should also like to
and researchassistant
in the 1950s
thankthe Moroccan who servedas his (and Hart's) interpreter
and 1960s. This individual,a Berber fromthe High Atlas,has requestedanonymity.He spent
severalhoursansweringmy questionson June 17, 1990. Because I do not speak Berberand he
preferred
not to speakMoroccan Arabic,we spoke in French.This was also the languagehe used
in speakingwith Gellnerand Hart. I thankSteve Bicknellformakingfigure1 and table 1.
My fieldworkin Morocco (in 1976-7 and the summersof 1987, 1988 and 1990) was made
possibleby grantsfromthe Social Science Research Council, the Fulbright-Hays
Programof the
Officeof Education,the FacultySummerResearch Programof the Universityof Maine, and the
JohnD. and CatherineT. MacArthurFoundation'sProgramon Peace and International
Cooperation.Virtuallynone of my fieldworkdirectlyconcernedthe Ait cAtta.
1 I have discussedGeertz'sinterpretive
approachelsewhere(Munson 1984; 1986; 1993). See
also the excellentcritiqueby Dresch (1986: 317-21).
2 Paul Dresch has arguedthatthe segmentary
model and lineage theoryshould not be confused(1984; 1986). Logically,he is right.But mostanthropologists
haveassumedthata 'segmenin termsof a segmentary
tarysociety' is one structured
lineage system(see Holy 1979; Kelly
1985).
3 Several people who commentedon earlierversionsof this articlechided me forusing the
phrase'greasethe gearsof segmentation'
withoutcitingMichael Meeker's use of thismetaphorin
his book Literature
and violence
in north
Arabia(1979). However, thismay be a case of independent
invention,since I do not recallever noticingMeeker's use of the expressionand it is not mentionedin my noteson his book.
4 The Ahansala actuallyserved as local agentsof the Moroccan state ('Amalik 1989; Morsy
1972; 1983; 1986). I have ignored the relationshipbetween the Moroccan stateand highland
tribesin this articleforlack of space. But it was more importantthan Geilnersuggests(Burke
1972; El Mansour 1990; Hammoudi 1974; Munson 1989).
5 I have also used the valuable work of al-Buzidi (1988), Dunn (1977), Hammoudi (1974),
Lefebure(1979; 1986), Mezzine (1987) and de Monts de Savasse(1951a; 1951b).
6 Geilner 1969: 61, 121; Mezzine 1987: 257; Spillmann1936: 44. Geilner'sinterpreter
says
that a man would sacrificeto a specificindividualto become a memberof his ighs.The new
membertherebygainedaccessto the ighs'spastureland (agudat),but not to irrigated
land.

REFERENCES

'Amalik,A. 1989. Ahansal.Ma 'amatal-Maghrib

1, 183-6.
Beaurpere,Lt. 1931. Note provisoiresurles valleesdu Todgha de l'Imideret du Saghrooriental.
Villeset Tribusdu Maroc9, 205-65.
In L'eventailde l'histoire
Berque,J. 1954. Qu'est-ce qu'une 'tribu'nord-africaine?
vivante:
hommage
a
Paris:ArmandColin.
LucienFebvre.
a new look at the
Burke,E. 1972. The imageof the Frenchstatein Frenchethnologicalliterature:
tonationin NorthAfrica(eds) E.
tribe
originofLyautey'sBerberpolicy.In ArabsandBerbers:from
Gellner& C. Micaud. Lexington:LexingtonBooks.

HENRY MUNSON, JR

279

al-Buzidi,Ahmad. 1988. Al-tarikhal-ijtima'ili-dar'a(matla'al-qarn17 - matla'al-qarn20): dirasat

