Munson-Critica a Gellner-Ayt Atta(1993)

7/30/2019 Munson-Critica a Gellner-Ayt Atta(1993)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/munson-critica-a-gellner-ayt-atta1993 1/15

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. 267-280Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and IrelandStable 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 formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

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

and extend access to Man.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=rai

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2803413?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2803413?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=rai



RETHINKING GELLNER'S SEGMENTARY ANALYSIS OF

MOROCCO'S AIT CATTA

HENRY MUNSON, JR

UniversityfMaine

Many anthropologistsf the ate twentiethentury ismiss he conceptof the egmentaryribeasa relic fantediluviantructural-functionalism.ut t s till efended y omeprominentcholars,notably rnestGellner.AllGellner's eneral tatementsbout tribalism eflect isconception fthe recolonial erber ribes fMorocco'sHighAtlas, speciallyheAit CAtta. etcritics fGellner'sviews have rarely ttemptedo assess he empirical lausibilityf his analysis f theAit CAttanSaints f heAtlas 1969). In this rticle,t s argued hatGellner's nalysis ears ittle esemblancetothepolitical tructurestwasmeant o explain.

The very hought fyet another riticismfthe segmentary odelwill nevit-ably nduce someanthropologistso roll their yesandgroan t thenaiveteof

thosewho seek to provethe ndubitable. owever,notions f the ndubitableoftenboil down to empirically aseless onventionalwisdom. This was truewhen mostanthropologistsssumedthatsegmentaryineage systemsctuallyexisted.And it remains ruenow thatmanybelieve thecontraryHoly 1979;Kuper 1988; Schneider 984).

Evenif he egmentaryodelhadbeen universallyepudiated, hich sbynomeans he case (seeKelly 1985), twould stillmerit ontinued loggingecausemuchof therepudiationasbeendue to shiftingashion ather han oa study fthe fit etween heorynd data.Forexample,nterpretiventhropologistshohave done fieldworkn the lowlandvillages nd towns of Morocco have re-peatedly riticized ellner's se ofthesegmentary odel without vertestingtin terms f thehighland ribes hathe himselftudied Eickelman 989: 131-8;Geertz1971; 1979: 235; Rosen 1984).Rather, heyhaveargued n thebasisofindividualisticssumptionshat Gellner rightly ejects.1 xcept for AbdellahHammoudi (1974), no one has attemptedo demonstraterather hanmerelyassert) hatGellner'sdepiction f theAitcAtta n Saints ftheAtlas 1969) isfundamentallylawed. venHammoudi, houghhispaper s excellent, oesnotdiscuss he rrelevancef thesegmentaryotionof 'balanced nd complemen-tary pposition'.

Gellner'sonceptionf he egmentaryodel

As anyonewho has takenan introductorynthropologyoursepresumablyknows, order n a segmentaryociety s maintainednot by the specialized

Man (N.S.) 28, 267-280



268 HENRY MUNSON, JR

institutionsf a state, utbythebalanced pposition fsegmentshatoin forcesin thefaceof externalhreatGellner 969:41-4). Such societies avea tree-likestructuren the basis of whichgroupsdivide ntosub-groups, hich in turn

furtherivide, llgroups tthesame evel of the treebeing nbalancedopposi-tion. ndividuals itntothis ree-likeystemfsegmentsndsub-segmentsnanunambiguouswayand social ties ofanyothernature re either bsent r rela-tively insignificant.Gellner puts particularemphasis on the absence (orinsignificance)f ambiguityna segmentaryociety nd contends hat t ensuresthat or nyconflicthatmay rise, herewillbe groupsn balancedoppositionwhichcanbe activated o confrontachother 1969: 44). Most of thesevariousgroups re notpermanentndcorporate,utemerge nly nopposition o others(1969: 116). Gellner as said that segmentarytree' s notnecessarilytructuredin terms f descent 1969: 48). Butwhileconceding hepossibilityfsegmenta-

tion n territorialerms, e writes:I doubtwhether he two- segmentationndunilineal inship can be wholly eparated'1969: 48).2

Another istinctiveeature fGeilner's egmentary odel is the presence fholy rbitrators,saints',who serve ogrease hegears f egmentation.3hus theAhansala hurafa', utativedescendants f theprophetMuhammad, erved smediatorsnmany f thedisputesnvolvingheprecolonial ribes fthecentralHighAtlas.Thesesacredubricants,aysGeilner, nabled heAitcAtta oremainan egalitarianocietynwhichno one group r ndividual revailed oliticallyreconomically1969:54-5).4

Geilnerrejects he idea that the segmentary odel is merely 'myth'or'ideology' indigenous r anthropological)ivorced romwhatflesh-and-bloodpeople actually o (1969: 62-3; Peters 967; 1990: 59-83). But he does concedethatpoliticalbehaviourdoes not invariably orrespond o it (1969: 63). ForGellner, he segmentaryrinciple' s an idea embedded n themindsof themembers f a segmentaryociety hathasa directmpact n how peoplebehave,eventhoughtdoes not determineverythingheydo.

TheAitCAtta:n overview

Havingsummarized ellner's onception f thesegmentary odel, shallnowattempto demonstratets rrelevance ithrespect o theprecolonialAit CAtta.Becauseofthedearth fdata nGellner's wn writings,shallbase my rgumentprimarilyn theexcellent thnographiesf Georges pillmann1931; 1936) andDavid Hart 1981; 1984), and on myconversationnJune 990 with heMoroc-can who served s interpreterndresearchssistantorboth Gellner nd Hart nthe1950sand 1960s.5

The Berber-speaking itcAttadominate regionof southeastern oroccoextendingver50,000 squarekilometres fromthe corched ahara dge tothehighest egularlynow-covered lateaugrasslandsn the north ide of theAtlas

watershed'Gellner 969: 59). Hartestimateshat heynumberedbout76,000in1939and135,000 n1960 (1981: 1, 62). Most precolonial pre-1934)AitCAttawere sheepor goat transhumantsho spentmuch of each year n three-orfour-storeyuildingsuilt f unbakedmudandstone. omeraised amelsnthesouthern esertLefebure 979: 121). Generally peaking,he outhern itCAttawere and are)morenomadic han henorthernighlanders oly 951).



