Pierre Bourdieu

Cambridge Studies in Social and Cultural Anthropology




T r a n s la t e d b y


ffiS C a m b r i d g e

P u b lis h e d b y th e P r e s s S y n d ic a t e o f th e U n iv e r s it y o f C a m b r id g e T h e P it t B u ild in g , T r u m p in g t o n S tr e e t, C a m b r id g e C B 2 1R P 4 0 W e s t 2 0 th S tr e e t, N e w Y o r k , N Y 1 0 0 1 1 - 4 2 1 1 , U S A 1 0 S ta m fo r d R o a d , O a k le ig h , M e lb o u r n e 3 1 6 6 , A u str a lia © In t h e E n g lis h la n g u a g e e d it io n C a m b r id g e U n iv e r s it y P r e s s 1 9 7 7 T h e o r ig in a l e d it io n , e n t it le d E sq u isse d 'u n e th e o rie d e la p r a ti q u e , p r e c e d e d e tr o is e tu d e s d ’e th n o lo g ie k a b y le , w a s p u b lis h e d b y L ib r a ir ie D r o z S .A . in S w itz e r la n d © L ib r a ir ie D r o z , 1 9 7 2 F ir s t p u b lis h e d in E n g lis h tr a n sla tio n 1 9 7 7 R e p r in te d 1 9 8 5 1 9 8 6 1 9 8 7 1 9 8 8 1 9 8 9 1 9 9 0 1991 1 9 9 2 1 9 9 3 1995 P r in t e d in G r e a t B r ita in at th e U n iv e r s it y P r e s s , C a m b r id g e L ib r a r y o f C o n g re ss C a ta lo g u in g in P u b lic a tio n D a t a B o u r d ie u , P ie r r e . O u tlin e o f a th e o r y o f p r a c tic e . (C a m b r id g e s t u d ie s in so c ia l a n th ro p o lo g y '; 16) T r a n s la tio n w ith r e v is io n s o f E s q u is s e d ’u n e th e o r ie d e la p r a tiq u e . I n c lu d e s b ib lio g r a p h ic a l r e fe r e n c e s a n d in d e x . 1. K a b y le s - A d d r e s s e s , e s sa y s, le c tu r e s. 2. E t h n o lo g y . I. T i t le . D T 2 9 8 .K 2 B 6 9 1 3 3 0 1 .2 7 6 -1 1 0 7 3

I S B N 0 521 2 9 1 6 4 X


T ran slato r's forew ord

page vii

Section i: A n alyses
From the mechanics o f the model to the dialectic o f strategies From the "rules ” o f honour to the sense o f honour Practice and discourse about practice The fallacies of the rule

3 10 16 22

Section 1 1 : Case stu d y: parallel-cousin m arriage
The state o f the question The functions o f kinship: official kin and practical kin Officializing strategies Collective beliefs and white lies The ordinary and the extra-ordinary M atrimonial strategies and social reproduction 2

32 33 38

52 58 72 ' . 72 78 &7

A false dilem m a: mechanism and finalism Structures, habitus and practices The dialectic o f objectification and embodiment

96 97 ^ 109 114 124 130 132 140 143

The calendar and the synoptic illusion Economy o f logic The body as geometer: cosmogonic practice Union and separation Thresholds and rites o f passage Reunion o f contraries and denial M aking use of indeterminacy The habitus and homologies




159 159

D oxa, orthodoxy, heterodoxy Symbolic capital Modes of domination

171 183
198 240

N otes In d ex

the sensible w orld.is that the external object.” K . as practice. reality. M arx.including that of Feuerbach ." T h e principal defect of all m aterialism up to now .but only in an abstract w ay. in a subjective way. in opposition to materialism . T h is is why the active aspect was developed by idealism . since idealism naturally does not know real concrete activity as su ch . but not as concrete human activity. Theses on Feuerbach . is grasped in the form of an object or an intuition.

the order of exposition is recast. where the separation w hich is the hidden condition o f all academ ic activity . and. tasks. that is. w hich brought to a head the contradictions inherent in the ethnologist’s position. the ethnographic chapters with w hich the Fren ch edition opens have been curtailed. and theories. enables us to grasp m ore pro­ foundly as involving more than questions of " translatability Bourdieu would [ v i i ] . T h e fieldwork in K ab y lia w hich provided the ethnographic basis for this text and the starting-point for its reflections w as carried out am id the tragic circum stances of the Algerian w ar. T h is was one factor in Bourdieu’s subsequent move into the field of sociology. T h e stages through w hich Bourdieu’s work has passed. the problem s he has set him self.could itself be grasped scientifically in the course of inquiry into the social functions of scholarship and the m echanism s of cultural and social reproduction. T h e Outliney a " reflection on scientific practice w hich will disconcert both those who reflect on the social sciences without practising them and those who practise them w ithout reflecting on th em ” . here and elsew here. and forces attention to the social conditions in which such sciences are possible.T ranslator’s foreword Outline o f a Theory o f Practice was first published in Fren ch in 1972 (Esquisse d ’une theorie de la pratique ).which crosses and chal­ lenges the boundary dividin g their objects. this E nglish text incorporates most of the changes which Pierre Bourdieu has made since then. partly for reasons of space. particularly as regards the concepts of practical logic and sym bolic capital. T h is text is the cornerstone of an oeuvre w hich encom passes num erous m ajor works in both anthropology and sociology . H ow ever. T h e com m onplaces a translator m ight feel required to adduce in order to extenuate the visible loss entailed in extracting a text from its context touch only the surface of processes which the explicit thrust of Bourdieu’s argum ent. an adequate theory o f practice which must include a theory of scientific practice.most insidiously so in the behavioural sciences . seeks to define the prerequisites for a truly scientific discourse about human behaviour. T h e argum ent is carried further. but also by the configurations of the intellectual field in France over a certain period. are of course partly determ ined by the accidents of a b iography.

theoretical allusions. The most autonomous work contains implicit reference to an intellectual universe whose cardinal points are scientific (and political) positions symbolized. this work.Vl l l Translator's fo rew o rd be the last to regret the shedding of all that the text was immediately and tacitly granted. the dignifyingreferences. internalized. Less pessimistically. when returned to their original universe. "structuralism ” or "structuralM arxism ” . N. from Durkheim to Levi-Strauss . inasmuch as it bore the social marks which signal a product conforming to the local standards: the signs of recognition eliciting the recognition of already converted readers. in a given state of the field. When these bearings are removed the text becomes open to misreading. which. .may. take on a significance very different from the one they were given in a context in which that tradition is disdained or unknown. written against the currents at present dominant in France. by the names of authors or schools of thought or by " is m s ” which may cover totally different realities in different national traditions. will not be merged with the very tendencies it combats.a heaven-sent weapon against the theoreticism which so strongly characterizes French social science. These are the structures of the field of production. R. for some readers. T h u s nothing guarantees that. T he provisional eclecticism which can juxtapose Wittgenstein with the young M arx finds its justification in the fact that all the resources of a tradition which from the beginning has made practice the negative obverse of theory are needed in order to think the unthinkable. But much more besides the value set on the text is at stake when it circulates beyond its field of production. stylistic effects. have indeed every likelihood of remaining dead letters once outside the magic circle of belief. function as unexamined principles of perception and appreciation. its divisions into antagonistic groups and rival schools. and be seen as a sign of allegiance to positivism (if not as an ingratiating gesture towards the intellec­ tual establishment). The fact remains that a text which seeks to break out of a scheme of thought as deeply embedded as the opposition between subjectivism and objectivism is fated to be perceived through the categories which it seeks to transcend. and to appear contradictory or eclectic (except when forcibly reduced to one or the other alternative). there is still reason to fear that the frequent references made to the Anglo-American philosophical tradition .

decoded. more concerned with the opus operatum than the modus operandi.1 And exaltation of the virtues of the distance secured by externality sim ply transmutes into an epistemological choice the anthropologist’s objective situation. represses the question of artistic production under the concept of the "objective intention” o f the work and reduces immediate com pre­ hension to a decoding that is unaware that it ii a d e c o d i n g . emphasizing in particular the tendency to intellectualism implied in observing language from the standpoint of the listening subject rather than that of the speaking subject. inclines him to a hermeneutic representation of practices. excluded from the real play of social activities by the fact that he has no place (except by choice or by way of a game) in the system observed and has no need to make a place for him self there. by reference to a transcendent code analogous to the Saussurian " langue” is to forget that artistic production is always also . as a "m ean s of action and expression” : "th e listener is on the side of the language. which. Panofsky. never having really broken with the tradition of the amateur. w T i t i n g on Abbot Suger and the invention” of Gothic architecture. only exceptionally and almost accidentally aban­ dons the point of view o f the interpreter who. as Husserl puts it. T h e anthropologist’s particular relation to the object o f his study contains the makings of a theoretical distortion inasmuch as his situation as an observer. gives free rein to celebratory contemplation and finds in the sacred character of its object every pretext for a hagiographic hermeneutics superbly indifferent to the question of the social conditions in which works are produced and circulate. that is. more precisely. T o treat a work of plastic art as a discourse intended to be interpreted. It is instructive to glance at the case of art history. that of the "im partial spectator” . unrecognised as privilege. Charles Bally remarked that linguistic research takes different directions according to whether it deals with the researcher’s mother tongue or with a foreign language. it leads to an implicit theory of practice which is the corollary of neglect of the social conditions in which science is possible.to different degrees d e p e n d i n g on the art a n d on t h e historically variable styles [ i] . condemned to see all practice as a spectacle. it is with the language that he interprets sp eech ” . for example. to decoding operations. leading him to reduce all social relations to communicative relations and.I The objective limits of objectivism SECTION I: ANALYSES T h e practical privilege in which all scientific activity arises never more subtly governs that activity (insofar as science presupposes not only an epistemological break but also a social separation) than when.

and carried about w ith u s w herever w e g o ”. but by default. as the idealist tradition rightly calls h im . he con stitu tes practical activity as an object o f observation an d analysis. or of what sociologists con sid er. K n o w led g e does not m erely d ep en d. in his preoccupation w ith interpreting practices. the prerogative o f the native.e. w ho." pure practice without theory ”. abstract space. . a mimesis. as Durkheim says. a representation. the anthropologist is con d em ned to adopt unw ittingly for his ow n u se the representation of action w hich is forced on agents or groups w hen th ey lack practical m astery of a h ighly valued com p eten ce and have to provide th em selves w ith an exp licit and at least sem i-form alized su bstitute for it in the form of a repertoire of rules. on the hither side of words or concepts. as an elem entary relativism teaches. inflicts on practice a m uch m ore fundam ental and p ernicious alteration w h ich . so to speak. S o lon g as h e rem ains unaware of the lim its inherent in his point of view on the object. is inclined to introduce in to th e object th e p rinciples o f h is relation to the object. or rather of journeys actually b ein g m ade. i. is b oun d to pass u n n oticed : in taking up a point of view on the action. m yth. in w h ich the ego is as unreal as th e starting-point in a Cartesian sp ace .2 or to put it another way. a sort of sym bolic gym nastics. w hich structures practical space into right and left. and it is also to forget that the work of art always contains som ething ineffable. on th e particular standpoint an observer "situated in space and tim e ” takes u p on the object. w ithdraw ing from it in order to observe it from above and from a d istance. devoid of landm arks or any privileged centre . T h e "know ing su b jec t”. a predeterm ined set of discourses and actions appropriate to a particular M stage-part ” . by the use o f a m odel of all p ossible routes. H ence it is not sufficient for anth rop ology to break w ith native experience and the native representation of that ex p er ie n c e: it has to m ake a second break and question the p resup position s inherent in the p osition of an outside observer. up and d ow n . can be seen from the difficulty w e have in recogn izin g fam iliar routes on a m ap or tow n-plan u ntil w e are able to bring together the axes of th e field of potentialities and the "system o f axes linked unalterably to our b odies. som ething which com m unicates. and w hich pleases (or displeases) without concepts.e.and the practical space of journeys actually m ade. as Poincare puts it.the product of an " art ”.3 It is significant t h a t" culture ” is som etim es described as a m a p .like gen ealogies. b ein g a constituent con d ition of th e cognitive operation. at best. not by excess. as is attested by the special im portance he assigns to com m un icative functions (w hether in language.2 T he objective lim its of objectivism of practising it . as hagiography would have it. as a " r o le ”. in front and b eh in d . T h e gulf b etw een this potential. or m arriage). i. it is the analogy w h ich occurs to an outsider w ho has to find his w ay around in a foreign landscape and w ho com p en sates for his lack of practical m astery. from body to body. like the rite or the d ance.

each o f w hich im plies a set of (usually tacit) anthropological theses. i. prim ary k now ledge. the fact that they are op posed to practical k now ledge. as a fa it accomp li.an inevitable m om ent in scientific k now ledge . " eth nom ethod ological ”) sets out to m ake exp licit the truth of prim ary exp erience of th e social w orld . and may be described as m om ents in a dialectical advance tow ards adequate k now ledge.e . all that is inscribed in th e relationship of fa m ilia rity w ith the familiar environ­ m en t.T he objective lim its o f objectivism From the mechanics o f the model to the dialectic o f strategies 3 T h e social w orld may be the object o f three m odes of theoretical k now ledge. has no other aim than to make p ossib le a scien ce of th e dialectical relations b etw een th e objective structures to w h ich th e ob jectivist m od e of k now ledge gives access and the structured d ispositions w ith in w h ich those structures are actualized and w hich tend to reproduce them . o f th e fam iliar w orld. they have on ly one th in g in com m on .th e q u estion of the (particular) con d ition s m aking that experience p ossible . in particular. T h e know ledge w e shall call phenomenological (or. w h ich is needed in order to grasp the lim its of ob jectivist k now ledge .. that w e can integrate th e gains from it into an adequate scien ce of practices. into th e lim its o f th e objective and ob jectifying standpoint w hich grasps practices from ou tside. T h e critical break w ith ob jectivist abstraction en su in g from inquiry in to the con d ition s o f p ossib ility. to speak in term s of currently active sch ools. i. the u n q u estion in g apprehension o f th e social w orld w hich .e . by defini­ tion. T h is con stru ction presup poses a break w ith prim ary k now ledge. d oes not reflect on itself and exclu d es the question of the co n d itio n s of its ow n possibility.and to brin g to light the theory of theory and the theory of practice inscribed (in its practical state) in th is m ode of know ledge. w h ose tacitly assum ed p resup position s give the social w orld its self-ev id en t. econ om ic or lin gu istic) w h ich structure practice and representa­ tion s of practice. natural character . F in ally.that ob jectivist k now ledge can establish b oth th e structures of the social w orld and the objective truth of prim ary experience as experience denied explicit k now ledge of those structures.g . practical and tacit. A lthough these m odes of know ledge are strictly speaking in no way exclu sive. instead o f constructing th eir generative principle by situating itself w ithin the very m ovem ent of their accom p lish m en t. it is only by m eans of a secon d break. T h is q u estion in g of ob jectivism is liable to be understood at first as a rehabilitation of subjectivism and to be m erged w ith the critique that naive .4 It is only on condition that it poses the q u estion w hich th e doxic exp erience of th e social w orld excludes by definition . T h e k now ledge w e shall term objectivist (of w hich structuralist herm eneutics is a particular case) con stru cts the objective rela­ tion s (e . and thereby.

makes a com p lete break w ith native experience and the native theory of that experience. m ore precisely. to a theory o f the theoretical and social con d ition s of the possibility o f objective apprehension .5 or. and not the in dividu al operations into w hich social life breaks it d o w n ”. but a m eans o f exploring the lim its of all ob jective exploration. inseparably. objectivist k now ledge is diverted from construction o f the theory o f practical know ledge of the social w orld.and thereby to a theory o f the lim its o f this m ode of know ledge. Just as ob jectivist k n ow led ge p oses the question of the con d ition s of the p ossib ility of prim ary exp erience. so the theory of practice puts objectivist know ledge back on its feet by p osin g the q u estion of the (theoretical and also social) conditions w hich m ake su ch know ledge p o ssib le. of w hich it at least produces the lack. In reality. thereby revealing that th is experience (or the phenom enological analysis of it) is fundam entally defined as not posing this q uestion. criticizing M au ss’s " p h en om en ological” approach to gift exchange. the theory of practice and o f the practical m ode of know ledge inherent in all practice w hich is the precondition for a rigorous scien ce o f p ractices carries out a new reversal o f the p roblem atic w hich objectivism has to con stru ct in order to con stitu te the social w orld as a system of objective relations in depend en t o f individual con sciousnesses and w ills. It will b e rem em bered that L evi-S trau ss. It teaches us that we shall escape from the ritual eith er/or ch oice b etw een objectivism and su bjectivism in w hich the social scien ces have so far allow ed them selves to be trapped only if w e are prepared to inquire into the m ode o f production and fu n ction in g of the practical m astery w h ich m akes possib le both an objectively intelligible practice and also an ob jectively enchanted experience o f that practice. that is to say. O bjective analysis of practical apprehension of the fam iliar w orld is not a n ew form of sacrificial offering to the m ysteries o f su bjectivity. and inseparably from this. in other w ords. Because it produces its scien ce o f the social w orld against the im p licit presup position s o f practical know ledge of the social w orld. that w e shall do so o n ly if we subordinate all operations of scientific practice to a theory of practice and of practical know ledge (w hich has n oth ing to do w ith p henom en ological reconstitution of lived exp erience).4 T he objective lim its o f objectivism hum anism levels at scientific objectification in the nam e o f " lived exp erience ” and the rights o f " su b je ctiv ity ” . A sin gle exam ple w ill suffice to sh ow how this sort o f third-order know ledge d oes not cancel out the gains from objectivist know ledge but conserves and transcends them by integrating the truth of practical experience and o f the practical m ode of k now ledge w hich this learned know ledge had to be constructed against. p ositing that it is the exchange as a con stru cted object w hich " constitu tes the primary p henom en on. the truth o f all learned know ledge. that the "m echanical la w s ” o f the cycle of .

it is to ignore the fact that the agents practise as irreversible a seq u en ce of actions that the observer con stitu tes as reversible. T h e ob server’s totalizin g apprehension su b stitu tes an objective structure fundam entally defined b y its reversibility for an equally objectively irreversible su ccession of gifts w h ich are not m echanically linked to the gifts they respond to or in sisten tly call for: any really objective analysis of the exchange of g ifts. It m eans that even if reversibility is the objective truth of the discrete acts w hich ordinary experience know s in discrete form and calls gift exchan ges. T h e tem poral structure o f gift exchan ge. like the theoretical m odel of the cycle of reciprocity. or even w om en m ust allow for the fact that each of these inaugural acts m ay m isfire. w hich defines the full truth of the gift. the m od el.6 " P h en o m en o lo g ica l” analysis and objectivist analysis b rin g to light tw o antagonistic principles of gift exchange: the gift as exp erienced . at least.From the mechanics o f the model to the dialectic o f strategies 5 reciprocity are the u nconscious principle of the obligation to g iv e. i. if it is not to con stitute an insult. is to set aside the q u estion of the relationship b etw een so-called objective truth. in any case. w hich. or. is what makes possible the coexisten ce of tw o o p p osin g truths. as L evi-Strauss su ggests. w hich objectivism ignores. and that it receives its m eaning. even if the response is a failure to reply that retrospectively rem oves its intended m eaning. it is not the w hole truth o f a practice w hich could not exist if it w ere co n sciou sly perceived in accordance w ith the m odel. that of the observer. telescop es gift and cou n ter-gift into the sam e instant. m eant to be experienced. from the response it triggers off. w ords. and on the other hand. to lending.e . T o stop short at the " o b jectiv e” truth of the gift. the counter-gift m ust be deferred and different. the ob liga­ tion to give in return.e . T h e difference and delay w hich the m onothetic m odel obliterates m ust be brought into the m odel n ot. in w hich the return of the loan is ex p licitly guaranteed by a juridical act and is thus already accomplished at th e very m om ent of the draw ing up of a contract capable of ensuring that the acts it prescribes are predictable and calculable. and the truth that can scarcely be called subjective.e . T o say that the m eaning the gift has for the d onor is recognized and consecrated only w hen the counter-gift has b een m ade d o es not am ount to restoring the structure of the cycle of reciprocity in different w ords. and the gift as seen from ou tside. i. ch allen ges. because the im m ediate return o f an exactly identical object clearly am ounts to a refusal (i. the return of the sam e ob ject). sin ce it represents the official definition o f the subjective experience of the exchan ge. but because th e operation o f gift exchange p resupposes (individual and collecti%'e) m isrecognition ( meconnaissance) of the reality of . and the obligation to receive . T h u s gift exchan ge is op posed on the one hand to swapping. In every society it m ay be observed that. out of a " phenom enological ” desire to restore the subjective experience o f the practice of the exchange.