fi'l-hayat
al-siyasiya
wa'l-ijtima'iyawa'l-iqtisadiyamin khilalal-watha'iqal-mahalliya.Bahthli
naildiplumal-dirasat
al-'ulyafi'l-tarikh.
Thesis,UniversiteMohamed V (Rabat).
de la Chapelle,F. 1931. Le SultanMoulay Isma'ilet les BerberesSanhajadu Maroc central.Archiv.
Maroc.28, 7-64.
Dresch,P. 1984. The positionofshaykhs
amongthenorthern
tribesofYemen. Man (N.S.) 19,31-49.
1986. The significance
of the course eventstake in segmentary
systems.Am. Ethnol.13,
309-24.
Duclos, L.-J.1967. Note surl'organisationjudiciaire
desAitCAttadansla vaIleede l'Oued Dra'. Rev.
Occ.musulm.
Medit.4, 23-29.
Dunn, R. 1977. Resistance
in thedesert:
Moroccan
responses
toFrench
imperialism,
1881-1912. London:
Croom Helm.
Eickelman,D. 1989. TheMiddleEast:an anthropological
approach
(2ndedn). EnglewoodCliffs:Prentice
Hall.
El Mansour,M. 1990. Morocco
inthereign
ofMawlaySulayman.
Wisbech:Middle East& NorthAfrican
StudiesPress.
Evans-Pritchard,
E.E. 1940. TheNuer:a description
ofthemodesoflivelihood
andpolitical
institutions
ofa
Niloticpeople.
Oxford:ClarendonPress.
1945. Someaspectsof marriage
andfamilyamongtheNuer (Rhodes-Liv. Pap. 11). Lusaka:
Rhodes-Livingstone
Institute.
Geertz,C. 1971. In searchof NorthAfrica.N.Y. Rev. Bks,April22, 1971, 20-4.
1979. Suq: thebazaareconomyin Sefrou.In Meaningandorder
inMoroccan
society:
three
essays
incultural
analysis(by) C. Geertz,H. Geertz& L. Rosen. New York: CambridgeUniv. Press.
Gellner,E. 1969. SaintsoftheAtlas.Chicago: Univ. Press.
1981. Muslimsociety.
New York: CambridgeUniv. Press.
1983. The tribalsocietyand itsenemies.In Theconflict
andstateinIranandAfghanistan
oftribe
(ed.) R. Tapper. New York: St Martin'sPress.
Hammoudi,A. 1974. Segmentarite,
stratification
sociale,pouvoirpolitiqueet saintete:reflexions
sur
les thesesde Gellner.Hesperis
15, 147-80.
Hart,D.M. 1970. Review of SaintsoftheAtlas,by ErnestGellner.MiddleEastJ. 24, 531-6.
1981. Dadda CAtta
and his fortygrandsons:the socio-politicalorganisation
of the AitCAtta
ofsouthernMorocco. Wisbech:Middle East & NorthAfricanStudiesPress.
1984. TheAit CAtta
of southernMorocco: dailylifeand recenthistory.Wisbech:Middle
East & NorthAfricanStudiesPress.
Holy, L. (ed.) 1979. Segmentary
lineagesystems
reconsidered
(Pap. social Anthrop.4). Belfast:Queens
Univ. Press.
Joly,F. 1951. Les Ait Khebbachede Taouz. Trav.Inst.Rech.sahar.7, 3-33.
Ann Arbor:
thestructure
anddevelopment
Kelly,R.C. 1985. TheNuerconquest:
ofan expansionist
system.
Univ. ofMichiganPress.
New York: Routledge.
Kuper,A. 1988. Theinvention
ofprimitive
society.
sociale:l'estivagechez les AytAtta
Lefebure,C. 1979. Acces aux ressourcescollectiveset structure
and society
(Maroc). In Pastoral
production
(ed.) L'equipe ecologie et anthropologiedes societes
pastorales.Cambridge:Univ. Press;Paris:Editionsde la Maison des Sciencesde l'Homme.
1986. AytKhebbach,impassesud-est:l'involutiond'une tribumarocaineexclue du Sahara.
Rev. Occ.musulm.
Medit.41-42, 136-57.
andviolence
in NorthArabia.New York: CambridgeUniv. Press.
Meeker,M.E. 1979. Literature
d l'histoire
du Marocaux XVIl7 et XVIIIc siecles. Rabat:
Mezzine, L. 1987. Le Tafilalt:contribution
Publicationsde la Facultedes Lettreset des SciencesHumaines.
de Monts de Savasse,R. 1951a. Le regimefoncierchez les Ait Attadu Sahara.Unpublishedstudy
availableat the Centredes HautesEtudessurl'Afriqueet l'Asie Modernes(CHEAM) in Paris.
1951b. L'elevage dans une tribuberberede montagnedu Sud marocain:les Ait Atta du
Sahara. Unpublishedstudyavailableat the Centre des Hautes Etudes sur l'Afriqueet l'Asie
Modemes (CHEAM) in Paris.
de l'Atlasmarocain.
Morsy,M. 1972. Les Ahansala:examendu rolehistorique
d'unefamille
maraboutique
Paris:Mouton.
de ThomasPellow:unelecture
duMarocau 18' siecle. Paris:EditionsRecherche
1983. La relation
surles Civilisations.