HENRY MUNSON, JR 269

Access o grazingandwasdeterminedy membershipn a taqbiltpl. tiqbilin).This highly lastic erm s related o theArabicword qabila,which is oftentranslateds 'tribe' Lefebure 979: 119-25). Harttranslatesaqbilts 'clan' or

'sub-clan',noting hat n the 1960s sometiqbilin ere found n ust one villagewhereas thers,ikethe Ait Bu Iknifen, ere found n ten 1981: 24, 73). Thetiqbilin ere furtherivided nto ighsanplural f ighs, r 'bone'), whichHartdescribes s 'lineages' no more thanfour generations eep (1981: 24, 73).Strangersouldbecome members f ghsan y sacrificingo them.6Members fthe ame taqbilt,s well asthose f the ame ghswere referredoasaitma,iterally'brothers'1981: 74, 76).

Commentingn an earlier ersion f this rticle, eilner aidhe did notrecallthe ghs eingrestrictedolineages f three rfour enerationsndepth.And hestressesherelativityf the terms aqbiltnd ighs:

The Berber terms aqbilttribe) nd ighs clan) are indeed used in a proper segmentary' ay,i.e., relative o context: hesameunitwillbe described s either ribe r as clanaccording owhether contrasts intendedwith a smaller r a larger roup.But thisrelativityapsesat thetop and at the bottom.No one would describe partof a village s a tribe, r a total ribe atthegenealogical eiling, o to speak)as a clan (Gellner1969: 92).

This passage s nterestingnseveral espects. irst f all, t suggestshat reschis wrong o accuseGellner fdeviating rom vans-Pritchard'socus n 'relationsbetweenrelations' Dresch 1986: 309). At the same time, however,Gellnerroutinelyranslatesaqbiltnd ighs s tribe' nd clan', thus bscuring herelativ-ityhehimselftresses,nd forcingheelastic erber oncepts ntothemorerigid

categories f structural-functionalistheory. ecause we do not know how Gell-ner' informantsse thesewords,we are unable to assess he fitbetween hisinterpretationnd theirs at eastnot on thebasis fhisdata lone seeSchneider1984).

Blood nd oil:thefivefifths

Despite Gellner's ssertion hat Berber societyreally s agnaticthroughout'(1969: 63), the relationshipetweengenealogy nd segmentationmongtheprecolonial itcAttawasinfact ften enuous.Unlike most edentaryribesmeninprecolonialMorocco, they id define hemselvesn terms f commonpatrili-neal descent Hart 1981: 8; Munson 1989; 1991a; 1991b). But theirmyth fcommondescent rom adda ('Grandfather')Attawas not inked o a genealogyencompassingllsegments.he word ait n thenameAitcAtta,ansimplymean'people'withoutny mplicationfcommondescent,s n AitUsikis,thepeopleofthecommunityf Usikis'. Or it can be translateds sons'or children'Hart1981: xix, 74). Thus thenameAitCAttaould be translateds the Sons ofCAtta'or thePeople ofcAtta'.Because of the egendconcerninghegroup's ncestryfromDadda cAtta, he former ranslation ould be more appropriaten this

context.The precolonial itcAttawere dividednto five ifths'khams hmas),s indi-cated in table 1 and figure1. These were: 1) the Ait Unir\AitWallal,concentratedn the farwestof AitcAtta errtory; ) the AitWahlim, oncen-trated ast and north f theAit Unir\AitWallal; 3) theAit Isful\AitAlwan,concentratedn thesouthwest eartheDra Valley;4) theAitYcazza (calledthe






TABLE 1 SegmentationftheAitcAtta.Numbers efer o households ccordingto Spillmann 936: 74, 81. Detailsare shownonlyfor he Ait Zimru of

theAitWahlim.)

Fifth: Ait Unir 550) -AitBu Iknifen500)AitWallal 1020) -AitCAisa Brahim340)

-Ilimshan290)FifthI: AitWahlim 2200) -AitZimnru1370) -Ignawen(240)

-AitHassu 830)FifthII: Ait sful 700)

AitCAlwan400)

FifthV: AitYCazza 1000)Ait Khalifa 370)Aital-Firsi 70)

-AitKhabbash460)Fifth : Ait Unibgi 1250) -AitUmnasf 790)

Ait CAisaMzin by Hart), concentrated east of the Ait Wahlim; and 5) the AitUnibgi, concentratedin the far east and southeast (Spillmann 1936: 74-103).

Geilnersuggests hatthese five fifths ere represented oth at the political centreoftheAitcAtta,gharm mazdar,where heconfederation'ssupreme ourt'washeld, nd along the various orders f Ait cAtta erritory.e sees thisdispersionas havingbeen an importantource of the over-allcohesionof theAitCAtta(1969: 173). But, as fig.1 demonstrates,hefifths ere definitelyot as dispersedas Geilner laims seeHart1970:535; Spillmann 936:74-95).