w hich m ust be neither too short (as is clearly seen in gift exchan ge) nor too lon g (especially in the exchange o f reven ge-m urders).g ifts to the m other of a new -born ch ild .e . the tim e-lag w hich the objectivist m od el m akes of it. w h ich is w hat gives his actions their social m ean ing. .unless he is capable o f transform ing forced delay into strategic deferm ent. w hich the anth rop ologist and his m odels b rin g to light sim p ly by su b stitu tin g the tim eless m odel for a schem e w h ich w orks itself ou t on ly in and through tim e.can have com p letely different m eanings at different tim es.7 In sh ort. a fake circulation o f fake coin. p aying a visit. w hile at the sam e tim e th ey m ust refuse to know and above all to recognize it . the collectively m aintained and approved self-d ecep tion w ithou t w h ich sym b olic exch an ge. not married off his daughters in tim e. said La R och efoucauld. w hile alm ost all im portant exchan ges . not b ou gh t back his land from a rival fam ily. offering o n e ’s services. It is all a question of style. etc.6 T he objective lim its o f objectivism the objective " m ec h a n ism ” of th e exchan ge. the agents m ust not be entirely unaware of th e truth of th eir exch an ges. both forced and interested. at least. lest he be accused of ingratitude and stand co n d em n ed b y "w hat people sa y ”. the receiver is " obliged”. cou ld not operate. to be exp erienced as irreversible. to pull h is p un ch es. to refrain from u sing against h im all the w eap on s he otherw ise m ig h t. . is to d en ou n ce the initial gift retrosp ectively as m otivated b y th e in tention of ob ligin g one. exp ected to sh ow his gratitude tow ards his benefactor. or on th e occasion o f a w ed d in g. " O verm u ch eagerness to d ischarge o n e’s obliga­ tions is a form o f in gratitu d e”. w hich m eans in this case tim in g and ch oice of occasion . i. so as to b e quits. com in g as it m ay at the right or the w rong m o m en t. everyth ing takes place as if a g en ts’ practice. T h e man w h o has not avenged a m urder. If th e system is to work. is q u ite the op posite of the inert gap o f tim e. the reason is that the lapse o f tim e separating th e gift from the cou n ter-gift is w hat authorizes the d eliberate oversigh t. T o betray on e's h aste to be free o f an ob ligation on e has incurred. for the sam e a c t . or. T o abolish the interval is also to abolish strategy. U n til he has given in return. a reality w hich an im m ediate response brutally exp oses: the in terval b etw een gift and cou n ter-gift is w hat allow s a pattern of exchange that is alw ays liab le to strike the observer and also the participants as reversible. g iv in g in return. T h e period in terp osed . and thu s to reveal too overtly o n e ’s desire to pay off services rendered or gifts received. to have regard for h im . w ere organized exclu ­ sively w ith a view to con cealin g from th em selves and from others th e truth o f their practice.have their ow n particular m o m en ts. sees his capital d im in ish ed from day to day by passing tim e . w hich is m ade exp licit in the anth rop ologist’s m od el. and in particular their m anip ulation o f time. th e sp ace of tim e in to deliberate sp acin g o u t: p utting off revenge or the return o f a gift can b e a w ay o f keeping o n e’s partner-opponent .g i v i n g . etc.

how m uch advantage the holder o f a transm issible pow er can derive from the art o f d elayin g transm ission and keeping others in the dark as to his ultim ate in ten tio n s. of the "little presen ts ” said to " keep friendship g o in g ” (" O present . It is understandable w ith in th is logic that a m an w hose daughter is asked for in m arriage sh ou ld feel he has to reply as soon as p ossible if the answ er is no. o f the action. there is still room for strategies w h ich consist of playing on the tim e. for exam ple. or thikchi. " is on h is s id e ” . tim e derives its efficacy from the state o f th e structure of relations w ith in w h ich it com es into p la y . D elay is also a w ay o f exacting from h im the deferential con d u ct that is required as long as relations are not broken off. w hereas if he in tend s to say yes. in th e form . surprising. drawing the co n tin u ou s ou t of the d iscon tin u ou s. A fter a certain p oint lack of response ceases to be an oversigh t and b ecom es disdainful refusal. and offend the suitor. lest he seem to be taking advantage of th e situ ation . and stealing a m arch. h ustlin g. W e know . like the really evil m om en t in the ill-o m en ed periods of the ritual calendar. m aintaining su sp en se or exp ectation .thunticht you w o n ’t make m e rich b ut you are the bond of frie n d sh ip ”). unreturned gift. a fo rtio ri. or on the other hand. through infinite m ultip lication of th e infinitely sm all. not to m en tion the art of osten tatiou sly givin g tim e (" d ev o tin g o n e’s tim e to som e­ o n e ”) or w ith h o ld in g it ("n o tim e to sp a re”). must be of m odest value and hence easy to give and easy to match. for exam p le. In other w ords. w h ich he w ill lose as soon as he gives his con sent. A nd th is is true. E veryth in g takes place as if the ritualization o f interactions had the paradoxical effect of g iv in g tim e its full social efficacy.From the mechanics o f the model to the dialectic o f strategies 7 in th e dark about o n e ’s in tention s. h urrying. tim e can also w ork against on e. w hich implies that they must function within the logic of "surprises” or "kind th ou gh ts” rather than according to the m echanism s of ritual. Little presents. T h ese presents intended to maintain the everyday order of social intercourse almost always consist of a dish of cooked food.h old in g back or p u ttin g off. a thing given w ithout recom pense) and the most rigorously " forced” gifts. and in a sense continuous. as m athem aticians d o . " T im e ”. T h en there are all th e strategies in tend ed sim p ly to neutralize the action o f tim e and ensure th e continuity of interpersonal relations. by d elayin g revenge so as to prolong the threat of revenge. never m ore potent than w h en n oth in g but tim e is goin g o n . the m om ent for th e com eback becom es im possible to p in p oin t. which are halfway between "gratuitous” gifts ( elma'tar. "like a m other’s m ilk ”. as in the dialectic of offence and ven gean ce. w e say. but they must be frequent. so as to m ake the m ost of the tem porary advantage of his p osition. W hen the u n fo ld in g o f the action is heavily ritualized. he m ay put off th e reply for as lon g as h e likes. of all the less strictly regulated occasion s w hich offer u n lim ited sco p e for strategies ex p lo itin g th e p ossib ilities offered by m anipulation of the tem p o of the action . w hich does not im ply that the m odel of that structure can leave it ou t of account. just b efore the upturn. . or rather th e tempo.

w eddings. and to conserve even fortuitous su ccesses. through steadily directed adjustm ents and corrections. to elim inate accidents w hen they can be put to u se.. so that he will grow tall and be fruitful.and whose importance and solem nity make them a sort of controlled challenge in the same way that marriages within the lineage or neighbour­ hood.since they are seen only intermittently. T o restore to practice its practical truth. linked to events in the life-cycle of men or the earth. the obligatory gift to a saint. som e dried vegetables. from norm s and rules: doubtless there are slips. "for good lu ck ” ( el fa l). It is therefore practice. and attains con sciou s expression in order to work itself o u t. or.objective limits o f objectivism couscous (with a piece of cheese. but never presum ing to encom pass in a catalogue o f recurrent situations and appropriate con d uct. and those invited to take part in that joy. when they mark a cow ’s first milk) and follow the course of minor family celebrations . m istakes. A nd indeed. called ajedjig "flower”. a baby’s first tooth or first steps. on the "great occasions” . to give back). etc.8 The. given "so that the boy [the reason for the exchange] will flourish ”. that is to say. th e " art ” of the necessary improvisation w hich defines excellen ce. they involve those wishing to impart their joy. w e m ust therefore reintroduce tim e into the theoretical representation of a practice w h ich . and also in time . a little sem olina (never barley. T h is takes u s a lon g w ay from the objectivist m odel o f the m echanical interlocking of preregulated actions that is com m only associated w ith the notion of ritu al: on ly a virtuoso w ith a perfect com m and o f his "art of liv in g ” can play on all the resources inherent in the am biguities and uncertainties of behaviour and situ ation in order to produce the actions appropriate to each case. is intrinsically defined by its tempo. which are visiting-presents) are sharply opposed to extraordinary gifts. T h e generative. too. births. som etim es intended to set the seal on alliances or reconciliations and always marked by solemn ceremonies. W e are a lon g w ay. thameghra) . Ikhir or lehna. and also gram m arians of decorum able to state (and elegantly. w hich is annihilated w hen . and do it the right w ay. in what is nothing less than a fertility rite: when the dish which contained the present is taken back. so frequent and so closely w oven into the fabric of ordinary exchanges that they pass unnoticed. T hese ordinary gifts (which include som e of those they call tharzefth. lentils. a female plant and symbol of fragility). preferably. what is som etim es called thiririth (from er. in its m ost specific asp ect. the little gifts between relatives and friends are opposed to the present of m oney and eggs which is given by affines remote both in space and in the genealogy. first visit to the market. a b oy’s first haircut. and circum cisions . are opposed to the more prestigious but infinitely more hazardous extraordinary marriages between different villages or tribes. ten d in g.the third or seventh day after a birth. and m om ents of clum sin ess to be observed here as elsew h ere.and a fortiori to Iw'ada. chick peas. organizing schem e w hich gives a d iscu ssion its unity or an im provised speech its "argu­ m e n t”. still less in a fatalistic m odel. is an o ften im precise b u t system atic principle of selection and realization. a little corn. to do that of w hich p eop le w ill say " T h ere w as n oth ing else to be d o n e ” . or first fast. too) w hat it is right to do and say. given for the major festivals called thimeghrivnn (sing. b ein g tem porally structured. it always contains.

it m ay be spurned as an in su lt . its irreversibility. because yesterday tomorrow' w'as to d a y . w ith its rhythm . For the analyst. then it m ust one day be true to say that it is. if it m eets w'ith ingratitude. direction. b u t also because he has the tim e to totalize. i. detotalized. is never m ore pernicious than w'hen exerted on practices defined by the fact that their tem poral structure. and rhythm are constitutive o f their m eaning. its orientation. that " T o d a y is tom orrow . it ten d s to ignore tim e and. sim p ly by totalizing th em .e . that if it is true to say of a thin g that it w ill be. Even in cases in w hich the agen ts’ h abitus are perfectly harm onized and the interlocking of actions and reactions is totally predictable from outside. b ein g m ore attentive than objectivism to the tem porality of action) but practice itself. w h ich finds its objective basis in the probabilist logic of social law s.and in particular the properties it ow es to the fact that it u nfolds in tim e . and affirms that cycles o f reciprocity are not the irresistible gearing o f obligatory practices found on ly in ancient tra g ed y : a gift may remain unrequited. uncer­ tainty rem ains as to the ou tcom e of th e interaction as long as the sequence has not been c o m p le te d : the passage from the highest probability to absolute certainty is a qualitative leap w hich is n ot proportionate to the num erical gap. to overcom e the effects o f tim e. (W hich is to say.a s has often been repeated sin ce M ax W eber .and in particular w hat is im plied in the specific tem porality of scientific practice. that epistem ological reflection is con stitu tive of scientific practice its e lf: in order to understand w hat practice is . with D iod oru s.From the mechanics o f the model to the dialectic o f strategies 9 the schem e is identified with the m odel: retrospective necessity becom es prospective n ecessity.arriving post festum. tim e no lon ger cou n ts: not only b e c a u s e . and can no longer not happen. and things w hich have h ap p en ed . S cien ce has a tim e w hich is not that of practice. once again. the w'hole logic of practice is transform ed. in the w ords of another paradox.e. he cannot be in any uncertainty as to w hat m ay h app en .”8 All exp erience of practice contradicts these paradoxes. is sufficient to m odify not on ly the experience of practice (w hich phenom enological analysis describes. Scientific practice is so "detem poralized ” that it ten ds to exclu d e even the idea of what it e x c lu d e s: because scien ce is p ossib le only in a relation to tim e w hich is op posed to that of practice. T h is uncertainty. or. becom e th e irresistible future of the acts w hich made th em happen. in d oin g so. T o su bstitute strategy for the rule is to reintroduce tim e.9 O nce the p ossib ility is adm itted that th e "m echanical law'” o f the "cycle of reciprocity” m ay not apply. T h is am ounts to p ositing. i. the product a p roject.it is therefore necessarv to know' what scien ce is . to reify practices. . in givin g an objective founda­ tion to strategies aim ed at avoiding th e m ost probable ou tcom e.) T h e detem poralizing effect (visib le in the syn optic apprehension that diagram s m ake p ossib le) that scien ce produces w hen it forgets the transform ation it im poses on practices inscribed in the current of tim e.

as th e M arx of the Theses on Feuerbach som ew hat rashly puts it. w ithou t b ein g " carried away ” beyond the gam e. co n tin u o u sly carries out the checks and corrections intended to ensure the adjustm ent o f practices and exp ression s to the reactions and expectations of the other agents. and unspoken im plication s o f verbal or gestural sym bolism to produce am biguous con d uct that can be d isow ned at th e slightest sign o f w ithdraw al or refusal. m ore likely to inspire in an outside observer the illusion of m echan ­ ical necessity than “fo rc e d ” conversation.e . the relationship b etw een the interlocutors. i. for exam ple. or savoir-faire . to perpetuate itself. at all ev en ts.p resupposed by th e m ost everyday gam es o f sociability and accom panied by the application of a sp ontaneous sem iology. for m aking a virtue ou t of n ecessity by con verting a de facto exclu sion into a ch oice of m eth od . d exterity. and codified cu es. constraining them to seek out points of agreem ent and disagreem ent. a m ass o f precepts. abandon and reserve.in dices of th e w elcom e given to actions already accom plished. arousing m ock quarrels that are always on the verge of b eco m in g real on es. eagerness and indifference. It fu n ction s . if one were able to procure a theoretical m astery of social practices of the sam e class as those o f w hich one may have a practical m astery. often ex nihilo. there w ould be less danger of locking the exchan ge of honour or the seem in gly m ost ritualized g ift exchange in reified. w hich seem s tolerable w hen applied to " a lie n ” practices. from the stand point of an adequate theory of practice: the u nceasing v igilance one n eed s to exert so as to be " carried along ” by th e gam e. such as bluff or seduction. is evidence that practices as visibly constrained as these rest on the sam e principle as conduct m ore likely to g iv e an equally m isleadin g im pression o f free im provisation. m aking them by turns trium ph and retreat. in n u en d os. preferably. T h u s. T h is practical know ledge. T h e language of rules and m od els. w hich . or. form ulae. w ith the sam e earnestness at once sincere and feign ed .10 T he objective limits o f objectivism From the "ru les” o f honour to the sense o f honour T h ere are w ays of avoiding ethnocentrism w hich are perhaps no m ore than so m any d ev ices for keep in g one s distance and. o n e can equally apprehend th is m echanical sequ en ce o f gestures and w ords "from a subjective point o f v ie w ” .tact. and to m aintain uncertainty about in ten tion s that alw ays hesitate b etw een playfulness and seriou sn ess. based on the con ­ tin u ou s d eco d in g o f the perceived . ceases to con vin ce as soon as one considers th e practical m astery of th e sym b olism of social interaction . but q uickly settled by a com prom ise or a return to the safe ground of shared con victions. reifying m odels. w hich play on th e eq u ivocation s. by a radical change in p oint of view .b u t not con sciously noticed . as happens w hen a m ock fight gets the better of the fighters. m ust en d lessly create and recreate. m oving them apart and bringing them together. B ut. T h ere is n oth ing.

It can be seen that the tvpical herm eneutic paradigm of the exchan ge o f w ords is perhaps less appropriate than the paradigm of the exchan ge of b low s used by G eorge H . that is. and of playing it w ell. A second corollary is this: he w ho ch allenges a man incapable of taking up the ch allenge. It is sufficient to carry out a sim ilar reversal of perspective in order to see that one can. and on ly those. T h u s elbahadla.11 that w ou ld enable the agent to " se le c t” the conduct appropriate to each situ ation . T o make som eon e a challenge is to cred it him w ith the dignity o f a man of honour. It is the chance to prove o n e ’s m anliness (thirugza) to others and to on eself. is ' a high point in the life o f the man w ho receives i t ”. each m ove triggers off a cou n ter-m ove. reading in th e b egin nings of a stroke or a sid estep the im m inent future. an anim al. not to salute som eon e is to treat him like a th in g. T h e scien ce of practice has to construct the principle w hich m akes it possible to account for all the cases observed. and w ith ou t having to construct at great expense of effort a " m ech a n ica l” m odel w hich w ould at best be to the man of honou r’s regulated im provisation w hat an etiq u ette handbook is to the art of living or a harm ony treatise to m usical com p osition . "is a d o n k ey” (th e sym bol of passivity). are on ly the theoretical equivalent of the practical sch em e w hich enables every correctly trained agent to produce all the practices and jud gm ents of honour called for by the ch allenges of existence. M ead . w ithout p ossessing the "filing-cabinet of prefabricated represen tation s”. in b oxin g as in conversa­ tion. requires a riposte and therefore is addressed to a man d eem ed capable of playing the gam e of honour. presupposes an opponent capable of preparing a riposte to a m ovem en t that has barely b eg u n and w ho can th u s be tricked in to faulty anticipation. remarkable at once for their inexhaustible diversity and their quasi-m echanical n ecessity. conversely.e. in exchanges of honour as in m atrim onial transactions. as su ch . i. T h ere is n oth in g w orse than to pass u n n oticed : thu s. " T h e m an w ho has no e n em ie s”. d ishon ou rs h im self. as Jakobson puts it . . From the principle of m utual recognition of equality in h onour there follow s a first corollary: the challenge confers h onour. sin ce th e challenge. for exam ple. incapable of pursuing the exch an ge.10 In d og-fights. as in the fighting o f children or boxers. every stance o f the body becom es a sign pregnant with a m eaning that the op p on en t has to grasp w hile it is still in cip ient. or a w om an.From the "rules ” o f honour to the sense o f honour ii like a se lf-r e g u la tin g d evice program m ed to redefine courses of action in accordance w ith inform ation received on the reception o f inform ation trans­ m itted and on th e effects produced by that inform ation. produce practically or reproduce theoretically all the honour con d ucts actually observed (or p otentially ob servab le). T h e challenge. A nd the d u m m y itself. the blow or the d u m m y. and the generative operation of w hich it is the basis. say th e K ab yles. w ith ou t forgettin g that th is con stru c­ tion.