280

HENRY

MUNSON,

JR

1986. Ahansal.Encyclopedie
berbere
3, 307-11. Aix-en-Provence:EDISUD.
New Haven: Yale
ofa Moroccanfamily.
Munson,H.,Jr.1984. ThehouseofSi AbdAllah:theoralhistory
Univ. Press.
1986. Geertzon religion:thetheoryand thepractice.Religion16, 19-32.
1989. On theirrelevance
ofthesegmentary
lineagemodelin theMoroccanRif.Am.Anthrop.
91, 386-400.
andemigration
fromtheJbalan
1991a. Slash-and-bum
cultivation,
charcoalmaking,
highlands
and ruraldevelopment
in NorthAfricaand theMiddleEast
of NorthwestMorocco. In Anthropology
(eds) M. Horowitz& M. Salem-Murdock.Boulder:WestviewPress.
1991b.The segmentary
lineagemodelin theJbalanhighlandsofMorocco. In Tribeandstate:
essaysin honorofDavid M. Hart (eds) E.G.H. Joffe& C.R. Pennell.Wisbech: Middle East &
NorthAfricanStudiesPress.
1993. Religionandpowerin Morocco.
New Haven: Yale Univ. Press.
Bedouin ofCyrenaica.
Peters,E.L. 1967. Some structural
aspectsofthefeudamongthecamel-herding
Africa
3, 261-82.
inpersonal
andcorporate
power(eds)J.Goody & E. Marx.
1990. TheBedouinofCyrenaica:
studies
New York: CambridgeUniv. Press.
theconstruction
in a Muslimcommunity.
Chicago,
Rosen, L. 1984. Bargainingfor
reality:
ofsocialrelations
London: Univ. of Chicago Press.
Ann Arbor:Univ. ofMichiganPress.
Schneider,D.M. 1984. A critique
ofthestudyofkinship.
Seddon, David. 1979. Politicalideologiesand politicalformsin the easternRif of Morocco. In
reconsidered
Segmentary
lineage
systems
(ed.) L. Holy (Pap. socialAnthrop.4). Belfast:Queens Univ.
Press.
du Maroc9, xi-268.
Spillmann,G. 1931. Districtset tribusde la hautevallee du Dra'. Villesettribus
1936. LesAitAttadu Saharaetla pacifcation
duHaut Dra (Publ. Inst.haut.Etud. Maroc. 29).
Rabat: FelixMoncho.
1968. Souvenirs
d'uncolonialiste.
Paris:Pressesde la Cite.
al-Susi,al-Mukhtar1961. Al-Ma'sul,vol. 16. Casablanca:Matba'atal-Najah.
etideologies
dansquelquescivilisations
de
pouvoirs
Verdier,R. (ed.) 1984. La vengeance,
vol. 3, Vengeance,
Paris:EditionsCujas.
l'antiquite.
in earlymodernScotland.PastandPresent
Wormald,J. 1980. Bloodfeud,kindredand government
87, 54-97.

Pour repenserI'analyse segmentaire de I'Ait CAttamarocain propose

par Gellner
Resume
La plupartdes anthropologues
de la findu XX)emesieclerejettent
le conceptde tribusegmentaire
comme une relique antediluvienneappartenant'a l'ere structuro-fonctionnaliste.
Pourtant,ce
concept est encore defendupar quelques eminentsspecialistes,
notammentErnestGeilner.Les
formulations
generalesde cet auteursontbaseessurla conceptionqu'il se faitdes tribusberberes
des AitCAtta.Cependant,ceux
pre-colonialesdu GrandAtlasmarocain,et plus particulierement
tented'evaluerla plausibiliteempiriquede
qui ont critiqueles positionsde Geilneront rarement
son analysedes AitCAttadansLes saintsde l'Atlas(1969). L'articledemontreque cetteanalysen'a
que peu de rapportavec les structures
politiquesqu'elle estsenseeexpliquer.

Anthropology
Department,
University
ofMaine,Orono,Maine04469, U.S.A.