Geilner peaks fthefive ifthss clans' 1969: 173).But Geilner'snterpretercontends hat he fivefifthsndthe smalleregments ithin hemwere by andlargenotgenealogically efinedpersonal ommunication,une17, 1990). Twoof the fifths the westernAit Unir\AitWallal and southwesternAitIsful\AitAlwan) id not even havea singlename,bearing nstead henamesoftheir genealogically nrelatedprimary egments. n the case of the AitIsful\AitAlwan, ound long theDra River, thenameof the first f itstwoprimaryegments, it sful,s generallyranslateds 'Sons of theFoundling'. ntheearly 930s,theAitcAttan general pokeof theAitIsful s aital-haram,r'bastards'Spillmann 936: 85-6). As for heAitCAlwan,he other rimaryeg-mentofthe fifthfthe Ait Isful\AitAlwan, ne legendstates hat heirnamemeans People of the Aid' and was giventhembyDadda CAtta ecauseof thehelpthey avehim Spillman 936:88). Thistradition,ike those oncerning he

name oftheAit sful,llustratesheabsenceof an overallgenealogy luggingllsegmentsftheAitCAttantoa single ineage ystem.The fifth f theAitWahlim s sometimes aid to have been named after

grandsonfDadda CAttaHart1981: 39). But its nternalegmentation asnotstructuredntermsfagnation actual r ideological' at eastnotatthehigherlevels.The AitWahlimweredivided ntotwoprimaryegments:heAitZimru




and theAitHassu,theformereingmuch morepowerfulhan he atterSpill-mann 1936: 81; Hart 1981: 39). Neither Hart nor Spillmannmentions nygenealogicaliebetween hese roups, r between hem ndthe malleregments

'nested'within hem Spillmann 936: 81-3; Hart 1981: 41-5). And the nter-preterwithwhomI spoke n 1990 specificallyenied the existence fany suchgenealogical ies.We thus ee once againthat ny attempto view the AitCAttaasbeing tructuredn terms fa segmentaryystemn the senseof a segmentarylineageystem ould be futile.

On the bsencef nunambiguousree-liketructure

Geilner tressesheunambiguousharacter fsegmentaryrees nd the moralclaims nd expectations' heygenerated 1969: 43). But no such treesgrew n

precolonialAttaland.AlongthebanksoftheDra Valley,theqsur themulti-storiedbuildings f theregion, gl., qsar)controlled y the AitCAttawere inprincipleontrolledy specific iqbilin,s inthenorthernighlands. anyof theinhabitantsftheqsur longtheDra wereharatin,lack harecroppinglients fthe AitCAttand other ribes al-Buzidi1988: 223-4; Spillmann 931: 95-6).They wouldsacrificeo a specific roupof theAitCAtta o obtain tsprotection.Anyone who attacked protected sarwould be attacked y the men of theprotecting roup, ome of whom took up residencenthe qsar rin tents ear t(al-Buzidi 988:295; Spillmann931:100-8;1936:62-3). In return,he nhabit-ants ftheqsarwouldprovide heir rotectors ith share ftheir atecrops reven a shareof all theirbelongings as much as a fourthal-Buzidi 1988:298-300). This was, in short, Mafia-likeprotection acketwhereby rans-humant ribesmen xtorted egular ayments rom he residents f sedentarycommunities.

In some cases,the inhabitantsf a qsarwould sacrificeo severaldifferentsegmentsf the Ait CAtta. hus in the atenineteenthentury,heqsar f BaniHayyun,whichwas nhabited rimarilyyharatinndJews,wasprotected y theAitKhardi, he limshan,ndtheAit sful Spillmann 931: 178). According oHart,thesethreegroupsbelongedto threedifferentevelsofsegmentationf

three ifferentifthsftheAit CAtta1981: 24, 36). Yet theyjointlyrotectedhesameqsar ndshared tsdatecrop.In a few cases, members f the AitCAtta iving n a qsarof the Dra Valley

alongside aratinndJewswouldsacrificelongwith hesegroups osegmentsftheAitCAtta ther han heir wn. In theqsar fthe AitCAisa Brahimn theFizwata oasis of theDra Valley,therewere thirtyamilies f the AitCAisauBrahimtaqbiltofthe AitZimrusegment f theAitWahlim fifth)nd twentyfamilies fharatin.othgroups acrificedo,and wereprotected y, segmentfthe Msuffa aqbiltf theAit Unir\AitWallal fifthSpillmann 931: 153-4; 1936:75). Thus we findAitCAttaegmentsf one fifthacrificingo andbeing pro-

tectedby a segment fanother ifth. nd we even findmen of one AitCAttataqbilt,he limshan,acrificingo andbeingprotected yothermenof this ametaqbilt!Spillmann 931: 154). It is ofcourse mpossibleo reconcile ll thiswiththeunambiguousree-likeyramidfequivalent egmentsmagined yGeilner.

Some scholarsmight rguethat raditionalribal tructuresendedto decayamongthe AitCAttan the owlandqsur f theDra Valley ndthatGeilnerwas




primarilyoncernedwith heAit CAttantheHighAtlas.But thekindofunam-biguous reeGellnermagined id not exist n thehighlandsnymorethan t didin theoasesalongtheDraRiver. We may onsider, or xample, henorthwest-

ern highland ommunity f Usikis,where in the 1960s two-thirds f thepopulation till pent hegrazingeason ntemporaryummeramps Hart1984:27).

The three ominant iqbilinnUsikiswere theAitBu Iknifen,heAitYcazza,and theAit Unibgi (Hart 1981: 138-9; Spillmann 936: 48). The last ofthesethreegroups orethesame name as theeastern ifth f AitUnibgi. Alreadyn1936, Spillmann oted that heyhad onlythe vaguestnotionof any kinship ieto theeastern itUnibgi ndcouldnot pecifyowhichoftheprimaryegmentsof this ifthheywere inked 1936: 48). The AitUnibgi andtheAitBu Iknifenof Usikis eferredo each other s imyisaten,r agnates', lthough hey elonged

to differentifthsfthe Ait cAtta nd no agnaticinkbetween hemwas recog-nized by theAitcAtta s a whole (Hart 1981: 103). Moreover, the 'lineagesegmentation' ithin heAitUnibgi ofUsikis was radically nlikethatfoundamong heAitUnibgi nthe ast Hart, ersonal ommunication,990).No neatunambiguousrees ere.