the M oroccan Berbers used to say. and sh ou ld tem per his accusation with a certain m oderation. am ekri). the good player is the on e w ho alw ays su p p o ses his op p on en t w ill discern the b est strategy and w h o directs his ow n play accord ­ ingly. so as to let his adversary p ut him self to sham e.12 In gam e theory. for there to be a ch allen ge. w'hich can go on for ever. the w h ole fam ily rejoiced at the en d in g of dish on ou r: th e m en let off rifle sh o ts and the w om en uttered cries of* y o u -y o u \ . " Better that he sh ou ld strip h im s e lf” .13 T h e receiver of a gift is caught in the toils of exchan ge and has to ch oose a line of conduct w h ich . "than that I sh ould unclothe h im . dishonour w ould fall on the m an w ho dirtied his hands in an unw orthy revenge (h en ce. w ill be a response (even if o n ly by d efault) to the provocation of the initial act. that is w hy elbahadla boom erangs. a provocation to reply. at the sam e tim e p utting his p oint of honour (nif) to the test. his choice is identical w ith his o p p o n en t’s initial ch oice: h e agrees to play th e gam e. H cncc the m an w ho finds h im self in a strong p osition m ust refrain from p u sh in g his advantage too far. he op ts for exch an ge. the m an w ho receives it m ust consider the m an w ho makes it w orthy of m aking it. for his part. ob ed ien t to th e p oint o f honour. An affront from a p resum ptuous inferior rebounds on its author. L ik ew ise. he leaves him to bear the w eig h t o f his arbitrary acts. it is said . as opposed to m ere aggression . accord in g to M arcv.12 T he objective limits o f objectivism extrem e hum iliation p ub licly in flicted . so to make a present so great that it cannot be m atched m erely d ishon ou rs th e giver. in certain cases. recoils on the man w h o provokes it ( am ahbul): even the man w h o m erits elbahadla p ossesses an honour. in other w ords. w hereas in abstaining from all reply. recourse to the hired killer. w hich cannot but disapprove of the accuser’s lack of m oderation. H e can choose to prolon g the exchan ge or to break it off. " H e has sham ed h im ” . apropos of the ch allen ge-gift ( taw sa) w hich m arked the great cerem o n ies . T h is is d one in the hope of rallying p u b lic op in ion . If." E lbahadla w ould fall on the w ise man w h o ventured to take up the am ah bufs senseless ch allenge. T h e third corollary is that only a ch allenge (or o ffence) com in g from an equal in honour deserves to be taken u p. A gift or ch allenge is a provocation. sim ilarly. says the proverb. as soon as ven gean ce had been taken. It is therefore th e nature of the riposte w hich m akes the challenge a ch allen ge. " T h e prudent. in the gam e of honour. can alw ays try to turn the tables by leading him on to overstep the perm itted lim its. ch allenge and riposte alike im p ly that each player ch ooses to play the gam e as w ell as he can w hile assu m ing that his adversary is capable of m aking the sam e choice. just as to in sult a man incapable of riposting d ishon ou rs on eself. for the riposte is in itself a new ch allen ge. T h e gift is a challenge w hich honou rs the man to w hom it is addressed. circum spect m an [amahdhuq] d oes not get involved w ith an amahbul. w hatever he d oes.” H is op p on en t. Form erly. con seq u en tly.

in the eyes of the grou p . to o . or inferior to the person offend ed . he is in a sen se ch oosin g to be the author o f h is ow n dishonour. h is prestige. h igh lig h ts the arbitrary and im m oderate character of the offence. those w h o lean o n ).From the "rules ” o f honour to the sense o f honour 13 oclaim ing that revenge was accom plished. o f cou rse. in term s o f h is p hysical stren g th . . the latter m ay riposte (th u s transgressing the third corollary) b u t if he unfairly exp loits his advantage. the exchange sto p s. or m em bers o f a sm all fam ily. ch allenge an sw ering challenge. the popular con sciou sn ess is nonetheless aware o f actual in eq ualities. either by rejecting the gift or by p resen tin g an im m ediate or su b seq u en t cou n ter-gift identical to the original g ift. w h o is thereby d ishon ou red . H ere. he cau ses the offence to recoil on its perpetrator. T h e offender m ay. only ad m is­ sib le so lon g as. or the im portance and authority of the group to w h ich he b elo n g s. equal. F in ally. clien ts (ya d h itsumuthen. at least ideally. w hich he m ay m anifest by calling in a hired killer. be superior. th e recipient may indicate that he ch ooses to refuse the exch an ge. But n on-reply can also express the refusal to reply: the m an w h o has suffered an offence refuses to regard it as su ch . C hoosing th e other alternative m ay take on different and even op posed m eanings. t o o ” is answ ered w ith the proverb " T h e m oustache o f the hare is not that o f the l i o n . T h e m an w h o declares " I ’ve got a m oustache. so that all m ig h t see h ow a fam ily of honour prom ptly restores its prestige and so that the o p p o sin g fam ily sh ould be left in no d ou b t as to th e source o f its m isfortune. H e on ly has to adopt an attitude of h um ility w h ich . Sim ilarly in the case of the gift. th e disparity b etw een th e tw o antagonists is u nequ ivocal. only the fact o f avoiding the ch allenge is held to be blam ew orthy. by em p h asizin g his w eakness. In th e case w here the offender is clearly superior to the offend ed . Let us take the case w here the offended party has. if h e proves incapable of taking u p the challenge (w hether a gift or an offence). the m eans to riposte. ” T h is is the basis o f a w h ole sp ontaneous casuistry. T h is strategy is. T h e offend ed party is even able to throw back elbahadla on his offender w ithou t resorting to a riposte. he exp oses him self to th e d ishon ou r w hich w ould otherw ise . . In sh ort. only escalation. and the offended party is not required to trium ph over th e offender in order to be rehabilitated in the eyes of p ub lic op in ion : the d efeated m an w h o has d o n e his duty incurs no blam e. it is a natural course for those individuals socially recognized as weak. can sign ify the op tion o f playing the gam e. and through his d isd ain . H e con fesses h im self d efeated in the gam e that he ou gh t to have played d esp ite everyth ing. w hich is then irrem ediable. in the case w here the offender is inferior to the offend ed . if from pusillanim ity or w eakness he sid estep s it and renounces the chance o f ripostin g. w ithin th is logic. W hile the logic o f honour presupposes the recognition of an ideal equality in h onou r.

there is som eon e in his h o u s e ”. T h erefore th e tim e-lag b etw een the offence and the reparation m ust be as sh ort as p ossib le. its sen sitivity and d eterm in ation. T h e distance b etw een failure to riposte o w in g to fear and non-reply b espeaking con tem p t is often infinitesim al. it’ll catch up w ith m e . on e day I ’ll reach it. w ith the resu lt that d isdain can alw ays serve as a mask for pusillanim ity. T h e reputation o f its nif. It is said that D jeh a. th e d ishon ou r recoils on to the attacker. a large fam ily has in deed sufficient fightin g m en not to have to w ait lon g. replied . " I f it’s in fron t o f m e. th e fact rem ains that the differences b etw een the tw o parties are never clear-cut. eq u ality .” T h e story is also told o f th e lion w ho alw ays walks w ith m easured p a ces: " I d o n ’t know w here m y prey i s ”. asked w h en h e had aven ged his father. W isdom advises him rather to abstain from any reply and to play the " c o n te m p t” gam bit: sin ce failure to riposte cannot be im pu ted to cow ardice or w eakness. or w o m en . Every exchange con tains a m ore or less dissim ulated ch allenge. th e exchange of gifts. A lth ou gh each of th ese " th eo retica l” cases cou ld be illustrated w ith a host of observations and stories. the greatest gift is at the sam e tim e the gift m ost likely to throw its recipient into d ishon ou r b y p roh ibitin g any cou n ter-gift. T h e respect inspired b y a good fam ily is exp ressed in the saying that it can "sleep and leave th e door o p e n ”. w ord s.albeit by th e transfer of borrow ed co n cep ts p henom en a such as the d ialectic o f ch allenge and riposte and. he said. lead it to appear as capable of rip ostin g the very instant an offence is com m itted .14 T h e objective lim its o f objectivism have rebounded on to the p resum ptuou s offend er. m ore generally. h en ce h e is im m u n e from even th e m ost reckless attack. o f w h om p eop le say that he fulfils " h is role as a m a n ” ( thirugza). w h ich is recognized b y the very act o f g iv in g offen ce .” H ow ever close it m ay com e to the logic o f practices (and to the extent that it d o es). if it’s b eh ind m e. T o redu ce to the fun ction o f com m un ication . and "even w hen he is aw ay.14 But p otential d ishon ou r becom es m ore and m ore real the longer vengeance is d elayed. But th in g s are n ot so sim p le. a legendary figure. If th e offence d oes not necessarily bear w ith in it d ishon ou r. "A fter a hundred years had g o n e b y . G en erou s exchan ge tends tow ards overw h elm in g g en er o sity . and th e logic o f ch allenge and riposte is b ut the lim it tow ards w h ich every act of com m un ication ten d s. the reason is that it allow s the p ossib ility of riposte. T h e m an o f honour. is to ignore th e structural am bivalen ce w hich predisposes them to fulfil a political function of d om in ation in and through perform ance o f th e com m u n ication fun ction . the abstract diagram w h ich has to be constructed in order to account for that logic is liable to ob scu re the fact that the drivin g force of the w hole m echanism is not som e abstract principle (th e principle of iso tim y . is alw ays on his g u a rd . so that each can play on the am bigu ities and eq u ivocation s w hich this indeterm inacy len d s to the co n d u ct.

W e know that returning a gift at o n ce. w ith the potential ripostes.. L ikew ise th e lesson con tained in the parables of D jeha and the lion m ust be taken seriou sly. T h e skilled strategist can turn a capital of provocations received or con flicts su sp en d ed . N if. w ays o f standing. to w hom each is linked b y h is d isp osition s and in terests. or w alking. T h e fact that there is n o " c h o ic e ” that cannot be accounted for. the m astery w h ich defines ex cellen ce finds exp ression in th e play m ade w ith tim e w h ich transform s ritual­ ized exchan ge in to a confrontation of strategies. But even the m ost strictly ritualized exchan ges. retrospectively at least. in th e form o f bodily postures and stances. are rigorously foreseen.From the "rules ” o f honour to the sense o f honour *5 in h onou r). com m only used to design ate the fundam ental virtu es of the m an o f honour. th e m ale orientation par ex cellen ce. look in g. . b y reserving the capacity to reopen or cease h ostilities in his ow n good tim e. sp eak ing. w ho find in the relative predictability and u np redictab ility o f the p ossib le ripostes the op portu nity to put their strategies to work. that is to say. from the aggregate of the in dividu als en d ow ed w ith the sam e d isp o sitio n s. w hich enables each agent to en gen d er all the practices co n sisten t w ith the logic o f ch allenge and riposte. th e verb qabel. and also. stand s up to others. em bedded in the agen ts’ very bodies in the form o f m ental d ispositions. future and past. schem es of p ercep tion and th ou gh t. inscribed in the b ody schem a and in th e sch em es of thou ght. such as those w h ich d ivid e up th e w orld in accordance w ith th e op position s betw een the m ale and th e fem ale.e . by m eans o f cou n t­ less in ven tion s. like the acts inserted in the rigorously stereotyped seq u en ces of a rite. is very closely associated w ith virility and with all the d isp ositio n s. sittin g . looks th em in the ey es. e tc . d oing away w ith the interval. d oes not im ply that su ch practice is perfectly predic­ table. have room for strategies: th e agents rem ain in com m and of the interval b etw een th e ob ligatory m om ents and can therefore act on their o p p on en ts b y p layin g w ith th e tempo o f the exch an ge. and on ly su ch p ractices. knows how to receive as a host and to d o his gu est h on ou r. and their u n fold in g. in w h ich all th e m om ents o f th e action . the m an w h o faces. ven gean ces. also m eans to face the east (elqibla) and the future (qabel). incorporated in the form o f bodily sch em es. still less the set o f rules w hich can be d erived from it. i. literally the n o se. but the sense o f h onou r. T h is is sufficient to rem ind us that the point o f honour is a perm anent d isp osition . top and bottom . at a d eep er level. ou tfaces. and this is true not on ly for the observer b ut also for the agen ts. right and left. into an in stru m ent o f power. a d isp osition inculcated in the earliest years of life and constantly reinforced b y calls to order from th e grou p . What is called the sense o f honour is n oth in g other than the cultivated disposition. w h ich th e stereotyped u n fold in g o f a ritual w ould in no w ay dem and. or con flicts it con tains. extrem ely general in their application. am ounts to breaking off the exch an ge. east and w est. w hich are held to m anifest v ir ility .

like W eb er’s K ad i-ju stice. reported by H anoteau and L eto u rn eu x . the m ost h ein o u s. real or im aginary .16 T h e g en erative sch em es are so gen erally and au tom atically a p plicab le that th ey are con verted in to exp licit p rin cip les. alw ays fu n ctio n in g in the im p licit state. for exam p le. theft com m itted b y n ight from a d w ellin g h ou se. th ose m aking it p ossib le to assess the gravity of a theft accord in g to the circu m stan ces in w h ich it w as com m itted . for exam p le. cu stom ary law alw ays seem s to pass from particular case to particular case. b etw een feast d ays and ordinary d ays. b u t som etim es w ith n ew im p licatio n s. from th e specific m isd eed to th e specific san ction . only in the very case in w hich th e value o f the object stolen is su ch as to sw eep aside all extenu atin g or aggravating circu m stan ces. for exam p le. the victim w as asleep . T h is is w h y. n ever exp ressly form u latin g th e fundam ental p rin cip les w h ich " ration al” law sp ells out exp licitly (e . other th in gs b ein g eq u al. the least h ein o u s. n igh t-tim e and d aytim e.15 T h e appropriate acts o f jurisp ru dence co n cern in g a particular offence. en tailin g no sa n ctio n ). su ch as the op p o sitio n s b etw een the h o u se (or m o sq u e) and other places. and there are also variations accord in g to th e social status of th e aggressor and the victim (m an /w om an . T h u s the qanun of Ighil Im oula. w h eth er the theft w as by night or by d a y . to th eft by day in a d istan t field.g .i6 T h e objective limits o f objectivism Practice an d discourse about practice It w ould th u s be p ossib le to m ove on to th e grou n d w here talk of rules seem s least m isp laced . b etw een the h ouse and other p laces (th e m urder of a person cau gh t in o n e’s h o m e . feast days and ordinary days. p rovid es that "he w h o steals a m u le. of co u rse . from inside a house o r outside. can all be produced from a sm all n um ber of sc h e m e s that are con tin u o u sly ap plied in all dom ains o f practice. and w hether the anim als belong to the householder o r to someone else ” .from . for exam p le. ox or cow .17 T h e sam e b asic sch em es.or in m an-to-m an com b at) and the extent to w h ich the deed w as carried o u t (m ere threats or actual v io le n c e). all m en are equal in h on ou r ). ad u lt/ch ild ) and th e w eap on s or m eth od s used (w h eth er it w as b y treachery . T h er e is every reason to think that if the basic . there are th e sam e o p p osition s. the first m em ber of each pair alw ays corresp ond ing to the severer p en alty. ap ply in th e case of braw ls. b y force or trickery shall pay 50 reals to th e djem aa and pay the ow ner the value o f the stolen anim al. that of cu sto m or " p re -la w ”. It is clear that it is sufficient to co m b in e th e corresp on d in g p rin cip les to p rod uce the sanction appropriate to each case. form ally stated. for exam p le. w h ich togeth er w ith th efts norm ally occu p y a con sid erab le place in cu sto m . w ith ou t th ose sch em es ever b ein g constituted as exp licit p rin cip les. and sh o w that the "custom ary r u le s” preserved by the grou p m em ory are th em selv es the p rod uct of a small batch o f sch em es en ab lin g agen ts to generate an in finity of p ractices adapted to en d lessly ch an gin g situ ation s.if. b etw een night and d ay.

is n ever m ore fallacious than w hen applied to the m ost h om o g en eo u s societies (or the least codified areas of differentiated so cieties) w here m ost p ractices. as in K abvlia.g . tw o p rop osition s m ay either be added togeth er or ncel each other ou t. the d isp o sitio n s o f the h abitus. can b e abandoned to the orchestrated im provisation of com m on d isp osition s: the rule is never. it w ould be p ossib le to reproduce all th e provisions of all the custom ary law s w h ich have b een collected and even to produce the co m p lete universe of all the acts of jurisprudence con form in g to th e "sen se of ju stice ” in its K ab yle form . It is because each agent has the m eans of acting as a judge of others and of h im self that cu stom has a hold on h im : in d eed . w ith in the logic of th e rule.18 It go es w ith o u t sayin g that th e im p licit p h ilo so p h y o f practice w hich pervades the anthropological tradition w ould n ot have su rvived all th e d en u n ­ ciations of legalist form alism if it had not had an affinity w ith the p resu p p o si­ tions in scrib ed in th e relation ship b etw een the ob server and th e o b ject of his stu d y. as m ore or less expanded fam ily cou n cils. w h ich . m ore than a secon d -b est in tend ed to m ake g ood the occasional m isfirings o f the co llectiv e enterprise of in cu lcation ten d in g to p rod uce h abitus that are capable o f gen erating practices regulated w ith ou t exp ress regulation or any in stitu tion alized call to ord er . a crim e is alw ays m ore seriou s com m itted by n ig h t than ding on the case. in social form ations w here. the ru les of cu stom ary law have so m e practical efficacy on ly to the ex te n t that. in every m em ber of the grou p .Practice and discourse about practice 17 tions o f th is im plicit axiom atics w ere sp elled out m ore co m p letely than Pr here (e . can o n ly be d e scrib ed as an ex c ep tio n ). 1S ^ m itted hv d av). sk ilfully m anip ulated b y the h olders of authority w ithin the clan (th e " gu aran tors”). there exists no judicial apparatus endow ed w ith a m on op oly of physical or even sy m b o lic v io len ce and w here clan assem b lies fu n ction as sim p le arbitration tribunals. a eu p h em ized form of legalism . in their incorporated state. so to speak. very close in this resp ect to sayin gs and proverbs (such as th ose w h ich govern th e tem poral d istrib u tion of activ ities). not so m uch to cite and recite them from m em o ry . have noth ing in com m on w ith the tran scend en t rules of a juridical code: everyone is able. Talk of rules. in clu d in g th o se seem in g ly m ost ritualized.e . in th is case. together w ith the law s by w h ich th ev are com b ined A „ com - T h u s the p recepts o f cu sto m . w h ich im p ose th em selv es in the very con stru ction o f his ob ject so lon g . i. as to repro­ duce them (fairly accurately). the schem es of perception and appreciation d ep osited . that is. T h e y are therefore separated on ly b y d ifferen ces o f degree from th e partial and often fictitious exp licit statem en ts of the g ro u p ’s im p licit axiom atics through w hich individual m ore-or-less " a u th o r ize d ” agen ts seek to cou n ter the failures or hesitations of th e h abitus by stating th e so lu tio n s appropriate to difficult cases. th ey "aw a k en ” .

ign oran t or in fo rm ed ). B ecau se th e native is that m uch less in clin ed to slip in to the language o f fam iliarity to th e extent that his q u estion er strikes him as unfam iliar w ith th e u n iverse of reference im plied b y his discou rse (a fact apparent in the form of the q u estio n s asked. or gram m atical form alism to w hich his o w n situ ation in clin es the observer.are in evitab ly subject to the censorship inherent in their h abitus. T h u c y d id e s. or b o x in g breaks dow n into in dividu al p osition s. or Caesar) who. Insofar as it is a discourse of fa m ilia rity . In v ited b y the a n th rop ologist’s q u e stio n in g to effect a reflexive and quasi-theoretical return on to h is ow n practice. d an cin g . and lacunae of the language o f fam iliarity.19 take for granted the p resu p p o sitio n s taken for granted b y the historical agen ts . an exp erience w hich finds ex p ressio n on ly in the silen ce s. the u n con sciou s sch em es o f h is practice. i. inevitab ly induced b y any learned q u estio n in g . liv in g "in the sp irit o f the e v e n t ” . w h ich is no longer that of action. If agents are p ossessed by th eir h abitus m ore than th ey p ossess it. ellip ses. and h en ce su cc essiv ely . Insofar as it is an outsideroriented discourse it ten ds to ex c lu d e all direct reference to particular cases (that is. T h e relationship b etw een inform ant and an th rop ologist is som ew h at an alogous to a p edagogical relation ship . particular or general. and because th is modus operan di in form in g all th ou g h t and action (including th o u gh t o f action ) reveals itself only in th e opus operatum . this is because it acts w ith in th em as the organ izing p rin cip le of their action s. F in ally. in w hich the m aster m u st b rin g to th e state of ex p licitn ess. X en o p h o n . or m oves. th e in form an t’s discou rse ow es its b est-h id d en properties to the fact that it is the p rod uct o f a sem i-theoretical d isp o sitio n . in the em ergen cy situ ation s of everyday life. ste p s. ethical. ch ess. T h e rationalizations prod uced from this sta n d ­ p oin t. th e vio lin . virtually all in form ation d irectly attached to p ro p er names ev o k in g and su m m arizin g a w h ole sy stem of previous in form ation ). p ractices w h ich in tegrate all these .e . it is u nderstandable that an th rop ologists sh ould so o fte n forget the distance b etw een learned recon ­ stru ction of the native w orld and the native exp erience of that w orld. for the p urposes of tran sm ission . w ith ou t b ein g that of scien ce. m eet and confirm the ex p ecta tio n s of th e juridical. th e b est-in form ed in form an t p rod uces a discourse which compounds tw o opposing system s o f lacunae.i8 T h e objective limits o f objectivism as they are not exp licitly taken as an ob ject. Just as the tea ch in g o f ten n is. it leaves u n said all that g o es w ith o u t sayin g: the inform ant’s remarks . a sy ste m o f sch em es of p erception and th o u g h t w hich cannot g iv e w hat it d oes g iv e to b e th o u g h t and perceived w ith ou t ipso facto p rod ucing an unthin k able and an u nn am eable. N ative exp erience o f the social w orld never ap preh en ds th e system o f ob jective relations other than in profiles.like the narratives or com m en taries o f those w h o m H eg el calls ‘'original h isto ria n s” (H ero d o tu s. in th e form o f relations w h ich present th em selv es o n ly on e by on e.

that it is learned ignorance (docta ignorantia). . th ose m ost esteem ed or rep reh en d ed . et c. the language of gram m ar. m ost often remain in their im p licit state.e . rather than to the ole from w h ich th e se m oves and all eq u ally p ossib le m o v es can be erated and w h ich . . m orality. i. of gen ealogical represen tation s. to exp ress a social practice that in fact o b ey s q u ite different prin cip les. togeth er w ith in stitu tio n alizin g. B ut th e su b tlest pitfall d o u b tless lies in the fact that such d escrip tion s freely draw on the h igh ly a m b ig u o u s vocabulary of rules. T h e exp lan ation agents may provide o f their ow n practice. T h is acad em icism of th e social " a r t” o f living w h ich . con ceals. For exam ple. in order to justify and le g iti­ m ate the estab lish ed order (e . sets them up as norm s ex p lic itly g overn in g practices (w ith phrases like "good form req u ires. thanks to a quasi theoretical reflection on their practice. a m ode of practical k n ow led ge not com p risin g k n ow led ge o f its ow n p rin cip les. and thereby from se ein g the gen ealogy as th e theoretical cen su s of th e u niverse o f theoretical relationships w ithin w hich in d ivid u als or grou p s d efine the real space o f (in b oth sen ses) practical relation ship s in term s of their conjunctural in terests. T h e im p osition and in cu lcation o f the stru ctures is n ever so p erfect that all ex p licitn ess can b e d isp e n sed w ith . It follow s that th is learned ign oran ce can on ly giv e rise to the m islead in g discourse of a speaker h im self m isled . N ative theories are d a n gerou s not so m uch b ecause th ey lead research towards illusory exp lan ation s as b ecau se they b rin g q u ite su perflu ous rein­ forcem ent to the in tellectu alist ten d e n c y in h eren t in th e ob jectivist approach to practices. th e id eological u se m any so cieties m ake o f th e lineage m o d el and.Practice an d discourse about practice 19 artificia „ activity. " c u sto m d e m a n d s . b elo n g in g to th e u n iverse of the u n d isp u ted . m ore gen erally. and law . takes away u n d erstan d in g of the logic of practice in th e very m ovem en t in w h ich it tries to offer it. in thC different social gam es (su ch as elbahadla in the h on ou r gam e or m arriage 1 th the parallel cousin a m o n g th e m atrim onial strategies). i. ignorant b oth o f th e o b jectiv e truth about his practical m astery (w h ic h is that it is ignorant of its o w n tru th ) and o f the true prin cip le of the k n ow led ge h is practical m astery co n ta in s. isolated elem en tary u nits of beh aviour in to the u n ity of an organized in form an t’s d isco u rse. having extracted from the opus operatum the su p p o sed principles of its p rod u ction . ) . A nd in cu lcation is itself. w ou ld d o u b tless have b eco m e appar­ en t to an th rop ologists at an earlier date if the theoretical u se th ey th em selv es make of this theoretical co n stru ct had not p revented th em from in q u irin g in to the fu n ction s o f g en ea lo g ies and genealogists. ten d s to draw attention to a^ r n o s t rem arkable " m o v e s ”. in w h ich h e strives to give h im self the sym b olic m astery o f his p ractice. b y ch o o sin g the m ore orthodox of tw o p ossible w ays o f classifyin g a m arriage).g . ev en from their ow n eyes. w h ich is alw ays accom pan ied by a certain am oun t of .e . the true nature o f their practical m astery.

in sh o rt. C hom skian gen erative gram m ar n ow ad ays en tails (o b jective) rediscovery that w hat creates th e p rob lem is not the p o ssib ility o f p rod u cin g coh eren t sen ten ces in in finite n u m b er but th e fact o f coh eren tly and appropriately u sin g an in finite n u m b er of sen ten ces in an in finite n um ber o f situ ation s. w h ich never m ake it clear w h eth er th e y recon stitu te th e real m ech an ics o f th e sch em es im m an en t in practice or th e theoretical logic of the m o d els co n stru cted in order to account for p ractices. p roverbs.and of all th e knowledges p rod uced by an "op eration o f th e secon d p o w e r ” w h ic h .kairos . as in K ab ylia. to p rod uce sy stem s of ru les. " p resu p p o ses the stru ctu res it a n a ly ses ”21 and m ore or less rigorou sly a ccou n ts for. m ore or less su cc essfu lly . it is n o n eth eless p ossib le to ob serve th e first sig n s o f a d ifferen tiation of th e d om ain s of practice accord in g to th e d egree of . m aking g o o d their m isfirin gs .to apply th e rules. su ch as gram m ars or rhetorics.22 the fact rem ains that w h en ever th e ad ju stm ent b etw een stru ctu res and d isp o sitio n s is b rok en . or. is m in im al. A n d . cam e u p against the p rob lem o f the rules d efin in g th e right w ay and right m o m en t . e tc . a w ritten cod e o f co n d u c t. R eaction against legalist form alism in its o vert or m asked form m ust not lead u s to m ake the h ab itu s th e ex clu siv e p rin cip le o f all p ractice. th e w h o le art of p erform an ce. E ven if th e y affect practice o n ly w ith in narrow lim its . even in social form ation s w h ere. to pu t into practice a repertoire of d ev ices or tech n iq u es. in order to realize its aim . rites. It is n ot easy to d efine rigorou sly th e statu s o f th e sem i-learn ed gram m ars o f practice —sayin gs. as M erleau -P on ty ob serv es.20 T h e objective lim its o f objectivism ob jectification in d iscou rse (oral or w ritten ) or so m e other sy m b o lic support (em b lem s. B ein g th e p rod u ct of the sam e gen erative sc h e m e s as th e practices they claim to a ccou n t for. In reality. on e of th e privileged m o m en ts for fo rm u la tin g the practical sc h e m e s and co n stitu tin g th em as p rin cip les.). g n o m ic p o em s. It is d o u b tless no a ccid en t that th e q u estion o f the relations b etw een the h ab itu s and th e " r u le ” sh o u ld be b rou ght to ligh t w ith th e h istorical em ergen ce o f an exp ress and e x p lic it action of in c u lc a tio n :20 th e p ed agogy of th e S o p h ists. forced . ch eck in g th e fu n c ­ tio n in g o f th e au tom atism s or. sp o n ta n eo u s " th e o r ie s” w hich alw ays accom pan y even th e m o st " a u to m a tic ’* p ractices. as th e phrase so aptly g o es. th e m akin g ex p lic it and ob jec­ tify in g of th e gen erative sc h e m e s in a gram m ar o f practices. n o doubt b ecau se it still partakes o f th e am b igu ou s statu s of all gram m ars. w hich im p o se n ew m ean in gs on th em b y reference to alien stru ctures. even the m ost false and superficial o f th ese " secon d ary exp la n a tio n s ” on ly reinforce the stru ctures by p rovid in g th e m w ith a particular form o f " r a tio n a liza tio n ”. the transform ation of th e gen erative sc h e m e s is d o u b tless reinforced and accelerated by th e d ialectic b etw een th e sc h e m e s im m a n en t in practice and th e n orm s p rod uced b y reflection on practices. in w h ich th e h abitus in evitab ly reappears.

) is on e able to p ose the q u estion of the m echanism s through w hich th e relation ship is esta b lish ed b etw een the structures and th e practices or th e rep resen tation s w h ich accom pan y th em .24 O ne is en titled to undertake to g iv e an "accou n t of accounts ”.m ust not lead us to forget that any socially recogn ized form ulation con tain s w ith in it an intrinsic pow er to rein force d isp o sitio n s sym b olically. instead of treating th ese " th o u g h t o b je c ts” as " r e a so n s” or " m o tiv e s ” and m aking them th e d eterm in in g cau se o f the practices. Our approach is th u s radically o p p o sed . as S ch u tz d o e s . b ecau se th e pre­ requisite for a scien ce o f co m m o n se n se represen tation s w h ich seek s to b e m ore than a co m p licito u s d escrip tion is a sc ien ce o f th e stru ctu res w h ich govern both practices and th e con co m ita n t rep resen tation s. th ereb y con trib u tin g tow ard s the m ainten an ce of the sy m b olic order from w h ich it draw s its au th ority. that is. ch an ces o f access to h igh er ed u ca tio n . custom ary recom m en dation s. th e latter b ein g the principal obstacle to th e con stru ction o f su ch a sc ie n c e . But th is is still too gen ero u s. to accoun ts of the accounts w hich agen ts p rod uce and through w hich they p rod uce the m eaning of th eir w o rld . particularly th e sy stem of co n cep ts b y m ean s o f w hich th e m em bers of a given group p rovid e th e m se lv e s w ith a representation o f th eir social relations (e. sa n ctio n s and im p oses what it states. Official language.the product of th e w ork of a b od y of sp ecialists exp ressly m andated to produce a coh eren t corp u s of juridical norm s and ensure resp ect for its application. B etw een the areas that are C° rently " fr e e st” b ecau se g iv e n over in reality to th e regulated im provisaa.Practice an d discourse about practice 21 t on of the p rin cip les g o v er n in g th em .PPa ^ {he h abitus (such as th e d istrib u tion of a ctivities and ob jects w ith in the^internal space of th e h o u se) and th e areas m ost strictly regulated by ustom ary norm s and u p h eld b y social san ction s (su ch as the great agrarian rites) there lies the w h ole field of practices su b jected to traditional p recep ts. M oreover.g . on tw o essen tial p oin ts. T h u s officialization is on ly one asp ect of th e ob jectify in g p rocess through w h ich th e group . so lo n g as on e d o es not p ut forw ard o n e ’s co n trib u tio n to th e scien ce of pre-scien tific representation o f the social w orld as if it w ere a science o f the social w orld .25 O n ly by co n stru ctin g the objective stru ctu res (price cu rves. con stru cts o f th e co n stru cts m ade by th e actors on the social s c e n e ”.23 or. th e lin eage m odel or the vocabulary of h o n o u r). th e co n stitu ­ tive pow er w hich is granted to ordinary lan guage lies not in th e lan guage itself but in the grou p w h ich au th orizes it and in vests it w ith au th ority. to th e interactionism w h ich redu ces th e con stru ctio n s of social sc ien ce to " c o n s­ tructs of the secon d d egree. T h e ab sen ce o f a g en u in e law . like G arfinkel. fu n ctio n in g as a regulatory device w hich orien ts practice w ith o u t p rod u cin g it. e tc . tacitly layin g d ow n th e d iv id in g lin e b etw een the thinkable and th e u n th in k ab le. and fu rn ish ed to th is en d w ith a co ercive p ow er . ritual p rescrip tion s. law s of th e m atrim onial m arket.

In social form ations in w h ich the exp ression o f m aterial in terests is heavily censored and political au th ority relatively u n in stitu tion alized .g .26 T h e agent w h o " reg u la rizes” his situ ation or puts h im self in the right is sim p ly b eating the group at its ow n gam e. in abiding by th e ru les. b u t it is liable to m ake on e forget the advantage that lies in ab iding b y the ru les. Brutally m aterialist redu ction enables on e to break w ith th e n aiveties o f th e sp on tan eou s theory of p ra ctice. It is therefore not sufficient to say that th e rule d eterm in es practice w h en there is m ore to -b e gained b y ob ey in g it than b y d isob eyin g it. in being in a regular situation. and th u s to com p oun d th e satisfaction s o f en ligh ten ed self-in terest w ith the advantage of ethical im peccability. disinterested resp ect for the rule. th e tran scend en t social norm and th e im m anent regularity of p ractices. fulfillin g the role o f a refuge for ignorance. he w in s the group over to h is sid e b y o sten tatiou sly h onou rin g the values the grou p h on ou rs.w hich am oun ts to th e sam e th in g . T he fallacies o f the rule T h e place w h ich a notion as visibly am b igu ou s as that o f the rule o ccu p ies in anthropological or lin gu istic theory cannot be fully u n d erstood u n less it is seen that th is notion p rovid es a solu tion to the con trad iction s and d ifficulties to w hich the researcher is con d em n ed b y an inadequate or . th is hospitab le n otion . in scrib ing in o b jectivity its representation o f w hat it is and thu s b in d in g itself b y th is p u b lic d eclaration . w h ich is the principle of the secon d-ord er strategies through w hich the agent seeks to p u t him self in the right. T h e ru le’s last trick is to cause it to be forgotten that agents have an interest in o b ey in g th e rule.an im p licit theory o f practice. q u ite apart from the d irect profit derived from d o in g w hat the rule prescribes.27 T h u s. It follo w s that strategies d irectly o rien ted tow ards th e prim ary profit o f practice (e . w h ich can su ggest at on ce the law con stru cted b y scien ce.22 T h e objective limits o f objectivism teaches itself and con ceals from itself its ow n tru th . E veryth in g takes place as if. political strategies for m obilization can be effec­ tive only if the values they pursue or propose are presented in the m isrecognizable gu ise o f th e valu es in w hich the grou p recogn izes itself. th e prestige accruing from a m arriage) are alm ost alw ays accom pan ied b y secon d-ord er strategies w h o se purpose is to give apparent satisfaction to th e d em an d s of the official ru le. enabled its user to escape from the d ilem m a of m echanism or finalism w ithou t falling in to th e m ost flagrant naiveties o f the legalism w hich m akes o b ed ien ce to the rule the d eterm in in g . or m ore precisely. perfect con form ity to the rule can bring secondary benefits su ch as the prestige and respect w hich alm ost invariably reward an action apparently m otivated b y n o th in g other than p u re. fallin g in to line w ith good form .

in order to bring to ligh t the im p licit p resu p p o sitio n s o f any m ode of know ledge w h ich treats practices or w orks as sy m b o lic facts. so Panofsky show s that iconological interpretation treats the sensible properties of the work of art. Saussure first m akes the p oin t that sp eech appears as th e precondition for language. occu p ied in h is system b y th e notion o f social c o n s tr a in t. finished p ro d u cts. T h is is so even th o u g h on e m ight invoke the ex isten ce o f dead languages or d u m b n ess in old age as provin g the p ossib ility o f losin g sp eech w h ile con servin g language. and even thou gh language m istakes reveal the language as the ob jective norm o f sp eech (w ere !t otherw ise. as mere *'cultural sy m p to m s”. for exam ple.T he fallacies o f the rule * 23 cip le o f all p ractices. irreducible to its concrete realizations. and on the other hand that betw een culture and conduct or works. or w hen. because language is learnt through sp eech . to b e deciphered by reference to a cod e (w h ich m ay be called culture). no anthropologist has tried to bring out all the im plications of the hom ology (w hich Leslie W hite is virtually alone in formulating explicitly) between the two oppositions. Kunstuollen . which yield their full m eaning only to a reading armed w ith the cultural cipher the artist has engaged in his work. to the utterances it makes possible. that w ith the exception of Sapir. because language cannot be ap prehended ou tsid e o f sp eech . they are perform ing an operation with regard to these particular cases w hich can be generalized to all practice. and because sp eech is the so u rce of in novation s in and transform ations o f language. roughly. Panofsky establishes that what he calls. together with the affective experiences it arouses. When Saussure constitutes language as an autonom ous object. O n e cou ld g o back to D u rk h eim and exam in e the lace at on ce central and em p ty.the objective sense of the work is no more reducible to the " w ill” of the artist than it is to the "w ill of the a g e ” or to the experiences the work arouses in the spectator. sparing them selves the effort of an epistemological critique of the conditions and limits of validity of transposing the Saussurian construction.. But it is sufficient to con sid er th e q uite exem plary theoretical operations w hereby Saussure con stitu tes lin gu istics as a scien ce b y con stru ct­ ing language as an au ton om ou s ob ject. the structure of objective relations making possible both the production and the deciphering of discourse. follow ing Alois Riegl. Heirs to an intellectual heritage which they did not make for them selves. as m uch from the in dividu al as from the co llectiv e p oin t o f v iew . who was predisposed by his dual training as linguist and anthropologist to raise the problem of the relations between culture and language. Finding them selves in a position of theoretical dependence on linguistics. but the language. they have too often been satisfied with literal translations of a term inology dissociated from the operations of which it is the product. structural­ ist anthropologists have often involved in their practice the epistemological unconscious engendered by unm indfulness of the acts through w hich linguistics constructed its own object. Just as Saussure show s that the true m edium of com m unication betw een two subjects is not discourse.that is to say. by a procedure similar in every respect. It is notew orthy. that is. d istin ct from its actu alization s in sp eech . every language m istake w ould m od ify th e language and there . the im mediate datum considered in its observable materiality. that betw een language and speech on the one hand.