Gellner peaks f thefive ifthsf theAit cAtta s iftheywerecorporate lansdispersed ya hiddenhand for trategicurposes1969: 173). But whatwe findin fact s thatnames of specific egments,ncluding ifthskhmas), iqbilin,ndighsan ended o pop up in differentegions t differentlevelsof segmentation'and that herewere often o structurallyignificantiesbetween uch dispersed

groups see Berque 1954). Ifwe consider he name Ait Umnasf'People of theHalf'), for xample, hename of one ofthetwo primaryegments f thefifthftheAitUnibgi,we find mall ocalized ghsannd tiqbiliny thisname isted ssegmentsf all the other our ifthsf the Ait cAtta y Spillmann 1931: 130-4;1936:78, 85, 87). There sno record f anyeconomicor political inks etweenthesevarious egments,owhichGellner ends o attributen illusoryollectivevolition1981: 228).

On the bsencefbalancedppositionmonghefivefifths

Geilner ontendshatna segmentaryociety,the tree-liketructurensures hatfor nyconflicthatmay arise, here resomegroups hat anbe activated ndwhichwill"balance"each other' 1969: 44). We findno such balancedopposi-tionamongthe Ait cAtta. n principle,he fivefifthsf theAitcAtta lectedchieffortheconfederations a whole everyyearby a system frotationndcomplementarityGeilner 969:59, 81). That s,thefifths eresupposed o taketurns roviding aramount hiefs, howere electedbythemembers f thefourfifthsoteligible onominate candidatena givenyear.However, ucha chiefwas actually nlyelectedwhen therewas a generally ecognized eedfor ne -

ifwarwere imminent,or xample Geilner1969: 91; Hart 1981: 79). GivenGellner's endencyo see the five ifthss cohesive orporate lans, tshouldbestressedhat he lectionf he op hieff heAit cAttawas ctuallyhe rincipalifnotthe ole) unctionf hefiveffthsHart1981:30, 76).

Gellner ees theAitCAtta'smethod felecting hiefs s epitomizingheseg-mentary ystem fbalancedoppositionwhereby ny groupor individualwas




prevented rom massing ower 1981: 118-19). However, the system as con-siderablyess balancedthanGellner uggests. he veryfact hatfive s an oddnumberprecluded he kind of balanced opposition ositedby the segmentary

model.Moreover, heoverall hiefwould often etainhispositionfor everalyears n succession Spillmann 936: 61). Hart provides list of top chiefs, fwhom overhalfwere from hefifthftheAitWahlim 1981: 78, 229-32). Hartsaysthis mbalancemayhave been due to the factthat his informants erethemselves f the Ait Wahlim 1981: 78). But other cholarswho workedwithother roups avealso noted hedominance f theAitWahlim al-Buzidi1988:301; Lefebure 979: 119, 121; Spillmann 936:42, 82).

One could of coursedismiss ll thisby arguing hat he segmentary odelrepresentedn ideal to which actualpractice id not necessarilyonform. utimbalanceswere embedded nfundamentalolitical nstitutions.nly segments

of twoofthefive ifths,heAitWahlim nd theAitYcazza,wererepresentednthe supreme ourt'oftheAitcAtta t IgharmAmazdar de Montsde Savasse1951a: 12, 46). The fifthftheAit Isful/AitAlwanhad no representativesnthis ourt,despite hefact hat omeAit Isful ived n thecommunity here twas held Hart1981: 170, 173). Of the ix members f thecourt, ourwere fromlocal tiqbilin elonging o the fifthf the AitWahlim and two from iqbilinbelonging o theAitYcazza (Hart 1981: 170; Spillmann 936: 56). Thus tiqbilinbelonging o one fifth f the AitcAttaprovidedtwo-thirdsf the supremecourt'sudges,while three f the fivefifthsrovidednone. It is in fact ossiblethat he fifthffiliationf the ocal tiqbilinhat rovided heudgesfor hecourtatIgharmAmazdarwasactually ltogetherrrelevant.e that s itmay,Geilner'scontention hat ll the fivefifths ere,or weresupposed o be, equallyrepre-sented n the basicpolitical nstitutionsf theAitCAtta s mistaken see 1969:173).

Another roblem riseswith respect o Gellner's epiction f the Ait CAtta'selectoralystemsa 'masterpiecef egmentaryrganisation'1981: 228). Not allsegments articipatednthese lections,ustas not allsegments ererepresentedon the upreme ourt.fwe take hefifthsually eferredoas AitY Cazza',Hartsays hattwascomposed ffour rimaryegments1981: 24). Butthree fthese

tiqbilineverhadtherightoprovide topchiefHart1981:61; Spillmann 936:57, 88, 91). Similar olitical mbalances,t the evelof bothpractice ndprin-ciple,existedn all thefivefifthsfthe AitAtta de la Chapelle1931: 59; Hart1981: 37-9, 51-3; Spillmann 936: 57, 75-9, 86-8). One finds othing emotelyresemblingalanced ppositiontany evel ofsegmentation.

On the rrelevancef he egmentarycale f olidarity

In a segmentaryociety, loser egmentsreof course upposed o unitewhenfacedwith threats rommore distantnes.The available vidence uggestshat

thisrarely appened mongthe Ait CAtta.Geilnerobserves hatthe lodge of'saints'whichhe studiedwas ideally ituated o mediate the annualdisputesbetween he northernegmentsftheAitCAtta ho livednearthechoicesum-merpasturesnd the outhernersho cameto thehighlandsachspringograzetheirflocks 1969: 32-3). But he glossesover the factthat thisconflictwasessentiallyetween gnates f the ametaqbilt,heAitBu Iknifen'the peopleof




the black burnouses'), omeof whom were usually upported y genealogicallyunrelatedllies Hart1981:39; 1984: 19-20).