T h u s. at the ex p en se of th eir practical functions. T h u s. o f the con stru ction o f the sy stem s of o b je c­ tive relations. liable to stan d in the w ay o f con stru ctin g th e lan guage. is that of th e rule to b e ap plied . " o f h om o g en eo u s n a tu re” . th o u g h it d oes not use th e w ord . that is. But h e then ob serves that the priority of sp eech over language is p urely ch ron ological and that the relationship is inverted as soon as on e leaves the d om ain o f individual or co llective history in order to in qu ire into the logical conditions for d ecip h erin g. w hich is that of ob jectivism . T h u s the sam e co n cep t. the negative p rod uct o f the operation w h ich con stitu tes the language as su c h . T h e lim its o f Saussurian ob jectivism are never m ore clearly v isib le than in its in ability to con ceive o f sp eech and m ore generally o f practice other than as execution . that is. Saussurian lin g u istics privi­ leges the structure of sign s. the "terrain o f th e la n g u a g e” and o f extracting a " w ell-d efin ed o b je c t” . he then isolates w ithin the " sp eech c ir c u it” w hat he calls th e "ex ecu tiv e s id e ”. w ith th e aim of d elim itin g . b ein g th e m ed iation w h ich en su res the id en tity o f the so u n d -con cep t associations m ade b y th e speakers and so guarantees m utual com p reh en sion . sp eech as a con stru cted ob ject defined by th e actualization of a certain sen se in a particular com b ination of so u n d s. because it is con stru cted from th e strictly intellectualist stan d p oin t of d ecip h erin g . to fu n ction s of com m u n ication or k now ledge. and a constructed object. O b jectivism con stru cts a theory of practice (as execu tio n ) b ut on ly as a negative b y-p rod u ct or. in th e logical order o f in telligibility. sp eech as a preconstructed ob ject. Saussu re sets aside " th e physical part of co m m u n ica tio n ”. T h e extrem e con fu sion of debates on the relation ship b etw een " cu ltu re” (or " social stru ctu r es”) and con d u ct generally arises from the fact that the con stru cted . th e relation s b etw een th em . that is.29 w ith in a logic w h ich . w hich he finally elim inates on the grou n ds that " execu tion is never the w ork of th e m a ss”. on e m ig h t say. sp eech . w aste p rod u ct. wr hich produces b oth ob jects by p rod ucing th e relation o f o p p o sitio n w ith in w h ich and b y wr ich h th ey are d efined.24 T he objective lim its o f objectivism w ould be no m istakes any m ore). im m ediately discarded. w ithin th e b ody o f lin g u istic data.28 It follo w s that. "an ob ject that can be stu d ied se p a r a te ly ”. w hich are never redu cible. F rom this p oin t o f view . is d iv id ed by theoretical con stru ction into an im m ed iately observable preconstructed datu m . sp eech is th e p rod u ct o f lan gu age . b ut "alw ays in d iv id u a l” . It w ou ld not be difficult to sh ow that th e con stru ction o f th e con cep t of culture (in the cultural an th rop ology sense) or social structure (in RadclifTe-Brown’s sen se and that o f social anthropology) sim ilarly im p lies th e con stru ction of a n otion o f co n d u ct as execu tion w'hich coexists w ith th e prim ary notion of con d u ct as sim p le behaviour taken at face value. or rather. p recisely that against w hich th e operation of theoretical con stru ction is carried ou t. language is the precond ition for th e in telligibility o f sp eech . as structuralism tacitly assu m es.

on the context and situation in which it is used. pow er.T h e fallacies o f the rule 25 m eaning of con d u ct and the theory of practice it im plies lead a sort 0f underground existen ce in the discou rse o f both th e d efen d ers and the opponents of cultural a n th rop ology . m ore p recisely. accept the fundam ental p resu p p o sitio n s o f its theoretical con stru ction . that on e finds the essen tial w eakness of the Saussurian m odel and o f all the th eories w h ich . involuntarily 1 think not °nly of his possible action towards m yself. their style. not to m en tion the all-too-fam ous " co llectiv e con sciousness . the m eaning of a linguistic elem ent depends at least as much on extra-linguistic as on linguistic factors. som etim es under new n am es. the receiver " selected ” the one which seems to him to be com patible with the circum stances as he perceives th em . formal. As Luis Prieto observes. the nature of the language and all the forms of expression used (posture. C red itin g the sp eak ing subject w ith a potentially in finite generative cap acity m erely p ostp on es the Saussurian d ifficulty: the power of innovation requ ired in order to generate an in finite n um ber of sentences in no w ay im p lies th e pow er o f adaptation that is required in order to make relevant use of th o se sen ten ces in con stantly ch an gin g situ ation s. E verything takes place as if. the o n e w hich w ou ld attack p recisely that th eory. or relations of power and authority. one sees that mere know ledge of the code gives only very im perfect m astery of the linguistic interactions really taking place. It is indeed " on th e ex ecu tiv e s id e ”. as Saussure puts it.30 O bjectivism is th u s protected by the im plicit state in w h ich its theory of practice rem ains against the only decisive ch allen ge. rank. official) betw een that person and m yself . that is to say. or the u n con sciou s finality of the history of system s. in a socially structured interaction. the source of all th e m etaph ysical aberrations on "the locus of c u ltu r e ” . prestige. which governs the form and content of the interactions observed in a particular conjuncture. mimickrv. to the uses agents actually make of it. m ore precisely. gesture. Bally show s how the very content of the com m unication. sex. the m ode of existen ce o f the " str u c tu re”. but also of his age. from am ong the class of "sign ified s” abstractly corresponding to a speech sound. e tc . obligatory. I cannot help visualizing the particular type of relationship (casual. H ence the lin g u ists’ lon gstan d in g stru ggle to overcom e the d ifficulties to w hich th e Saussurian con stru ction w as con d em n ed from the very b eg in n in g . or talk about him . perhaps. e tc . As soon as one m oves from the structure of language to the functions it fulfils.31 T h u s reception depends to a large degree on the objective structure of the relations betw een the interacting agents’ objective positions in the social structure (e . relations of com petition or objective antagonism .). and culture: "W hen I talk to som eone. and social 2 BOT . that is. by the structure of their relative positions *n the hierarchies of age. are affected by the structure of the social relation betw een the agents involved and.) and above all.g . inasm uch as th e o n ly w ay it co u ld con stitu te the structural properties of the m essage w as (sim p ly b y p ositin g an indifferent sender and receiver) to neglect th e functional properties the m essage derives from its use in a determ inate situ ation and.

in w hich the speakers adopt cne or the other of the two available languages according to the circum stances. a particular tone.34 remains locked within the framework of the rule and the exception. guides them unw ittingly towards the type of exchange best suited in form and content to the objective situation between the interacting individuals.into the structure. one condem ns oneself simply to take the diametrically opposite course to the structuralist abstraction which subsum es variations . T h e desire to "integrate variations. as it were. the subject of conversation. to "correct” what strikes them as unreal and abstract in the structuralist model are in fact still trapped in the logic of the theoretical model which they are rightly trying to supersede. in enabling speakers to situate others in the hierarchies of age. through the mediation of bodily mim esis. In short.”35 In accepting as obligatory alternatives the m odel and the situation.37 N o t the least of C hom sky's m erits is to have reopened d iscu ssion on the d istinction betw een syntax and sem an tics (and secondarily. by affirm ing the in d ep en d en ce of th e structural properties o f linguistic exp ression s relative to their uses and fu n ction s and the im p ossib ility of m aking any inference from analysis of their form al structure .26 T h e objective lim its o f objectivism background. whatever efforts are made to introduce them . power. and to miss the very principle of the structuralist error. all these considerations may affect my choice of expressions and lead me to avoid what might discourage. or culture. T he pressure of the socially qualified objective situation is such that. a whole way of speaking. wealth. etc. som etim es even an accent. T h e whole content of the com m unication (and not just the language used) is unconsciously modified by the structure of the relationship between the speakers. seem to be objectively called for by certain situations. it slides over the surface instead of in sistin g. But the linguists and anthropologists w ho appeal to " co n tex t” n r " situ ation ” in order.leads one to regress to the pre-structuralist stage of the individual and his choices. quite excluded from others. failing to con stru ct practice other than n egatively. offend. b etw een syntax and pragm atics) and. the social status of their interlocuter (and thus his degree of culture and bilingualism ). T h is is seen clearly in bilingual situations. If need be. or hurt. conversely. my language becomes reserved an d prudent.a p osition w hich has sim p ly adopted exp licitly the p ostu lates im plied in th e Saussurian lan guage/sp eech distinction. there must be an area where the individual is free to make choices so as to manipulate the system to his advantage. In all viable system s. and. which Leach (often invoked by the exponents of "situational analysis”) spells out clearly: "I postulate that structural system s in which all avenues of social action are narrowly institutionalized are im possible. ob jectivism is con d em ned either to ignore the w h ole question o f th e principle u nd erlyin g . it becom es indirect and euphem istic.33 which consists of "observing people in a variety of social situ ation s” in order to determ ine "the way in which individuals are able to exercise choices within the lim its of a specified social structure”.’* Hence com m unication is possible in practice only when accom ­ 32 panied by a practical spotting of cues w hich.regarded as sim ple variants . T he m ethod known as “situational analysis”. a type of joke. exceptions and accidents into descriptions of regularities ” and to show " how individuals in a particular structure handle the choices with which they are faced as individuals are in all so cieties”36 . on the dep en dence or in d ep en d en ce of th ese different levels o f discou rse relative to the situ ation . the structure and the individual variations. m ore p recisely.

the only w ay to escape the crudest naivities o f the legalism w hich sees practices as the p rod uct of o b ed ien ce to the rules is to play on the p olysem ous nature of the w ord rule: m ost often u sed in th e sen se of a social norm expressly stated and explicitly recogn ized . sim p ly to indicate that it exists in a practical state in agents' practice and not in their con sciou sn ess. T h e q u estion of h ow far and in w hat proportion the m em bers of a given so ciety respect the norm is very interesting. " structures ” . T h u s L evi-S trau ss s use o f the notion of the unconscious m asks th e contradictions generated b y the im plicit theory o f practice w hich "structural a n th rop ology” accep ts at least by d efau lt. to reify abstractions. perm anent existen ce h e ascribes (as S aussu re d oes to language) to all collective " realities”. by th e fallacy of treating the ob jects constructed by s c i e n c e . since they can exist even w ithou t b ein g actually a p p lied ” . or "m od es of production ”. sin ce w hat it says m ust be d one. or rather.T h e fallacies o f the rule 27 the p ro d u ctio n o f the r e g u la r itie s w hich it then con ten ts itself w ith recording. m od els. w hether " c u ltu r e ”. capable o f actin g as agents responsible for historical actions or as a power capable of con strain in g p ra ctices. m ore rarely.41 that they are system s o f norm s of w hich agents have a certain aw areness. the w ord is also.4 0 Clearly a case in point is C hom sky. But it is also instructive to reread a paragraph from L evi-Strau ss’s preface to th e secon d edition of L es structures elementaires de la parente (E lem entary Structures o f K in sh ip) . som etim es in the sen se o f a theoretical model. sim u ltan eou sly. in w h ich one m ay assu m e that particular care has b een taken w ith the vocabulary of norm s. that the rules of gram m ar are in scrib ed in n euro-physiological m ech a n ism s .39 and u n w illin g to ascribe to th ese rules th e tran scend en t. but a d ifferen t q u estion to that of w here th is society sh ou ld properly be placed in a typ o lo g y . restoring the old en telech ies of the m etaphysics o f nature in th e apparently secularized form of a structure structured in the absence of any stru cturin g p rin cip le . w h ich make it p ossib le to avoid ch oosin g betw een incom patible theories o f practice. used in the sense o f a scheme (or p rin cip le) im m anent in practice. a system which recommends m arriage w ith the m oth er’s brother’s daughter m ay be called p rescriptive even if the rule is seld om ob served . like m oral or juridical law . their discou rse . a con stru ct d ev ised b y scien ce in order to accoun t for practices. or rules. w h ich sh ou ld be called im plicit rather than u n con sciou s. sin ce th e passage deals w ith the d istin ction b etw een preferential sy s te m s ” and "prescriptive sy s te m s ” : " C on versely. w h o h old s. and lastly that they are in stru m en ts for description o f language.38 When one is reluctant to follow D urkh eim in p ositin g that none of the rules constraining su bjects "can b e found en tirely reproduced in the applications made o f them b y in dividu als. or to save appearances by m eans of con cep ts as am bigu ous as the notions of the ruie or the u n con sciou s. It is sufficient . as realities en d ow ed w ith a social efficacy.

'" K in sh ip sy s te m s ’. m arriage w ith the patrilateral cross cou sin (father’s sister’s daughter) w ould violate it irrevocab ly . at on ce declared and repudia­ ted .”4 6 .”43 B ut for the reader w h o rem em bers the passages in S tructu ral A n thropology on th e relation ship b etw een language and kinship (e . if you like. " c u r v e ” in "genealogical s p a c e ” . and th is suffices to im print a sp ecific curve in the gen ealogical space. like 'p h o n em ic sy s te m s ’. " str u c tu re s”) evok e the logic o f th e th eoretical m od el and of the eq u ivalen ce.28 T h e objective lim its o f objectivism to ack n ow led ge the lik elih ood that awareness of the rule in flects choices ever so little in the prescribed d irection . th e co n cession s m ade here to "aw areness o f the r u le ” and the d issociation from rigid system s " th e n otion of w hich is entirely th e o re tic a l’' m ay com e as a surprise. T h ey are also a w a re that m arriage w ith th e m atrilateral cross co u sin (m o th er’s b roth er’s daughter) p rovid es th e sim p lest illustration of th e rate. O n the other h and . not to m en tion passages assertin g th e u niversality o f th e fun da­ m ental rule of exo gam y. sin ce th e m ath em atical-p hysical m etaph ors organ izin g th e central passage (" o p erator” . is that of th e norm. th e form m o st likely to guarantee its su rv iv a l. are b uilt up by the m ind on the level o f u n c o n scio u s th o u g h t ”)4 and th e im perious way in 4 w hich "cultural n o rm s” and all the " ration aliza tio n s” or "secon d ary argu­ m e n ts ” p roduced b y the n atives w ere rejected in favour of th e " u n co n scio u s stru ctu r es” . N o d ou b t there w ill be not just on e cu rve but a great n um ber o f local cu rves. to be able to recogn ize w hat m igh t be called a m atrilateral *operator’ at work in th is so c iety and actin g as a p ilot: certain alliances at least fo llo w th e path w h ich it charts out for th e m . as m ay th is further passage from the sam e preface: " I t is n on eth eless true that th e em pirical reality o f so-called p rescriptive system s o n ly takes on its full m ean in g w hen related to a theoretical m odel w orked out b y the natives themselves prior to e th n o lo g ists ” . o f th e model and the norm : " A preferential sy stem is p rescriptive w hen en visaged at th e m odel lev el. as in the w h ole p reface. w hereas S tructu ral A nthropology is w ritten in the language of the model or. h ow ever. and form in g closed cycles o n ly in rare and excep tion al cases. n ot that su ch term s are en tirely ab sen t here. th e structure.g . But the structural ou tlin es w h ich em erge h ere and there w ill be en ou gh for the sy stem to b t used in m aking a p rob abilistic version o f m ore rigid sy stem s the notion o f w hich is com p letely theoretical and in w hich m arriage w ou ld con form rigorously to a n y rule the social group pleases to enunciate ”42 T h e d om in an t ton ality in th is passage. a p rescriptive system m ust b e preferential w hen en visaged on th e level of reality .45 or again: " T h o se w h o practise th em know fu lly that th e spirit of su ch system s cannot be redu ced to the tautological prop osition that each grou p ob tain s its w om en from 'g iv e r s ’ and gives its daughters to 'ta k e rs’. m erely in cip ien t for th e m ost part. and that the percentage of conventional m arriages is higher than w ou ld be the case if m arriages w ere m ade at random.

in order to accoun t for a practice ob jectively govern ed b y rules u n k now n to the agents. i. as. . .But w hat if ob servation d oes not enable us to see any clear rule.T h e fallacies o f the rule 29 • tem ptin g to q uote in reply a passage in w h ich W ittgenstein effortlessly 1S together all the q u estio n s evad ed by structural an th rop ology and no k ^ v T m o r e generally b y all in tellectu alism . or the on e w h ich he g ives u s in reply w hen w e ask w hat his rule is? .th er e is the suggestion in th e latter case that that th e train be tw o m in u tes late is as it were in accordance w ith som e p olicy or p l a n .”50 In on e case . is to slip from th e m od el of reality to the reality of the m odel .to take up Q u in e’s distinction b etw een fittin g and guiding . in the other case on e states a rule w hich g u id es th e behaviour and w h ich can d o so o n ly to the extent that it is know n and recogn ized (and h en ce cou ld b e sta ted ).51 O n e is en titled to p osit an " im p licit g u id a n c e ” . by resortin g to the fallacy o f th e rule w h ich im p licitly p laces in the con sciousness o f the in dividu al agen ts a k n ow led ge b u ilt u p against that experience.T o argue t h a t . but he w as prepared to withdraw and alter it. w h ich w e ob serve: or th e rule w h ich h e looks up vhen he uses sign s.th er e m ust be rules in the natural language is like argu in g that roads m ust be red if th ey correspond to red lin es on a m a p .e . . S o h ow am I to d eterm in e the rule accord in g to w h ich he is playing? H e d oes not know it h im self. C hom sk y d o es. . accord in g to Q u in e.O r. to ask a b etter q u estion : What m eaning is th e exp ression 'th e rule b y wr ich he p ro ce ed s’ su p p o sed h to have left to it h e r e ?”4 8 T o consider regularity.o n e form ulates a rule w h ich fits the observed regularity in a purely d escrip tive w ay. . as th e p rod u ct of a con scio u sly laid -dow n and co n s­ ciously respected ruling (w h ich im p lies exp lain in g its g en esis and efficacy).F o r he d id in deed g ive m e a definition w hen I asked h im w hat he u n d erstood b y ' N*. w h ich transfers the ob jective truth blished by scien ce in to a practice w h ich b y its very essen ce ru les o u t the C S tical stance w h ich m akes it p ossib le to estab lish that tr u th :47 " W'hat do I call ‘the rule by w hich he p r o c e e d s’? .T h e h yp o th esis that satisfactorily describes his use of w ords. the train is tw o m in u tes la te ’ . . R ules co n n ect w ith plans or policies in a w ay that regularities d o n o t . . but on ly o n con d ition that on e d oes not m ask the q u estio n o f the m echanism s p rod u cin g th is con form ity in the ab sen ce of the in ten tio n to conform . or as the product of an u n co n scio u s regulating by a m ysteriou s cerebral and/or social m echan ism . . w hat recurs w ith a certain statistically m easurable frequency. T h e theory of action as m ere execution o f th e m o d el (in the tw ofold sen se o f norm and scientific con stru ct) is just on e exam p le am ong oth ers o f th e im aginary . . that is. con fers th e value o f an an th rop ological d escrip tion on the theoretical m od el con stru cted in order to accou n t for practices. and the question brings n on e to l i g h t ? .4 "C on sid er the d ifferen ce b etw een sayin g 'T h e train is regularly tw o 9 m inutes la te ’ and 'A s a rule.

w ith in the lineage.53 M arriage w ith a patrilateral parallel cou sin (bent'am m . gen ealogical lin eages b ein g b y the sam e token clearly defined. the ab solu te n ecessity o f ex ch a n g e. b y providing not on ly p rocedu res for research b u t also p roced u res for valid ation .e . T h u s . A n ex o gam ic system clearly d iv id es alliance grou p s and d escen t g ro u p s. A rising in resp onse to scien tific d ifficu lties and not to the reading o f tex ts.C O U S I N MARRI AGE " P h ilosop h y aim s at the logical clarification o f t h o u g h t s . in C laude L e v i-S tra u ss’s ter m s . and d u ties are tran sm itted eith er m atrilineally or patrilineally. In ch a llen g in g th e idea of exogam y. b y ch o o sin g to keep the parallel co u sin . . they do not ach ieve their en d in "th e clarification o f p r o p o sitio n s”. Is it sufficient to regard . in the extrem e case of a sy stem actually fou n d ed on p arallel-cou sin m arriage.”52 In th is sen se. W ithou t philo­ sop h y th o u g h ts are. w ith the aid of w ords that obscure the d istin ction b etw een " th e th in g s of lo g ic and the logic o f th in g s!) it p resen ts th e ob jective m ean in g o f p ractices or w orks as the subjective p urpose o f th e action of the producers o f th ose practices or w orks. But on th e other hand. it ch allen ges the w h ole n otion of u nilineal d escen t as w ell as the theory of m arriage as an exch an ge o f on e w om an against an oth er. resu lts in a b lu rrin g of the d istinction b etw een lin eages. i. a q u a si-sister. privileges.3 ° T he objective lim its o f objectivism an th rop ology w h ich o b jectivism en gen d ers w h en . sin ce p o w ers. the grou p w o u ld d ep rive itself o f an o p p o r tu n ity to receive a w om an from ou tsid e and o f th u s con tractin g n ew alliances. S E C T I O N I I : CASE S T U D Y : P A R A L L E L . the fo reg o in g analyses m ay be said to b elon g to p h ilosop h y. calcu lation. w h ich assu m es an in cest taboo.a sort of q u asi-in cest ch allen gin g b oth the u n ilin ea l-d escen t theories and th e m arriage-alliance th eory . th ey are in ten d ed to h elp su rm oun t d ifficu lties. w ith \\^ im p ossib le homo economicus su b jectin g h is d ecisio n -m a k in g to ration*. T h e case of m arriage .co n stitu tes an ideal terrain for such a tru th -test . E n d ogam y. clou d y and in d istin ct: its task is to m ake them clear and g ive th em sharp b o u n d aries . by contrast.55 only to those w h o have internalized th e categories o f th o u g h t w h ich it disturbs. as it w ere.stru cturalist grou n d par ex cellen ce . th e p recon d ition for th e co n tin u a tio n of separate lin eages and for the perm an en ce and easy id en tifica tio n o f con secu tive u n its. . w h ich by definition cannot c o in c id e . B ut u nlike p h ilo so p h ica l activity as W ittgen stein con ceiv es it.and o f p arallel-cou sin mar­ riage . its actors p erform in g roles or actin g in co n fo rm ity w ith m odels or its sp eak ers " s e le c tin g ” from a m on g p h on em es. means of d ecid in g b etw e en com p etin g accoun ts o f the sam e practices. a particular in dividu al co u ld be related to his paternal grandfather eq u ally through his father or h is m o th er. fath er’s b rother’s d augh ter )54 appears as a sort of scandal.

T h e inadequacy o f th e language of p rescription an d rules is so clear in the case of patrilateral m arriage that w e cannot fail to be rem in d ed of R odn ey N eedham 's in qu iries in to the co n d itio n s o f v a lid ity. it is not su fficient to con clu d e that. w h ich is e n ­ cou raged or e v e n im p osed b y the particular ch aracteristics of a cultural trad ition . as L o u is D u m o n t says th e th e o r y of u nilineal d escen t g rou p s and th e allian ce theory o f m arriage rem ain " reg io n a l th e o r ie s” in the geographical and a lso the ep istem o lo g ica l sen se. F o r exam p le. b u t also on th e on e h and.e . the notion o f the g e n e a lo g ic a lly defined grou p . an en tity w h o se social id en tity is as in variab le a n d u niform as the criteria for its d elim itatio n and w h ich con fers on each o f its m em bers a social id en tity eq u ally d istin ct and p erm an en tly fix e d : and o n the other hand.57 But this q u estio n in g of the ep istem ological status of co n ce p ts as co m m o n ly and as w id ely u sed as th ose o f rule. in evitab ly challenges the theory o f practice w h ich th ey p resu p p ose: can w e . perhaps n ever fu lfilled . of such a lan guage. e v en th o u g h they wear the cloak o f u n iv e rsa lity .T he objective lim its o f objectivism 3i of m arriage as th e excep tion (or the " a b erra tio n ”) w h ich proves |ile or to rearrange th e categories o f th ou gh t w h ich m ake it p o ssib le in ^ °h " t o ’ find a place ( i. But su ch a critical exam in ation m ay con trib ute to progress tow ards a theory free from all geograph ical or ep istem ological regionalism by p o sin g u niversal q u estio n s w h ich are raised w ith particular in sisten ce b y the pecu liarities o f certain ob jects.56 N eith er can th e critical e x a m in a tio n of certain of the bases o f th ese th eo ries. W e m ust find in this ex cep tion a reason for q u e stio n in g not o n ly th e very n o tio n of p rescription or p referen ce. the n otion o f rules and rule-governed behaviour in the tw o fo ld s e n s e of b eh aviour con form in g ob jectively to rules and d eterm in ed bv o b e d ie n c e to rules. treat th e "algebra o f k in sh ip ”. w h ich is in fact n oth in g other than legal la n g u a g e . as M alinow sk i called it. althou gh a residual D urkh eim ian scru p le m akes R adcliffe-B row n call th e m " ju ra l” rather than . and p referen ce. p rescription . a nam e) for it? Or sh o u ld w e radically q u estio n c a te g o r ie s of th ou gh t w h ich have p rod u ced this " u n th in k a b le” ^ T h e c o n t r a d i c t i o n p osed b y Arab and Berber trad ition s to cu rren tly avail­ able th eo ries has at least th e m erit of rem in d in g us th a t. even im plicitly. the idea o f a p referential m arriage is not justified in the case of a so c iety w ith ou t exogam ou s g ro u p s. c la im to be universal. w h ile valid in the case o f an ex ogam ic tradition w h ich str ic tly d istin gu ish es b etw een parallel and cro ss k in. as a theory ° f the practical u ses o f kinship and of " p ra ctica l” k in sh ip w ith o u t tacitly postulating a d ed u ctive relationship b etw een k in sh ip term in o lo g y and " kin­ ship a ttitu d e s” ? A nd can w e g ive an an th rop ological m ean in g to th is relation­ ship w ith o u t p ostu latin g that regulated and regular relatio n sh ip s b etw een kin are the resu lts of o b ed ien ce to a set of rules w h ich .

By contrast. So both adm it that parallel-cousin marriage cannot be explained w ithin the pure logic of the matrimonial exchange system and that any explanation must refer to external econom ic or political fu n ction s. .61 Barth em phasizes that endogamous marriage " plays a prom inent role in solidifying the minim al lineage as a corporate group in factional stru g g le”.a n d . and th a t. in sh o rt. w hether econom ic functions. die group d efin es th e agen ts and th eir in terests m ore th an th e agen ts d efine groups in term s of their interests? T h e state o f the question T h e m ost recent theories of parallel-cousin marriage. If a represents the choice of endogam y and b the choice of exogam y. L evi-Strauss is perfectly justified in stating that the twT op p osin g positions amount to exactly the sam e thing: in fact o Barth’s theory makes o f th is type o f marriage a means o f reinforcing lineage unity and of lim iting the tendency to fission. to the fact that it "contributes to the extrem e fission of agnatic lin es. encysts the patrilineal seg m en ts”. M urphy and Kasdan criticize Barth for explaining the institution "through reference to the consciously felt goals o f the individual role p layers’*. through in-marriage.32 T h e objective limits o f objectivism legal are assu m ed to con trol b eh aviour in the sam e w ay as legal ru les?** F in a lly . founded on the appeal to a common origin. It is difficult to see how they could do otherw ise w ithout making absurd a marriage w hich obviously does not fulfil the function of exchange and alliance com m only attributed to cross-cousin marriage. those of Fredrik Barth59 and of Robert M urphy and Leonard K asdan.”63 One m ight be tem pted to see it as a virtue . Thus M urphy and Kasdan relate this type o f marriage to its "structural fu n ctio n ”. do have in com m on the fact that they appeal to those functions w hich structuralism either ignores or brackets off. of w hom one m ust marry endogam ously in order to m aintain the coherence of the group. and if one follow s the branchings of the two-part fam ily tree from the roots upwards. or political functions. or more precisely by reference to the lineage h e a d s interest in keeping a close control over his nephew s. can w e m ake th e gen ealogical d efin ition of gro u p s th e o n ly means o f d ifferen tiatin g b etw een social u n its and of a ssign in g agen ts to th e se group 8 w ith o u t im p licitly p ostu la tin g that th e agen ts are d efined in every respect and for all tim e by their b elo n g in g to the g rou p . and the other must marry exogam ously in order to gain alliances for the group. such as the reinforcem ent of lineage inte­ gration. such as the retention of the patrimony w ithin the lineage.60 though diam etrically opposed. it expresses in the usual genealogical term inology of Arab thought a choice betw een alternatives w hich may be represented as a 'partial ord er’ diagram in w hich the num erical values of a and 6 are and % respectively. T h is opposition between the tw o brothers is found at all levels of the agnatic group. M urphy’s theory sees in it the principle of a quest for integration into larger units. that is. " It is native thinking itself w hich gives us a clue to an explanatory m odel. in a construction w hich attem pts to account for the inconsistencies noted by all observers betw een the “ m o d el” and actual practice. who represent points of potential segm entation. together with at least the econom ic external functions of matrimonial exchanges.62 C uisenier sim ply draws o u t the consequences o f this observation. and ultim ately encom passing all Arabs. . T h is m odel represents in effect alliances knit together in one group based on the fundam ental opposition o f tw o brothers. the choice of a at the m ost superficial genealogical levels is the choice of the parallel cousin (Vs of the c a ses).

whose structure and extent depend on the functions actually given by the group to those whom it rem em bers or forgets ? R ecognizing in a lineage diagram an ideological representation resorted to by the Bedouin in order to achieve a "primary comprehension” of their present relationships. A nd nowadays there w ill always be a m athe­ m a tic ia n to prove that tw o cousins parallel to a third are parallel to each o t h e r .. generates a "theoretical ^ a V'. i. and the pressures on him to marry inside the lineage are stronger. it is the very notion of the endogamous group.and then there is no need to appeal to an epistem ological critique to show 010 t h e model fits the facts so perfectly only because it has been made to measure to fM he facts.65 Are w e to be satisfied with abstractly dissecting genealogies wr hich have the sam e extent as the group memory. effectively m obilizable lineage (as well as the num ber of potential partners) is larger. It first n ecessary to ask w hat is im plied in d efining a grou p by th e genealogical relationship lin k in g its m em b ers. L . T h ere is an equation for the c u r v e of each face. and therefore the basis o f calculation. And perhaps inform ants are simply victim s of an illusion created by the decline of the great undivided fam ilies. a genealogically more distant cousin m ay be the practical equivalent of the bent'amm w hen the tw o cousins are part of a strongly united '*h o u se” living under one elder and ow n ing all its property in com m on. . from the magical percentage V£?) w hich. 1 33 that it seeks to account for the statistical data in contrast to traditional £ercntjaj marriage w hich w ent no further than to state the divergence t h e o r ie s "norm ” (or the " r u le ”) and actual practice. E. that it forgets about the w om en. using criteria w hich are not necessarily genealogical ? We discover. as here.67 M ust w e then resort to the units which the agents them selves recognize. w hen com bined with a native m axim . and political factors. p ru dently slip from the n otion of preferential m arriage w ith a parallel cousin to the n otion o f " lin eage en d ogam y ”. and in thereby im p licitly treatin g kinship .64 But one only has to adopt b e tw e e n restrictive definition of the marriages assim ilable to parallel-cousin a m° re to move away. invented ad hoc to account for a statistical artefact. h igh sounding lan guage w ill offer a w ay ou t o f th e problem s raised b y th e n otion ° f en d ogam y and con cealed b y the all-too-fam iliar con cep t o f th e group.The functions o f kinship: official kin and p ra ctica l kin . said L eibniz. dem ographic. and that it treats as "contingent a ccid en ts” the most basic ecclogical. On the other hand. and not built up from a theory of the principles of the production of practices. the father’s brother’s daughter may be considered no closer in degree of kinship than any other patrilateral (or even matrilateral) cousin. 0f this mo T h e functions o f kinship: official kin and practical kin It is not su fficien t to fo llo w the exam p le o f the m ore circu m sp ect fieldw orkers. W e can im m ediately see what is strange about the idea of calculating rates of endogam y wr hen. that an individual’s chances of making a marriage w hich can be treated as a marriage w ith the daughter of his r amm are greater to the extent that his practical. which is in q uestion. But the intention of subm itting genealogies to statistical analysis has at least the virtue of revealing the m ost fundam ental properties of the genealogy. when they repeat with insistence that people now marry less w ithin the lineage than they did formerly. an analytical tool which is never itself analysed. tru stin g that th is va g u e. to a greater or lesser extent. however. Peters66 points out that the genealogy ignores the real power relations between genealogical segm ents.e. Once the family property is divided and there is nothing to recall and maintain the genealogical relationship.

a q u estio n w hich k insh ip th eo rists prefer to treat ^ resolved . then the third time the sam e people accom panied by several group and village notables such as the taleb. in certain situ ation s and w ith a v iew to certain fu n ction s. and similar m atters.. The g en ealogical diagram o f kin relation ship s w hich th e an th rop ologist constructs m erely reprodu ces th e official representation o f th e social stru ctures. w e cannot fail to n otice that th o se u ses o f k in sh ip w h ich may ^ called genealogical are reserved for official situ a tio n s in w h ich they ^ th e fu n ctio n of ord erin g th e social w orld and o f leg itim a tin g that order . etc. acceptance (aqbal) is proclaimed before the largest possible number .e. a repre. by a kinsman from another line. then on the second occasion a paternal uncle and one of the notables o f the group. Marriage provides a good opportunity for observing what in practice separates official kinship. having been asked to do so by this latter group. such as the economic conditions of the marriage. So progressi­ vely closer and more distinguished relatives of the bridegroom com e to present their request ( ahallal) to m en in the bride’s family w h o genealogically and spatially are increasingly distant. such as an old w om an. i.6 jn 8 th is resp ect th ey differ from th e other kinds o f practical use m ade of kir j relation sh ip s. i. a m idw ife. w hich are a particular case o f the u tilization o f connections. defined once and for all by the norm s o f genealogical protocol. single and im m utable. T h e official marriage proposal (akhtab) is presented by the least responsible of those responsible. and the fourth tim e the father together with notables from the neighbouring village and even the next tribe.34 T h e objective lim its o f objectivism as th e necessary and su fficien t con d ition of grou p u n ity .e . accom panied. the elder brother and not the father. especially if he is young. In the end it is the most im portant and m ost distant of the girl's kin w ho com e to intercede w ith the girl’s father and mother on behalf of the closest and m ost prestigious of the young m an’s kin. for example. In the difficult negotiations betw een distant groups a w ell-know n. w hose boundaries and definitions are as many and as varied as its users and the occasions on w hich it is used. to be joined later by the village marabouts. are left to the persons least qualified to represent the group and to speak for it (w ho can therefore be disowned if need b e). T h e m en w h o present the request may be. sentation p rod uced b y ap p lication of the stru cturin g prin cip le that is dominant in a certain respect. on the first occasion. but w ill try to find an opportunity to meet som eone from "the girl’s s id e ” and to disclose to him the " in ten tio n s” of the interested fam ily. etc. from practical kinship. relations with the husband’s m other. In ordinary marriages the contacts preceding the official proposal (akhiab) and the least avowable negotiations relating to areas w hich the official ideology tends to ignore. A s soon as we ex p licitly about th e functions of kin relation ship s. the status offered to the wife in her husband’s home. He will avoid com ing straight to the point. or som e other woman used to m oving from village to village. usually a sort of professional in these secret m eetings. it is official kin w ho celebrate them . the paternal uncle and not the grandfather. Finally. or m ore b lu n tly . prestigious man from a group sufficiently distant and distinct from the "w ife-takers’ to appear neutral and to be in a position to act in com plicity with another man occupying approximately the sam e position in relation to the w ife-givers (a friend or ally rather than a kinsman) w ill be entrusted w ith the delivery of the declaration of intent (assiw at w a w a l). It is practical kin who make marriages. about t}* u sefu ln ess of k in sm en . an elder brother and a maternal uncle.

having played their parts as "utility m e n ”. w hich is often associated w ith particu^j s^perjorjty (because the man is marrying beneath h im ). T here are various reasons of the hierarL ^ ^ ^ advisable to " c o m m it” in the early stages kin w h o because of for this. and w ith w h ich they do so m eth in g. here. w hich 3 ^often*painful. T h u s. As eminent of t ^ an(j begin to look successful. not structur ^ asked to put him self in the position of a supplicant liable to receive eVe?usa^ and a fortiori to take part in negotiations w hich w ill bring no glory. And it is natural that. official kin may w ell take the place negotiations pr ^ hierarchy with respect to utility being alm ost the exact opposite 0f practica * reSpect to genealogical legitim acy. th e u nilineal d escen t group (or elsew h ere. representational kinship is n o th in g other than the group s self-rep resen tation and th e alm ost theatrical p resen tation it g iv e s of itself w h en actin g in accord ance w ith that self-im age. kept in an im p licit. is not m erely to su b stitu te a " fu n ction alist ” for a " stru cturalist ” interpretation. Finally. ev en h id d en state. for no sin gle on e in particular. to enjoy particular authority over the fam ily in question. or to be on good term s with someone in a position to influence the d ecision . in the official phase. practical groups exist o n ly through and for th e particular fu n ctio n s in p ursuan ce of v^hich they have b een effectively m ob ilized . and som etim es bring dishonour on the tw o parties (like the practice thaj'alts which consists of paying m oney to secure the intervention of som e o f the ° *soective bride’s kin). as o p p o sed to the private. am enable to perform an ce b y agen ts interchangeable b ecau se co llec­ tively m andated. to schem atize. B y con trast. directed tow ards the sa tisfa ctio n o f the practical in terests of an in d ivid u al or grou p of in d ivid u a ls. the co llectiv e as o p p o sed to th e in d ivid u al. su ch as. explicitly codified in a m agical or quasi-juridical form alism . Secondly. they m ust make way for the "leading actors”. w ho has been asked to support the proposal. th e p u b lic. as current ta xon om ies m ig h t lead on e to b eliev e. as op p osed to strategy. co llectiv e ritual. su b jectless practice. the search for maximum efficiency in the practical hase of negotiations directs the choice towards persons know n to com m and great skill. and have practical ex isten ce o n ly for th e m ost official uses of k in sh ip . r i » social position m ight com prom ise their principals too dpeplv the^ gene2 ^ sjtuation of conjunctural inferiority. those who have actually " m a d e” the marriage should have to make do with the place assigned to them not by their usefulness but by their position in the genealogy. A bstract u nits produced by sim p le theoretical d iv isio n . age-group s) are available for all fu n ctio n s. official kinship is op p osed to practical k insh ip in term s of the official as op p osed to th e non-official (w h ich in clu d es the unofficial and the scand alous). T o treat kin relation sh ip s as so m eth in g people make.T h e functions o f k in sh ip : official km and practical kin 35 ved to the most em inent kinsman of the young man by the most 0f men and conv ^ kinsm en. and th e y co n tin u e to exist only because th ey have b een kept in w ork in g order b y th eir very u se an d by M aintenance w ork (in c lu d in g th e m atrim onial exch an ges th ey m ake p o ssib le) and b ecause they rest on a co m m u n ity o f d isp o sitio n s (h a b itu s) and interests u-hich is also th e b asis o f u n d ivid ed o w n ersh ip o f th e m aterial and sy m b o lic patrim ony. that is. it is radically .

since first names are transmitted in direct patrilineal line. son of so-and-so. o f affinal relation sh ip s: it is o n ly w hen on e records th ese relation ship s as a fa it accom pli. O n ce on e forgets all that is im plied in extracting from the product the p rin cip les of its p rod uction . or of the rights to land belonging to the patrimony in the case of sale. Here as elsew here. sym bolizing the whole sym bolic capital accum ulated by a lineage. a fo rtio ri. . like the noblest lands. are the object of regulated com peti­ tion. the convenient language of norms and obligations (m u st. but also in a sense to predestine the child thus named to bring the eponym ous ancestor "back to life ” ( isakrad djedi-s "he has brought his grandfather 'back to life ’”). is distributed in accordance with a hierarchy analogous to that governing the obligations of honour in the case of revenge.) m ust not be allowed to m islead us: thus.e. T h e com petition is particularly evident w hen several brothers wish to give their children their father’s first name: whereas the need to rescue it from neglect and fill up the gap that has appeared requires that the name should be given to the first boy born after the death of its bearer. T o give a new-born child the name o f a great forefather is not sim ply to perform an act o f filial piety. the father cannot give a child the name of his own 'amm or his own brother (the ch ild ’s 'amm) if either of the latter has left any sons w ho are already married and hence in a position to reuse their father’s name for one of their son s or grandsons.e tc . as th e anthropologist does w h en he draw s u p a gen ealogy. and the " righ t” to appropriate the first name which is most coveted. and use them b y reference to necessarily practical fu n ctio n s. a younger brother has been known to take advantage of a favourable balance of power in order to give his children the first name of a prestigious brother who had died leaving only very young children. that on e can forget that they are the product of strategies (con sciou s or u n con sciou s) oriented tow ards the satisfaction of m aterial and sy m b o lic in terests and organized by reference to a determ inate set of eco n o m ic and social con d itio n s. . T h e state of the relations of force and authority between contem porary kin determ ines what the collective history will be. from th e opus operatum the modus operandi. . but this sym bolic projection of the power relations between com peting individuals and groups also plays a part in reinforcing the initial state of affairs by giving those w ho are in a dom inant position the right to profess the veneration of the past which is best suited to legitim ate their present interests. on e con d em n s o n eself to proceed as if the regular p rod u ct had b een p rod uced in accordance w ith the ru le s . because it continuously proclaims the genealogical connection w ith the ancestor w hose name is preserved by the group and outside the group.70 Prestigious first nam es. the children subsequently set their point of honour on retaking possession of the first name of which they considered them selves the legitimate bearers . po st festum .6 9 T h e com petition and conflicts provoked by the transmission of first names provide an opportunity to observe the practical and political functions of these genealogical markers: to appropriate these indices of genealogical position (so-and-so. son of so-and-so etc. i. the .3^ T h e objective lim its o f objectivism to question the im p licit th eory of practice w hich causes the anthropological tradition to see kin relation ship s " in the form of an object or an intuition as Marx p u ts it. rather than in the form o f the practices w h ich produce. . The sam e is tru e. to succeed him in his responsibilities and p ow ers. reproduce. is in a sense to take possession o f a title giving special rights over the group’s patrimony. T h u s. c a n n o t.even at risk of confusion.) w hich are also emblems.