Hart's nformantsoldhimthat heAitBu Iknifenntheneighbouringorth-

erncommunities f Usikis nd Msimrir oughtach other orfouryears eforethe French ubjugation f the Ait cAtta n the 1930s (1981: 138). The Ait BuIknifen fMsimrirskedmen ofthenon-Ait Atta ribes f theAitMurghad, heAit Hadiddu, andtwo segments f the Ait Sukhman o helpthemfight he AitBu IknifenfUsikis Hart1981: 204). Thisthoroughlynsegmentaryehaviouris strikingn a number f respects. irst f all, the Ait Murghadand the AitHadiddubelonged o theAitYafalman onfederation,hetraditionalnemyoftheAit cAtta Hart1981: 13, 135). Moreover, he AitBu Iknifen fMsimrirwere surrounded n most sides by non-Ait Atta the Ait Sukhman, he AitHadiddu,theAitMurghad ribes,nd theAhansalasaints') ndyetcalledupon

men of theseforeignnd ostensibly ostile roups o help themfightheir wnagnatesnthevillagenext o theirsHart1981: 135). The segmentaryrinciple'is difficultodiscernnall of this.

Testinghe egmentaryodel ymeans f heAitCAtta's esponsesoFrenchonquest

Geilner uggestshattheapplicabilityf the segmentary odel in the centralHighAtlas ouldbe tested although e does not do so himself) y examininghow tribes esponded otheFrench onquestn the 1920s and 1930s 1969: 63).This is an excellent dea, since there re detailed ccounts of the AitcAtta's

resistancendsubmissionotheFrenchDunn 1977; Hart1984; Spillmann 931;1936; 1968; al-Susi1961). We mayreturn, or xample, o thecase oftheAitBuIknifen, hose nternecineeudsntheprecolonial erioddidnotend nthefaceofthe French hreat. ather, heybecamepartof the division ftheAitCAttaintopro-andanti-French orces. he Ait Bu Iknifen f Usikis alongwith therest fthecommunity)upportedhe anti-French orces ed bya 'saint'of theZawiya Ahansal,whereasmanyof theAit Bu Iknifen f Msimrir upportedhepro-French orcesed by a leader f theAitBu Iknifenn thenearby ommunityof Imidar Hart 1981: 203-4). Even within midar, he Ait Bu Iknifenwere

divided ntopro-and anti-FrenchactionsBeaurpere 931: 259).This failureounite ntheface fexternaloeswas typical. oth esistanceo ndsupportortheFrench mongthenorthern itcAtta theAit CAtta s a wholeneverunited gainst heFrench)were ed bymen of the Ait Zimrusegment ftheAitWahlimfifthHart1984: 166-8). Such division ftiqbilinntopro-andanti-French orceswas notsimply heresult f their eaders' ffortso keep ongood termswithbothsides although uch effortsid occur. We know thisbecausemanymen on both idesdiedfighting en oftheir wn taqbilt.his wasthecase,for xample, tthe famous attle fBu Gafrn 1933 (Spillmann 936:140-4).

Theseexamples funsegmentaryehaviourn thefaceoftheFrench onquesthave nvolved henorthernighland it cAtta f the fifthf theAitWahlim. tmightbe thought hat the relativelymorepastoralAitCAtta f the southerndesert ehaved n a moresegmentary anner. his was not thecase. The firstAit CAtta o resist he French in 1901) and the ast o submit o them in 1934)were menof the outheasternitKhabbash, ne ofthetwoprimaryegmentsf




thefifthfAitUnibgi Dunn1977: 182-3; Spillmann 936:92-93, 148). But theAit Khabbashwerenever upported ytherest ftheAitCAttas the egmentarymodel would predict. ven among theAitKhabbash hemselves,herewas no

unificationn the face of the FrenchthreatLefebure 986; Spillmann 936:92-3, 148).

The otherprimary egment f the eastern ifth f the AitUnibgi,the AitUmnasf, otonlyfailed osupportheAitKhabbash esistance,s didmost ftheother egmentsf the AitcAtta, utsome of thembeganto negotiate erms fsubmission o theFrenchn 1911,thirteenears eforeAitKhabbash esistancewasfinallyrushed Dunn 1977:239). In otherwords,whereas omemenoftheAit Khabbashwere the astAit cAtta o submit,ome members f their ollateralsegment,heAitUmnasf,werethe firsto do so (Dunn 1977). In fact, ome oftheAitUmnnasfctually ought or heFrenchgainstheAitKhabbashLefebure

1986: 141). Both groupswere rivenby pro- and anti-French actions Dunn1977: 239; Spillmann 936: 94-5).

WhiletheAitKhabbashwereunable omobilize lltheir wnmen, et alonetherestof the AitcAtta,n their truggle gainst heFrench, heywere oftensupported ynon-Ait Atta roups. he largelyedentaryrabtribe ftheBaniMhammad, o whom theAitKhabbashwereboundbya pactof milkkinship'as well as by partnershipn long-distancerade,generally upported he AitKhabbash, s did segmentsfvarious ther ribes uch s thenomadic AribDunn1977: 182-3, 197). Thus we findmen of thesame segments nd tribes ightingeach other longsidemenwithwhom theyhadno agnatic rtribal onnexion fanykind.Rather han nite ntheface fthe hreatfcolonialrule, heAit CAttatended osplitntopro-and anti-Frenchactionslong ines hatwould never efound n a segmentaryiagram. For furtherxamples, ee al-Buzidi1988: 370;Lefebure 986: 139; Spillmann 936: 120-1,126).

Gellner'sttempto alvagehemodel

In respondingo the cn'tics fhis segmentaryiewofMuslimtribalism, ellnercontends hat:

a wide rangeof well-attestednstitutions the feud,collectiveoath, a legal system elyingheavily n arbitration, arriage atterns, asture se - onlymakes enseon theassumptionsfsomethingike the modelpropounded 1983: 446).