a name threatens to escheat. at which point the responsibility ° reviving” it falls first on the collaterals. on the other hand. A s soon as o n e poses the problem of m arriage in strictly gen ealogical term s. But it may also happen. T h e eth n ologist can n ot break the c o m p ­ licity w hich b in d s him to the official id eology o f his inform ants and reject the presuppositions im p lied in the m ere fact o f se ein g ex clu siv ely genealogical relationships o f filiation or alliance in relation ship s w h ich can be read in other w ays (e . H e has no reason to p erceive that he is allow in g the official definition o f social reality to b e im p o sed on him a version w h ich d om in ates or represses other d efin ition s. he is d isp osed to take for gospel truth the official d iscou rses wr hich in form an ts are in clin ed to present to him as lo n g as they see th em selves as sp okesm en m andated to present the grou p 's official account o f itself. and by th e sam e token he p roh ibits him self from grasping the ep istem ological status of a practice w h ich . the kinship of others) are restricted to cogn itive u ses. coherent sy stem of p urely logical relation sh ip s. is . by referring to m arriage wr ith th e bent'am m . W itness to th is are the desperate efforts by generations o f an th rop ologists to confirm or d en y the existence o f " p referen tial” cross-cou sin m arriage. all so lu tio n s are acceptable so lo n g as they are expressed in gen ealogical l a ng ua ge . in term s o f sib lin gsh ip ) and are alw ays also based on other principles (e .a genealogical level. to make good any gaps that may appear elsewhere (one of the functions of marriage with the daughter of the 'amm w hen the latter dies w ithout male heirs. as inform an ts alw ays w ill.g . all further d iscu ssion w ill take place w ithin certain lim its. he p roh ib its h im self from apprehending the different practical fu n ctio n s of th e k inship term s and relations w hich he u n w ittin gly brackets. p resup poses and consecrates n eutralization of the practical fu n ctio n s of those term s and relationships.T he functions o f kinship: official kin an d practical kin 37 may Put t^ attribution of the name in order to give it to one of his ie eldest |nSteacj 0f leaving it for the son of one of his younger brothers. being to allow the daughter to see to it that her father's name does not disappear). m oreover. and then on the group as a w hole. W hen the anthropologist treats n ative k insh ip term in o lo g y as a clo sed . defined o n ce and for all b y the im plicit axiom atics of a cultural trad ition. and cu ltivated . eco n o m ic or p o litica l). which bv demonstrates that its integration and its wealth o f men enable it to reuse the a m e s of all direct ancestors and.g . kept UP. . an im aginary representation of all theoretically p ossib le roads and rou tes. T h e eth n ologist is in a particularly bad p osition to d etect th e d istin ctio n between official and practical kinship: as his d ealin gs w ith kinship (at least. u nless he situ ates th is sp ecial kind of use of kinship w ith resp ect to the various kinds of u ses the agen ts m ay make of it. . thus Sran .practical b ecau se co n tin u o u sly practised. that for lack ^ male descendants.in the sam e w ay as the geom etrical sp ace of a m ap . T h e logical relation ship s con stru cted by the an th rop ologist are op posed to practical ” relation ship s . like his °w n .

ever m ore easily . through constant u se.rises w ith the degree to w h ich they actually or p otentially fulfil fu n ction s in dispensab le to th em or. to m easure its d egrees. the logical relations of kinship to w hich the structuralist tradition ascribes a m ore or less com p lete au ton om y w ith respect to econ om ic d eterm in ants. w hich increases as w e draw nearer th e p oint o f com m on origin . to call h im self a m em ber o f the A th A bba (th e h ou se.3« T h e objective limits o f objectivism op posed to the network of b eaten tracks. on e assu m es the ex isten ce o f a purely gen ealogical definition of th e lin eage. exist in practice on ly through and for the official and unofficial uses m ade o f th em b y agents w hose attachm ent to keeping them in w orking order and to m aking th em work in ten sively . situ ation . causes the co m p lete network of kinship relations over several gen erations to exist as on ly theoretical objects exist. and interlocutor. every adult m ale. like abandoned roads on an old m ap. that is. T h e further back in tim e and genealogical space w e place th e p oint o f origin . In sh ort. of the A th O usseb'a (adh ru m )t or of the A th Y ahia ('arch).h en ce. of the A th Isa'd ( takharrubth).72 O fficializing strategies By th e m ere fact o f talking o f en d ogam y and o f tryin g. and correlatively a near-perfect internal co ­ herence. the exten t to w hich th ey do or can satisfy vital m aterial and sym bolic interests.71 Official relationships w h ich d o not receive con tin u ou s m aintenance ten d to becom e w hat th ey are for the gen ealogist: theoretical relationships. . and scanned indifferently from any p oint in any d irection . to put it less a m b ig u o u sly . a spatial diagram that can be taken in at a gla n ce. of paths m ade ever m ore practicable by con stant u se. ”) o b eys a positional logic altogether sim ilar to that w h ich accord in g to Evans-Pritchard characterizes th e u ses o f the w ord ciengy th e sam e person b ein g able. T h e gen ealogical tree con stru cted b y th e an th rop ologist. akham ). tota sim ul. uno intuitu. w ould at least have the m erit of repu d iating the naive realism o f those w h o cannot characterize a grou p other than as a popu lation defined .the m ore w e push back the boundaries o f the lineage and th e m ore th e assim ilative pow er of genealogical ideology grow s. . as a totality p resen t in sim u lta n eity . T h e absolute relativism w hich b esto w s upon the agents th e pow er to m anipulate w ith ou t lim it their ow n social id en tity (or that o f th e adversaries or partners w h om they assim ilate or exclu d e b y m anip ulating the lim its o f the classes they each b elo n g to ). at w hatever level on th e genealogical tree. represents a p oint of potential segm entation w h ich m ay b ecom e effective for a particular social purpose. but on ly at the exp en se o f its distinctive pow er. ou t o f a laudable desire for rigour. In fact. d ep en d in g on circum stance. T h u s the kind of use w h ich can be m ade o f the exp ression ath (" th e d escen d an ts o f.and n othing forb ids a regression to in finity in th is abstract space . th e people o f .

73 O n e again su ccu m b s to realism if one forgets that the effects of spatial d istance are d ep en d en t on the fun ction which the social relation ship aim s to ach ieve. b y the m ere fact of com m on residence.O fficializing strategies 3 9 directly visible boundaries. or political. that b etw een brothers. and o n ly in cessan t work can m aintain the co m m u n ity of interests.e . th e greater th e sym b olic profit). the structure o f a group (and h en ce the social id en tity of th e in dividu als w h o m ake it u p) d ep en d s on the fu n ction which is fundam ental to its con stru ction and organization. the fact rem ains that. althou gh w e cou ld in theory m aintain that there are as m any p ossib le groups as there are fu n ctio n s. econ om ic (un d ivid ed p atrim on y). th e genealogical relation ship is never stron g en ou gh on its ow n to provide a com p lete d eterm ination o f th e relationship b etw een the individuals w hich it u n ites. as w e saw in the case o f m arriage. w e m ay posit that th e con stants of the field o f potentially useful relationships (i. any m ore than on e can offer o n e’s services to anyone for a n y en d . is also th e p oin t of greatest ten sion . w hether ecological (n eigh b ou rh ood ). W e m ay adm it. T h u s . and it has su ch p redictive value on ly w h en it g oes with the shared interests. In sh ort. In fact. th ose that are actually u sable. w here the m ore distant the people between w hom the relationship is estab lish ed . T h is is also forgotten by those w h o try to escape from genealogical abstraction by con ­ trasting the d escen t line w ith the local line or the local d escen t grou p . If u nity of resid en ce con trib u tes to the integration of the grou p . H ow ever. and useful. that the potential u sefu ln ess of a partner ten d s to decrease w ith distance (except in the case o f p restige m arriages. because socially influential) cause each grou p of agents to ten d to keep up b y con tin u ou s m aintenance-w ork a privileged netw ork o f practical relationships w hich com p rises not only th e su m total of the genealogical relationships kept in w orking order (here called practical kinsh ip ) b ut also the sum total o f the non-gen ealogical relation ship s w hich can be m obilized for the ordinary n eed s of existen ce (practical relation ship s). the closest genealogical relationship. T h e official set o f th ose in dividuals am enable to definition b y the sam e relationship to the sam e ancestor at th e sam e level on the genealogical tree may con stitu te a practical grou p : th is is the case w h en the genealogical divisions cover (in both sen ses) u nits foun ded on other p rin cip les. to escape from relativism w ithou t falling into realism . because spatially close. the unity given to the grou p b y its m obilization for a com m on fun ction con trib utes towards m in im izin g the effect o f d istance. that portion of a unilineal d escen t group w h ich . as w e shall see. In sh ort. produced by th e com m on possession of a m aterial . can act collectively as a g ro u p . T he fact that the d escrip tive value o f the genealogical criterion is greater w hen the com m on origin is nearer and the social u nit is m ore lim ited d oes not m ean that its unificatory efficacy rises in the sam e w ay. for exam p le. on e cannot call on absolutely anyone for a n y occasion .

but m u ch m ore than th o se w h o " w o n ’t p lay th e g am e ” are w illin g to gran t th em . w h o m th e ex c e lle n c e o f a p ractice im m ed iately in lin e w ith th e official rule. It is natural that p o litics sh o u ld b e th e . It is also to b e ab le to d em o b ilize it. that is. to rules he can n eith er resp ect nor d en y .en tirely official . w h o .su rvival of th e ru le. w h ich en ta ils co llec tiv e v u ln era b ility as w ell as co llectiv e p rop erty. particular in terests (n o tio n s d efin ab le only w ith in th e relation ship b etw een a social u n it and th e en co m p a ssin g social u n it at a h ig h er le v el) in to d isin te re ste d . officializin g. b y d iso w n in g th e p erson d irectly co n ce rn ed . o f officializing strategies. B etw een th e responsible m an. th e op p o site strategy te n d in g to reduce th e sam e situ ation to a m erely private affair . b eca u se p ro d u ced b y a regu lated h abitus. co n d em n e d to appear u nreason able in seek in g to im p o se his private reason . d oes n o th in g to ex ten u a te h is in fraction s. T h e e x te n t o f practical k insh ip d ep en d s on th e capacity o f th e official grou p m em b ers to o v erco m e th e ten sio n s en g en d ered b y the co n flict o f in terests w ith in th e u n d iv id ed p rod u ction and co n su m p tio n grou p .7 T o p o ssess th e cap ital of 4 a u th ority necessary to im p o se a d efin ition o f the situ a tio n . g r o u p s m ake room for th e w ell-m eaning rule-breaker w h o b y c o n c e d in g th e ap pearan ces or in ten t o f co n fo rm ity . b y p resen tin g an in su lt to a particular w om an as an affront to th e hurma o f th e w h o le g r o u p ). fa ilin g to id en tify his particular in terest w ith th e " gen eral in te r e s t”. grou p s d em an d in fin itely less than legalist form alism w o u ld have u s b e lie v e . am ong oth ers. th e o b ject o f w h ich is to tr a n s m u te " e g o is tic ”. and to k eep u p the kind o f p ractical relation sh ip s w h ich co n fo rm to th e official v iew h eld b y every grou p wrh ich th in k s o f itself as a corporate u n it. S tra teg ies aim ed at p ro d u c in g "regular ” p ractices are o n e categ o ry . th e y m ay en joy b o th th e ad van tages a ccru in g fro m ev ery practical relation sh ip and th e sy m b o lic p rofits secu red b y th e approval so cia lly con ­ ferred o n practices c o n fo rm in g to th e official represen tation of practices.g . p u b lic ly avow ab le. co llec tiv e. p olitical action p rop er can b e ex ercised o n ly b y th e effect o f officialization and th u s p resu p p o ses th e competence (in th e se n se o f a ca pacity socially recogn ized in a pu blic au th ority) required in ord er to m anip ulate th e co llec tiv e d efinition o f th e situ a tio n in su ch a w ay as to b rin g it closer to th e official d efin ition o f th e situ ation and th ereb y to w in th e m ea n s of m o b ilizin g th e largest p o ssib le grou p . n ot c o n ten t w ith break in g th e ru les. In fa ct. leg itim a te in terests. In the ab sen ce o f p olitical in stitu tio n s en d o w e d w ith an effectiv e m o n o p o ly of leg itim a te v io len ce. recognition. is to be able to m o b ilize th e grou p b y so le m n iz in g . O n that co n d itio n .4o T h e objective lim its o f objectivism an d sy m b o lic p atrim on y. private. p red isp o ses to fulfil th e fu n ctio n s o f d eleg a te and sp o k e s­ m an. is red u ced to th e sta tu s o f a m ere in d ivid u al. and th e irresponsible m an w h o . co n trib u tes to the .idiotes in G reek and am ah bul in K a b y le. an d th u s u n iv e rsa lizin g a p rivate in cid en t (e . esp ecia lly in the m o m e n ts o f crisis w h e n th e co llec tiv e ju d g m en t falters.

W e find in fact in the p olitical sp h ere th e sam e d iv isio n o f lab ou r w h ich en tru sts relig io n . is m o st clearly seen in the d ifferen t u ses wr ich m en and w o m e n can m ake o f th e sam e field of h genealogical rela tio n sh ip s. secret. sym bolic capital in th e form of c o llec tiv ely reco g n ized credit .to th e w o m e n .to th e m en . b y red u cin g the opposition b etw e en th e official and th e private to the o p p o sitio n b etw een the outside and th e in sid e. and m agic . In th is co m p e titio n th e m en have the w hole official in stitu tio n o n their sid e . esta b lish a sy stem a tic hierarchization c o n d e m n in g w o m e n ’s in te rv e n tio n s to a sh a m e fu l. to have any p ow er at all. its official m anifestation.m u st n ot lead us to forget th e n ecessarily h id d en o p p o sitio n b etw een th e official and th e unofficial. while the w o m e n m ay en ter in to com p etitio n for a p ow er wr ich is b y d efin itio n h condem ned to rem ain unofficial or ev en cla n d estin e and o cc u lt. h en ce th e m ale and th e fem a le. in that it still serves th e au th ority it u ses. th e y can ex ercise it fu lly o n ly on condition that th e y leave th e appearance o f powr er. C o m p etitio n for official p ow er can be se t up o n ly b etw een m en . T h e true statu s o f kin relatio n sh ip s. w hich it w ould be naive to consider fictitious on the grounds that no one is taken in. so le m n . clandestine. ^ e ab sen ce o f ec o n o m ic a cc u m u la tio n . and in particular in th eir d ifferen t " r ea d in g s” and u s e s ” o f gen ea lo g ica lly am b ig u o u s k in sh ip ties (w h ich are relatively freq u en t on accou n t of the narrow area of m atrim onial c h o ic e ). u n d er th e cover of an official au th o rity . the agen ts in co m p etitio n for p olitical p ow er are lim ited to ritual s tr a te g ie s in te r e sts and strategic ritu als. or m ove closer to him . p rin cip les of stru ctu ration of th e social world w h ich . m other’s . p rod u cts o f th e c o lle c tiv iz in g of private and th e sy m b o lic ap propriation o f official in terests. Even w h en w o m e n d o w ield th e real p ow er. What ls at stake in these m anipulations. alw ays fulfil a p olitical fu n ctio n . at b est. w hich can be redrawn by this m eans so as to go beyond or fall short of an individual one w ants to annex or ex clu d e. and private . or.secret. th e stru g g le to a ccu m u late But th e stru ggle to m o n o p o liz e th e leg itim a te exercise o f v io le n c e .that is to say. is in all cases nothing other than the definition of the practical lim its of the group. that is. as is often th e case in m atrim onial m atters. to th e m e n . An idea of these subtleties m ay be got from considering the uses of the term khal (strictly. by em phasizing what unites. startin g w ith th e m vth ico-ritu al representations and th e rep resen tation s o f k in sh ip w h ic h . as su c h . unofficial ex iste n c e . and co llec tiv e . a dom in ated p o w e r w h ich is opposed to official p ow er in that it can op erate o n ly b y p ro x y . In all cases o f genealogically am biguous relationship.p u b lic . one can always bring closer the most distant relative. w o m e n m ust m ake do with th e unofficial p ow er o f th e eminence grise.O fficializing strategies 4i ivjjeged arena for th e d ia lec tic of th e official and th e u sefu l: in their efforts ^ draw th e g ro u p ’s d eleg a tio n upon th e m se lv e s and w ith d ra w it from their rivals. w hile one can hold the closest relative at a distance by em phasizing wr hat separates. as w ell as to th e su b v ersiv e refusal o f th e rule-breaker. official.

«aA Koula ( ± Ahccne Ahmed Ardjab i k. or his fath er’s b roth er’s d a u gh ter’s daughter. T h u s . w ithin the lim its of courtesy. it expresses the desire to distinguish oneself. alb eit so m etim es m ore direct and often m ore co n v en ien t p ractically.Mohand I A thm an / K hedoudja “ Ahmed Case i Case 2 F ig . for exam p le. of a m ulti-faceted relation ship . th rou gh th e latter.in sh ort. lay peasant.42 T h e objective limits o f objectivism Moussa A A. to cite another case from the sam e gen ea lo g y . w h ich w ou ld reckon through the w om en . the d om in an t reading. lin k ing each of th e in d ivid u als w h o are to be situated to his patrilineal forebears and. he assim ilates to parallel-cousin m arriage the relation ­ sh ip w h ich u nites. or again. it m anifests the intention of setting up a minimal relationship of familiarity by invoking a distant. w h ich im p oses itself w ith particular in sisten ce in all p u b lic.p rivileges th e n oblest asp ect. hypothetical affinal relationship. It is the official reading that the an th rop ologist is accep tin g w h en . th is latter relation ship lies at the origin o f the m arriage (see fig. official situ a tio n s . T h e m ale. by indicating the absence of any legitim ate kin relationship.. that K h ed oud ja sh ould b e seen as her husband . i. It represses the other p ossib le pathw ay. gen ealogical prop riety requires on e to con sid er Z oubir as having m arried in A ldja his fath er’s fath er’s b rother’s so n ’s d augh ter. w ith his in form an ts’ b lessin g . i. rather than h is m o th er’s b roth er’s daughter. to the patrilineal forebears th ey have in co m m o n . in all honou r relation ship s in w hich one m an of h onou r is sp eak in g to another . case i) . secon d -d egree patrilateral parallel cou sin s w hen on e o f them is h im self th e ch ild o f a parallel-cousin m arriage. as h app en s to be the case. and a fo rtio ri w h en b oth are ch ild ren of su ch m arriages (as in th e case o f an exchan ge o f w om en b etw een the son s of tw o b rothers). whereas between peasants. the aspect m ost w o rth y o f p u b lic p roclam ation. that is to say. even if. b roth er): used by a m arabout to a com m on.

the m ale or the fem ale. the second-order strategies aim ed at d isg u isin g the first-order strategies and th e interests th ey p u rsu e. instead o f b ein g treated cross cou sin (father’s siste r’s d au gh ter). b y leg itim a tin g it. hardly ever achieved in practice. w h ich everyth in g en cou rages. d isin terested research into all p o ssib le routes b etw een tw o p o in ts in gen ealogical s p a c e : in p ractice. C ollective beliefs an d w h ite lies T he am biguity o f the strategies in to w h ich it enters is su ch as to lead us to ask w hether parallel-cousin m arriage sh ou ld be seen as th e ideal. or as an ethical norm (a duty of honour) w hich bears on every m arriageable person b u t w h ich can conceivably be broken (w h en circu m stan ces m ake it im p o ssib le). th is language m ay also be current in the m ost in tim ate sp h ere of fam ily life. B ut the ideological trap w orks both w ays: too m uch faith in native a ccou n ts can lead °n e to present a m ere id eological screen as the norm o f practice. In this case. too m uch distrust of them m ay cause on e to n eglect the social fu n ction of a lie socially devised and en cou raged .C ollective beliefs an d w hite lies 43 d ’s father's father’s b rother's son 's daughter. th e gen ealogical reading. i. on e o f th e m ean s agen ts have of correcting the sym bolic effects o f strategies im p o sed b y other n ece ssitie s . w h ich . u nd er the appearances of o b ed ien ce to the rule. or sim p ly as a " m o v e ” recom m en d ed in certain situ ation s. w h ich w ould p resup pose access to com p lete inform ation on the exchan ges b etw een the groups in q u estio n . taking on th en the value of an affirm ation of th e in tim a c y o f the grou p of in terlocu tors as w ell as at least the sy m b o lic participation in that in tim acy of th e person th u s d esign a ted . o f accom p lish ed m arriage. T h e an th rop olo­ gist is in d eed the on ly person to undertake pure. d esign ates its victim as " his m o th er’s son ” and not “ h is fath er's son A part from the cases in w hich w om en are sp eak ing to oth er w om en about a w om an ’s kin relation sh ip s. is reserved for private situ a tio n s. It is because it is all these things at once that it is a favoured ob ject of m anip ulation. and the econom ic and p olitical reading. w hen use of the language of kin sh ip through w om en is taken for granted. w'hich p rivileges the relation s through w o m en that exclu d ed from the official a ccou n t. w h ich orients the m arriage tow ards on e or the oth er lin eage. the ch oice o f one route rather than an oth er. arise from the a m b igu ity of a practice that is ob jectively am en able to a tw ofold reading. d ep en d s on the pow er relations w ith in the d om estic u n it and ten ds to rein force. like in su lts. the balance o f pow er w h ich m akes th e ch oice p ossib le. or even p erh ap s her h u sb an d ’s b rother.75 T h ere is n o d ou b t that th e p re-em in en t p osition en joyed by parallel-cousin . if ^ot for m a g ic. w h ich sh e equally w ell is (case ^ T h e h eretical reading. in a w o m a n ’s con versatio n s w ith her father and his brothers or her h u sb an d .e . her so n s.