But in thecaseof the AitCAtta,he nstitutionsowhichGellner efersctuallyattest o the rrelevancefthesegmentary odel.By far he best documentedfeud mongtheAitCAttanvolvedmen of the clanoftheAitBu Iknifen illingeach other oftenwith hehelpofmenfrom enealogicallynrelatedlans ndtribesHart1981:204; 1984: 19-20).There sno record fanyAit Attafeud orwar) that onformedo thesegmentary odel (Hart1981: 203-6). As forthecollective ath, t did usuallynvolve man'sagnates, utthere s no evidence

that t ever involved the balancedand complementaryppositionof groupsgenerated y an unambiguous egmentaryree.Hart makesthisclear,eventhoughhe too imagines linkbetween the oath and the segmentary odel(1981: 158-67).

Gellner's ontention hat helegal system fprecolonial ribesonlymakessense' nterms fthe egmentaryodel spatentlynaccurate ithrespecto the




AitCAtta.He has stressedhat 'pure egmentaryociety' acks gencies o pun-ish transgressionsfrules nthe abstract'o that ransgressionsreonlypunishedby the groups o whichthevictims elong 1969: 45). And he sees theAit CAtta

and similar erbergroups s being amongthepurest egmentaryocieties nhuman history Gellner 1969: 64; 1981: 118, 228). But the AitCAttahad ahierarchyf courts hatpunished transgressionsf rules n the abstract' n thebasisof utterly nsegmentaryrittenenal codes al-Buzidi1988; Duclos 1967;Hart 1981: 155-82,219-27;Mezzine 1987; de Montsde Savasse1951a). Thuswe read ntheprecolonial enalcode ofthe supreme ourt'of gharmAmazdarthatifone mankills notherwithin he imits fthe Tafrawtn-Igharm maz-dar),he mustpay 8 iguryanone-year-oldheep)' (Hart 1981: 221). This ruleapplied egardlessf the relationshipetween ransgressornd victim.

In commentingn anearlier ersion f this rticle, ellner aised hequestion

of howmuchpowertheAit CAtta ourts ctually ad to enforce heir ecisions.This s certainly crucial oint, nd t would be a mistake o equate theAitCAttajudicial systemwiththatof a modemstate.We know,forexample, hatthecourts id not eliminate hebloodfeud Hart1981: 25). But thishasbeentrue fmany tateudiciaries s well (Verdier 984; Wormald1980). AndtheAit CAttacourtsdid impose very evere anctions' n thosewho violated he confeder-ation's 'customaryaw' (de Monts de Savasse 1951a: 48-9; cf. Hart 1981;Mezzine 1987). This was definitelyot a societyn which transgressorsouldonlybe punished y the ineages ftheir ictims.

As for the 'marriage atterns' nd 'pastureuse that Gellner sees as beingunintelligibleithout eferenceo thesegmentary odel,theywere once againunrelated o it. No one has everdemonstratedny inkbetweenthe notionofbalanced ndcomplementaryppositionnd patternsfmarriagend pasture seamong the Ait CAtta. oth certainlywere linked to membershipn specificdescentgroups tiqbilin),ut not to the segmentarycale of solidaritysee Hart1981; 1984; Lefebure 979; de Montsde Savasse 1951b). It should be kept nmind that he internecineeuds f the AitBu Iknifen ften nvolveddisputesoveraccess opastureand Hart1984: 19-20).

Conclusion

It is true that the precolonialpoliticalorder of the Ait CAttawas relatively'acephalous' ndegalitarianhencomparedwith full-fledgedtate.fthiswereall the term egmentarymplied, herewould be no reasonnot to apply t togroups uch as theAitcAtta.But Gellner's egmentary odel is morespecificthan his. t posits he existence f an unambiguoustree' ofsegments,he bal-anced and complementarypposition fwhich was the linchpinof politicalorder. uch a treedidnot exist mongtheAit cAtta.

One couldofcourse rgue, smanyhave,that hesegmentary odelcan be

salvaged y depictingt as a model of an 'ideology'rather hanof actualbeha-viour Evans-Pritchard940: 212; 1945: 63; Seddon1979). But there s simplyno evidence of such an 'ideology' among the Ait CAtta.The precolonialAitcAtta,ikemostpeople everywhere,enerallyccepted heprinciplehat neshouldhelpclosekinagainst istant in,distant inagainst trangers,ndso on.Ifwidespread cceptance f ucha principle ere sufficientoqualify society s




'segmentary',hen one cannot maginea society anywhere hat would notdeserve he abel.ButGeilner'smore pecificmodelof a polityn whichorder smaintained rimarilyy the balanced nd complementarypposition f groups

generated yan unambiguousreedoesnotcorrespondo anythingn themindsorthe ehaviourf theprecolonial itCAtta.We are notspeaking f a fewdevia-tions rom nidealsegmentarybase ine',we arespeaking f a societywhere hekindof base ine' imagined yGeilner id not exist.

NOTES

I thankHastings onnan,Paul Dresch,ErnestGellner,David Hart, Emanuel Marx and DavidSeddonfortheir omments n earlier ersions f this rticle. Dreschand Seddon revealed heiridentities fter eviewing he article nonymously orMan.) I am indebted o Professor eilner nways thatgo far eyondhispatient olerationfmy criticism ver the years. should alsoliketothank he Moroccanwho served s his and Hart's) nterpreternd research ssistantn the 1950sand 1960s. This individual, Berber from heHigh Atlas,has requested nonymity. e spentseveralhoursansweringmy questions nJune 17, 1990. Because I do not speakBerber and hepreferred ot to speakMoroccan Arabic,we spoke n French.This was also the anguagehe usedin speakingwithGellner nd Hart. thank teve Bicknellformaking igure and table1.

My fieldworkn Morocco (in 1976-7 and the summers f 1987, 1988 and 1990) was madepossibleby grants rom heSocial Science ResearchCouncil,theFulbright-Haysrogram ftheOffice fEducation, heFaculty ummerResearchProgram f theUniversityfMaine, and theJohnD. and Catherine . MacArthur oundation's rogram n Peace and International ooper-ation. Virtually one ofmyfieldworkirectly oncerned he AitcAtta.

1 I have discussedGeertz's nterpretivepproachelsewhere Munson 1984; 1986; 1993). See

also the excellent ritique yDresch 1986: 317-21).2 Paul Dresch has argued thatthe segmentary odel and lineage theory hould not be con-fused 1984; 1986). Logically, e is right. ut mostanthropologistsave ssumed hat 'segmen-tary ociety' s one structuredn terms f a segmentaryineage system see Holy 1979; Kelly1985).

3 Severalpeople who commented n earlier ersions f this article hided me forusingthephrase grease he gears f segmentation' ithout itingMichael Meeker's use of thismetaphor nhisbook Literaturend violencennorth rabia 1979). However, thismay be a case of ndependentinvention, inceI do not recall ever noticingMeeker's use of the expression nd it is not men-tioned nmynoteson his book.

4 The Ahansala actually ervedas local agentsof the Moroccan state 'Amalik 1989; Morsy1972; 1983; 1986). I have ignoredthe relationshipetween theMoroccan state and highland

tribes n this articlefor ack of space. But it was more importanthan Geilner uggests Burke1972; El Mansour1990; Hammoudi 1974;Munson1989).

5 I have also used the valuable work of al-Buzidi (1988), Dunn (1977), Hammoudi (1974),Lefebure 1979; 1986),Mezzine (1987) and de Montsde Savasse 1951a; 1951b).

6 Geilner 1969: 61, 121; Mezzine 1987: 257; Spillmann1936: 44. Geilner's nterpreteraysthat a man would sacrificeo a specificndividual o become a memberof his ighs.The newmember hereby ainedaccess to theighs's astureand (agudat),ut not to irrigatedand.

REFERENCES

'Amalik,A. 1989.Ahansal.Ma amat l-Maghrib, 183-6.

Beaurpere, t. 1931. Note provisoire ur es valleesdu Todgha de l'Imider t du Saghro oriental.Villes tTribusu Maroc , 205-65.

Berque,J. 1954. Qu'est-ce qu'une tribu'nord-africaine?n L'eventail e 'histoireivante: ommageLucien ebvre.aris:Armand olin.

Burke,E. 1972.The imageof the French taten French thnologicaliterature:new look at theorigin fLyautey's erberpolicy. nArabs ndBerbers:fromribeonationnNorth fricaeds)E.Gellner& C. Micaud.Lexington: exington ooks.




al-Buzidi,Ahmad. 1988. Al-tarikhl-ijtima'ii-dar'a matla'al-qarn7 - matla' l-qarn20): dirasatfi'l-hayatl-siyasiya a'l-ijtima'iya a'l-iqtisadiyamin khilal l-watha'iq l-mahalliya. ahth inail diplum l-dirasatl-'ulya i'l-tarikh.hesis,UniversiteMohamed V (Rabat).

de la Chapelle,F. 1931.Le SultanMoulay sma'ilet esBerberes anhajadu Maroc central. rchiv.

Maroc. 8, 7-64.Dresch, . 1984. The position f haykhsmong henorthernribes fYemen. Man N.S.) 19,31-49.

1986. The significancef the course events ake n segmentaryystems. m. Ethnol. 3,309-24.

Duclos, L.-J. 967. Note sur 'organisationjudiciairees Ait CAtta ans a vaIleede l'Oued Dra'. Rev.Occ. musulm. edit. , 23-29.

Dunn, R. 1977. Resistancen the esert: oroccanesponsesoFrenchmperialism,881-1912. London:CroomHelm.

Eickelman, . 1989. TheMiddle ast:ananthropologicalpproach2nd edn). EnglewoodCliffs:renticeHall.

ElMansour,M. 1990. Morocconthe eignfMawlay ulayman. isbech:Middle East& NorthAfrican

Studies ress.Evans-Pritchard,.E. 1940. TheNuer: descriptionf hemodes f ivelihoodndpoliticalnstitutionsfNiloticpeople.xford:Clarendon ress.

1945. Some aspects fmarriagendfamily mong heNuer Rhodes-Liv. Pap. 11). Lusaka:Rhodes-Livingstonenstitute.

Geertz,C. 1971. In search fNorthAfrica.N.Y. Rev.Bks,April 2, 1971, 20-4.1979. Suq: thebazaar conomynSefrou.nMeaningndordernMoroccanociety:hreessays

inculturalnalysisby)C. Geertz,H. Geertz& L. Rosen. New York:CambridgeUniv. Press.Gellner, . 1969. Saints f heAtlas.Chicago:Univ.Press.

1981. Muslim ociety. ew York: CambridgeUniv. Press.1983. The tribal ociety nd ts nemies.n The onflictf ribend taten ran ndAfghanistan

(ed.) R. Tapper. New York: St Martin's ress.

Hammoudi,A. 1974. Segmentarite,tratificationociale, ouvoirpolitique tsaintete: eflexionsurles theses e Gellner.Hesperis5, 147-80.

Hart,D.M. 1970. Review ofSaints f heAtlas, y ErnestGellner.Middle astJ. 24, 531-6.1981. Dadda CAttandhis forty randsons:hesocio-political rganisationfthe AitCAtta

ofsouthernMorocco.Wisbech:MiddleEast & NorthAfrican tudies ress.1984. TheAit CAtta fsouthernMorocco: daily ife ndrecenthistory.Wisbech: Middle

East & NorthAfrican tudies ress.Holy,L. (ed.) 1979. SegmentaryineageystemseconsideredPap. social Anthrop. ). Belfast:Queens

Univ. Press.Joly, . 1951. LesAit Khebbachede Taouz. Trav. nst.Rech. ahar. , 3-33.Kelly,R.C. 1985. TheNuer onquest:he tructurenddevelopmentf nexpansionistystem.nnArbor:

Univ. ofMichiganPress.Kuper,A. 1988. The nventionfprimitiveociety.ew York: Routledge.Lefebure, . 1979. Accesaux ressources ollectives t structureociale: 'estivage hez lesAytAtta

(Maroc). In Pastoralroductionndsocietyed.) L'equipe ecologie et anthropologie es societespastorales. ambridge:Univ.Press; aris:Editions e laMaisondesSciencesde l'Homme.

1986. AytKhebbach,mpasse ud-est: 'involution 'une tribumarocaine xclue du Sahara.Rev. Occ.musulm. edit. 1-42, 136-57.

Meeker,M.E. 1979. Literaturend violencen North rabia.New York:CambridgeUniv. Press.Mezzine, L. 1987. Le Tafilalt:ontributionl'histoireu Maroc uxXVIl7 et XVIIIc siecles. Rabat:

Publications e la FacultedesLettres t des SciencesHumaines.de Monts de Savasse,R. 1951a. Le regime oncier hez les Ait Attadu Sahara.Unpublished tudy

available t theCentredes Hautes Etudes ur 'Afriquet 'AsieModernes CHEAM) inParis.

1951b. L'elevagedans une tribu erberede montagne u Sud marocain: es AitAttaduSahara.Unpublished tudy vailable t the Centre des Hautes Etudessur 'Afrique t l'AsieModemes (CHEAM) inParis.

Morsy,M. 1972. LesAhansala: xamen u role istorique'unefamille araboutiquee 'Atlasmarocain.Paris:Mouton.

1983.La relatione Thomas ellow: ne ectureuMaroc u 18' siecle. Paris: ditions echerchesur esCivilisations.




1986. Ahansal. ncyclopedieerbere, 307-11.Aix-en-Provence:DISUD.Munson,H.,Jr.1984. Thehouse f i AbdAllah: he ral istoryf Moroccanfamily.ew Haven:Yale

Univ.Press.1986. Geertz n religion: he theory nd thepractice.Religion 6, 19-32.

1989. On the rrelevancef he egmentaryineagemodel n theMoroccanRif.Am.Anthrop.91, 386-400.

1991a. Slash-and-bumultivation,harcoalmaking,ndemigrationrom heJbalanighlandsof NorthwestMorocco. In Anthropologyndrural evelopmentn North fricand theMiddle ast(eds) M. Horowitz& M. Salem-Murdock. oulder:WestviewPress.

1991b.The segmentaryineagemodel ntheJbalan ighlands fMorocco. In Tribe nd tate:essaysn honorfDavidM. Hart eds)E.G.H. Joffe C.R. Pennell. Wisbech: Middle East &NorthAfrican tudies ress.

1993. Religionndpowern Morocco. ew Haven:Yale Univ. Press.Peters, .L. 1967.Some structuralspects fthe eud mong he amel-herdingedouinofCyrenaica.

Africa, 261-82.1990. TheBedouin fCyrenaica:tudiesnpersonalnd orporateowereds)J.Goody & E. Marx.

New York: CambridgeUniv. Press.Rosen,L. 1984. Bargainingforeality:he onstructionf ocial elationsna Muslim ommunity.hicago,

London: Univ. of Chicago Press.Schneider, .M. 1984.A critiquef he tudy fkinship.nnArbor:Univ. ofMichiganPress.Seddon,David. 1979. Political deologies nd politicalforms n the easternRif ofMorocco. In

Segmentaryineageystemseconsidereded.)L. Holy (Pap.socialAnthrop. ). Belfast: ueensUniv.Press.

Spillmann, . 1931. Districtsttribus e la hautevalleedu Dra'. Villes ttribusu Maroc , xi-268.1936. Les AitAttadu Sahara t a pacifcationuHaut Dra (Publ. nst.haut.Etud. Maroc. 29).

Rabat: Felix Moncho.1968. Souvenirs'uncolonialiste.aris:Presses e la Cite.

al-Susi, l-Mukhtar 961.Al-Ma'sul, ol. 16. Casablanca:Matba'at l-Najah.Verdier, . (ed.) 1984. La vengeance,ol. 3, Vengeance,ouvoirst deologiesans uelquesivilisationsel'antiquite.aris:EditionsCujas.

Wormald, . 1980. Bloodfeud,kindred nd governmentn earlymodern cotland.Past and Present87, 54-97.

Pour repenser 'analyse segmentaire de I'Ait CAttamarocain proposepar Gellner

ResumeLa plupart es anthropologuese la fin uXX)eme ieclerejettente conceptde tribu egmentairecomme une relique antediluvienne ppartenanta l'ere structuro-fonctionnaliste.ourtant, e

concept est encoredefendu ar quelques eminentspecialistes, otamment rnestGeilner.Lesformulationsenerales e cet auteur ontbasees ur a conception u'il se fait es tribus erberespre-coloniales u GrandAtlasmarocain, t plusparticulierementes AitCAtta. ependant, euxqui ontcritiqueespositions e Geilner nt rarementented'evaluer a plausibilitempirique esonanalyse es Ait CAtta ansLessaints e 'Atlas 1969). L'article emontre ue cette nalyse 'aque peu de rapport vec les structuresolitiques u'elle est ensee xpliquer.

Anthropologyepartment,niversityfMaine,Orono,Maine04469, U.S.A.

Documents

Munson-Critica a Gellner-Ayt Atta(1993)