O n the other hand w e know that the husband is free (in theory) to am repudiate his w ife.khalu r m u). it con stitu tes the m ost ab solute affirm ation of the refusal to recogn ize the relation ship of affinity for w hat it is.76 It fo llo w s that a w om an is n ever w orth m ore than the w orth o f the m en of her lin eage. a cu l­ tivated.e. sh e w o n ’t sw allow y o u . in accordance w ith the stru cture (o f the ty p e a :b : : b j : b 2) w h ich also organ izes the m yth ic space o f the h ouse and o f the agrarian calen dar . and that a w ife co m in g from ou tsid e is a virtual stranger until sh e has p roduced a m ale d escen dan t and so m etim es even b eyon d that tim e. even if she ch ew s yo u . ikh aw el. of w om en is the on e w h o is sp ru n g from the m en o f th e lineage. i. is A th en e. W e know too the am bivalen ce of the relationship b etw een n ep h ew and m aternal uncle ( khal): " h e w h o has no en em ies need o n ly await his sister's s o n ” (that is. at b est. and m ore parti* cularly o f th e fu n ction s assigned to the m en and the w o m en in inter-group relations. the person w h o . is d u e to the fact that it is the m arriage m ost p erfectly co n sisten t w ith the m yth ico-ritu al representation of th e sexual d iv isio n of labour. born o f Z e u s’ head. But the refusal to recogn ize the affinity relationship (" th e w om an neither u n ites or se p a r a te s”. tw isted .the proverb says. It fo llo w s to o that the best. in the m yth ical representation of w om an as the sou rce from w hich im pu rity and d ishon ou r threaten to en ter the lin eage.77 M arriage to the father’s brother’s daughter is the m ost . im pu re w om an . the patrilateral parallel cou sin .44 T h e objective lim its o f objectivism m arriage in native accoun ts and. can alw ays claim his m oth er’s in heritan ce p ortion ). w h o se b lood is p u r e ”) can be attached to th e sam e lineage through their father or their m oth er ("he took his m aternal u n cles from the place w here he has his r o o ts’*.” T h e patrilateral parallel co u sin . her w ick ed n ess on ly b ein g com p en sated for by her weakness (" G od knew what he w as creating in the d o n k ey . "M arry the daughter o f you r 'amm. the im p ossib le figm en t of a patriarchal im agin ation . and th e son -in -law is so m etim es called setter la y u b " th e veil cast over sh a m e ” . he d id n ’t g iv e him any h o rn s”) .ichathel. as the m ale-fem ale is op posed to the fem ale-fem ale. m aleficen t. or least bad.e . or in A rabic. alw ays arises in w om en through the corrective and p rotective action o f a m an. i. w hen it does not appear as a sim p le duplication of the relationship o f filiation: there is praise for the result peculiar to a m arriage b etw een parallel co u sin s. th is g ood in evil. if not a basis. a natural. tham attuth u r th a zed d i ur theferreq) finds reinforcem ent.th e extrem e in stance o f w h ich . " h is m aternal u n cle is h is paternal u n c le ” . "S h am e is th e m a id e n ” .aVar thaqchichth . in con tem p t o f h onou r. straightened w om an . F irst. T h is lesser ev il. in eth nograph ic accoun ts. the lesser of tw o ev ils. is op posed to th e m atrilateral parallel cou sin . N o th in g entirely g ood can com e fom a w om an : sh e can bring n o th in g but evil or. co n seq u en tly . the fact that the resu lting ch ild ren (" th ose w h ose extraction is u n m ix ed . the m ost m ascu lin e of w om en .

her brother s daughter. presents as the best. w hen thislith is her own sister’s daughter. resulting eventually in the break up of joint ow nership.e. seek in g to reinforce her p o sitio n in her adoptive hom e by b rin gin g into the fam ily a w om an sp ru n g from her ow n lineage. Since the mother and the father have (in a certain respect) structurally opposed interests. the so n ’s marriage provokes a confrontation . while the mother directs her secret approaches towards her own lineage. T h e wom en w ould not deploy in matrimonial exploration all the ingenuity and effort that is generally conceded to them by the sexual division of labour. and thus of a crisis in the dom estic economy which w ould lead consum ption ( lakhla ukham. rein forces the agnatic unit and.albeit undeclared. his ow n p osition in the d om estic u n it. in arranging h his son ’s m arriage. in acts o f in evitab le sa crileg e . whether she is so by her father.I 1 usec*t0 r^ e ° f the o p en in g rite of the m arriage season . and at the opportune m om ent will invite her husband to give his official sanction to the results. the em ptiness of the house) to overtake the accum ulation of stocks (la'mara ukham. the one w hich mythical representation.e . carries very different w eight in the power relationship with her husband’s m other ( thamgharth). as befits a m an. w ithout being seen to do so . the fullness of the house). The in-marrying woman ( thislith). by an agreem en t w ith h is ow n kin. whether it is by her father or her m oth er). nded. if it were not the case that their so n ’s marriage contains the potentiality of the subversion of their ow n pow er. like the h o m o lo g o u s rite in the case of p lou g h in g . or more generally bv a man. and the on e m ost likely to call d ow n b lessin gs on roup. or som e other patrilineal kinsm an. or by her m other) or to her husband’s m other (and there again. this relationship clearly also varies depending on the thamgharth’ genealogical relationship to the men of the lineage (i.betw een the parents. am gharw ill authorize thamgharth to seek out a docile girl from her lineage: moreover. the ideological legitim ation of male dom ination. he may deliberately choose to take for his son his own sister’s daughter \patrilateral cross cousin) or even. plough sh are and furrow . the father tending to favour marriage within the lineage. to exorcize the threat contained in the co m in g togeth er of m ale and fem ale. since the w ole structure of practical relationships betw een kinsm en is present in each particular je ationship. whereas the "old w om an’s ” position may be strengthened in her relations with thislith. thereby. a fortiori.C ollective beliefs an d w h ite lies 45 j 0 f ail m arriages. that the interests of "the old m an ” (amghar) and "the old w o m a n ” ( thamgharth) are not necessarily antagonistic: conscious of the advantage to him self of the choice of a young Wlfe (thislith) fully devoted to a thamgharth herself devoted to the lineage. kv and earth. to her s husband s father). T h is m eans. his own brother. fire and w ater.7 8 T h e projection of the categories of m yth ic th o u g h t on to kin relation ship s duces op p osition s w h ich w ould rem ain relatively unreal if th e d ivision s thev engender d id not corresp ond to a fun dam en tal d ivision in d om estic politics: the interests of the m other. depending on whether she is linked to her husband’s father (and in that case. at least up to the m om ent w hen official dialogue can be established between the m en. i. and. incidentally. in her relations w ith her ow n husband. are ob jectively op p osed to the in terests of the father. T h u s the patrilateral parallel cousin finds herself from the outset in a position of strength w hen she has to deal w ith an "old w o m a n ” from outside the lineage. and also. encourage his wife t° marry him to her broth ers daughter (matrilateral cross cousin) rather than . because the wom en can have no official strategy . wr o. indirectly.

and the hierarchy of rights to honour and obligations to buy is both more apparent and more often transgressed.” A lthough infinitely closer to the reality of practice than anthropological legalism . In practice th is ideal marriage is often a forced ch o ic e. and if they do invoke the right or custom of chafa‘ (or achfa'). they are alm ost always m otivated by principles which have nothing to do w ith those of legal rights (e. th u s m aking a virtue of n ecessity . w hich adopts the official language of law. the father’s brother’s daughter. the obligation of honour may becom e a right to honour in the eyes of som e (the same murder is som etim es avenged tw ice). Because the sale of a piece of land belonging to the patrimony is first and forem ost an internal matter for the lineage. is d o u b tless sim p ly another exp ression o f the id eo lo g y o f m a scu lin ity w hich gives the m an su periority. masks the real and infinitely more com plex relation linking an individual with his parallel cousin. it is entirely exceptional for the group to have recourse to the authorities (the clan or village assem bly) which transmute the obligation of honour into a right. accord in g to which everyon e has a sort o f " righ t o f p re-e m p tio n ” over h is parallel cou sin . unmarried girl. T h u s. in the case of land. and it is infinitely less binding than the im perative of avenging the murder of a group mem ber. the right of pre-em ption (achfa') is formulated and codified by the learned legal tradition (furnished with an institutionalized authority and guaranteed by the courts) as w ell as by " cu sto m ” ( qanun) in no way im plies that the juridical or customary rule can be m ade the principle of the practices actually observed when land changes hands. the intention to challenge the purchaser of the lands by dem anding the annulm ent of an allegedly illegal sale) and which govern m ost of the practices of buying or selling land. In the case of land. It’s the same as with land. this remark by an inform ant. el bur. T h e obligation to marry a woman who is in a situation similar to that of fallow land. taken up w ith en th u siasm b y legalist form alism . in all relations b etw een the sexes and especially in m arriage. T h e native " theory ”. he has a right to her. may in fact be a duty which obeys the same principles as the obligation to avenge a kinsman or to buy up a piece of family land coveted by strangers.g . land ill defended and ill possessed . neglected by its masters ( athbur. or to buy back land fallen into the hands of outsiders. and is therefore totally binding only in very special and even som ewhat exceptional circum stances. of course. A m an’s supposed right to the bent'amm. on their dispositions. not that of a gen ealogical rule. the force o f the duty depends on the agent’s positions in the genealogy and also.79 T h e fact that. while others w ill back out or bring them selves to do it only under pressure.46 T he objective limits o f objectivism strengthen the hold of a brother already dom inant (by age or prestige). fallow land) sim ply im poses itself w ith less urgency than the obligation to buy land put up for sale by a group m em ber. w'hich p eop le so m etim es try to pass off as a p ositive ch oice of the id eal. It is im possible to find an informant or anthropologist who will not declare that in Arab and Berber countries every boy has a ''rig h t” to his parallel cousin: " If the boy wants his father’s brother’s daughter. with conflicts and com plex transactions betw een . the material advantage o f purchase is clear. In all these cases. he isn ’t consulted. But if he d o esn ’t. in the case of revenge. by agreeing to take his daughter (patrilateral parallel cousin). Parallel-cousin m arriage m ay in certain cases im p ose itself as a necessity w h ich is. howr ever. and therefore the in itiative. which does not even suspect the homology betw een a m an’s relation to the w om en of the lineage and his relation to the land.

it w ould m oreover. or at least not fou n d on e w orth y o f her family: " H e wr o has a daughter and d oes not marry her off m u st bear her h sh am e” . even in th ese lim itin g situ ation s 0 where the ch oice of th e parallel co u sin im p oses itself wr ith extrem e rigour. thou gh to con travene cu stom in th is w ay on e has to be able to co u n t °n a relationship as stron g as that b etw een twr closely u n ited brothers. and t^ l°Se xrhn have lesser duty-rights to purchase but could afford to. th e tw o brothers have the sam e in terest in "coverin g u p the sham e before it is un v eile d ”. the on ly wr o f avoid in g the threat w'hich m arriage ay to a stranger (aw rith ) w ou ld pose to the h onou r of th e grou p and perhaps to its patrim ony. in asm uch as he is the eq u ivalen t of and su b stitu te for the father. shirking the obligation is scarcely thinkable. g o in g against all h propriety (it is alw ays the m an w ho " a sk s” for the w om an in m arriage). esp ecially an elder brother. excep t in th o se fam ilies which are sufficiently stron gly integrated to wr ant th is rein forcem en t o f their integration. w h o has n ot had a m ale heir. in extrem e circum stances. sin ce honou r and d ishon ou r are held in co m m o n . T h e obligation to m arry the parallel cou sin also im p o ses itself w h en a daughter has not fou n d a h usb and . In this case in terest and d uty com cide to require the m arriage of the parallel cou sin s. and a b roth er’s disapproval. those In practice. ere is no need to appeal to ethical or juridical rules in order to a cco u n t for Practices w hich are th e result of strategies co n sciou sly or u n co n scio u sly . sin ce the amengur's brother and his ch ild ren w ill in any case inherit not on ly the land an d the house of the " fa ile d ” m an but also his ob ligation s w ith regard to his daughters (particularly in the case o f w id ow h ood or rep u d iation ).C ollective beliefs an d w h ite lies m e m b e rs 47 of the family who feel obliged to purchase but cannot afford to. asks for her for his son . and refusal is unthin k able wr en . su ch as the case of the daughter of the am engur. T h e d em an d s o f solidarity are even m ore b in d in g . T h e o fact rem ains that. before the fam ily finds that its sy m b olic capital has been d evalu ed b y the lack o f takers for its aughters on the m atrim onial m arket . " T h e m an w h ose daughter grow s up w ith ou t m arrying w ould be better off dead than a liv e . the m an w ho has " fa iled ”. is not ahvays a ritual p retext.8 S o . the girl’s father offers her for h is n ep h ew . parallel-cousin m arriage d oes not take on the ideal sign ifican ce and function w hich th e official accou n ts attribute it. m oreover. in w hich the taker is also the giver.” T h e relation ship b etw een brothers is su ch that a man cannot w ith h old his daughter w h en his b rother. h in tin g at it as d iscreetly as possible. or. as w h en an u n cle asks for his niece on behalf of so m eon e to wr om he has prom ised her. In th is lim itin g case. in the language of sy m b o lic in terest. at least in an ab solu te wr ay. and sin ce this marriage is. It on ly im p oses itself. h be a serious sligh t to a m an ’s b rothers to marry off his daughter w ithou t inform ing and co n su ltin g th e m . o ften g iven as a reason for refusin g.

even o p p o site . or "over their h e a d s”). the in d ivid u al and collectiv e fu n ction s w h ich they have fulfilled . or on th e contrary w h o takes a d augh ter from h im . and even perhaps by him (w ith the agreem en t of th e tw o fathers. A s soon as one con sid ers not sim p ly the m arriages already co n clu d ed . w h eth er it is the elder brother ( d a d d a ) w h o g ives his daughter to his junior. A nd as if to add to the a m b igu ity of this type of m arriage. m ean in gs and fu n ctio n s. w h eth er the tw o brothers are alive at the m om en t w hen the m arriage is settled . the d esign ated protector of th e girl he is taking for h is son (esp ecially if sh e has n o adult b rother). T h e eth ic o f honou r is the self-in terest eth ic of social for­ m ations. or classes in w hose patrim on y sy m b o lic capital figures p rom in en tly. w h eth er th e tw o brothers live and work separately or have kept u n d ivid ed th eir farm ing activity (land. d ep en d in g on w heth er th ey w ere co n clu d ed d uring the lifetim e of the co m m o n paternal grandfather. or make g ood the outrage. wr o m ay u se his d om in ant p osition in order to secure the h allegiance of th e son -in -law . i. or on the contrary. grou p s. T h e s e can on ly be grasped b y m eans o f a re­ con stru ction of th e entire system of relation ship s b etw een the twr associated o grou p s and o f th e state of th ese relation ship s at a g iven p oint in tim e. O n ly total unaw areness o f the terrible and perm anent loss w h ich a slur on th e honour of the w o m en o f the lin eage can represent could lead on e to see o b ed ien ce to an ethical or juridical rule as the principle of the action s in ten d ed to p revent. not to m en tion th e case in w hich on ly the appearance of u n d ivid ed property is m aintain ed . a d ifferen ce in age and esp ecially in sib lin g order so m etim es b ein g associated w ith d ifferen ces in social rank and prestige. u seful and p raisew orthy to praise as if it sprang from . that th e d uty to sacrifice o n eself. and m ore p recisely w h eth er th e surviving brother is the b o y s father. it is not u nu sual. as w e have seen . the girl’s father. or on th e contrary by direct agreem en t b etw een the tw o b rothers . w hether in th is latter case they w ere arranged w h ile the future sp ou ses w ere still ch ild ren . con ceal. and to p rotect a su sp ect or ill-favoured g irl. b u t also the co n scio u s and u n con sciou s strategies and th e ob jective co n d ition s w h ich m ade them p o ssib le and n eces­ sary. d ep en d in g on the strategies in w h ich th ey are in v o lv ed . one cannot fail to n o tice that any tw o m arriages b etw een parallel co u sin s m ay have n oth in g in co m m o n .e . M arriages w h ich are id en tical as regards gen ea lo g y alone m ay th u s have differen t. herds. those counted and classified by the g en ealogist. w h ose act it is easy.48 T he objective lim its o f objectivism directed tow ards th e satisfaction o f a d eterm in ate type of m aterial and sy m ­ bolic in terests. or on ce th ey were o f m arriageable age (not to m en tion the case o f the daughter w h o has already passed that a g e). sh ould fall to a m an from the poorest branch o f th e lineage. w h eth er the brother g iv in g h is daughter has a m ale heir or is an am engur. and other g o o d s) and their d om estic e c o n o m y ("a sin gle cook in g p o t ”). so as to be the " veil cast over s h a m e ”. or on ly one of th em is.

T h u s the line of the descendants of A hm ed. p reserve m e from that m isfo r tu n e ”).83 and also the least prestigious (" F rien d s have com e w h o oversh adow y o u . but also in term s o f practical satisfactions.e .and at the sam e tim e th e safest: th e sam e term s are u sed to contrast a close marriage w ith a d istant on e as are u sed to contrast direct exch a n g es b etw een peasants w ith m arket tran saction s . In short.e . and that it may take on different.the transactions and m aterial and sy m b o lic costs b ein g reduced to a m in im u m . accord in g to its d eterm in in g con d itio n s. from which the s e com es.81 I n f o r m a n t s con stantly rem ind u s by th eir very in coh eren ces and con trad ic­ tions that m arriage can n ever be fu lly defined in gen ealogical term s.8 It m ay also be th e w orst kind of u nion 2 ("Marriage b etw een *paternal u n c le s ' . One example will suffice to give an idea of the econom ic and sym bolic inequalities w hich may be disguised beneath the mask of the genealogical relationship between classificatory parallel cou sin s and to bring to light the specifically political strategies cloaked under the legitim acy of th is relationship. you re­ main. I pray you .a z w a j el la 'm u m . even o p p o site m ean in gs and fu n ctio n s. and which is correspondingly richer in land. sin ce it is the least on erou s econ om ically and socially . It m ay be the best kind o f m arriage ("to marry the daughter of your 'amm is to have h on ey in your m o u th ”). not simply from the m yth ic p oin t o f v ie w . provided one knows how to make the capital work. id eo lo g ica lly ) unequivocal m arriage. an d th ereb y to the m an ip u lation s of the ob jective m eaning o f practice and its p ro d u ct w h ich th is com b in a tio n of am bigu ity and clarity allow s and en cou rages Perhaps the only victim of these m anipulations is the anthropologist: by putting into the same class all patrilateral parallel-cousin marriages (and assim ilated cases) whatever their functions for the individuals and groups involved. T h e y also rem ind u s that parallel-cousin marriage can be th e w orst or the b est o f m arriages d ep en d in g on w h eth er it is seen as voluntary or forced . to a great num ber of ? Vantages the most im portant of w hich is authority in the conduct o f the house’s internal and external affairs: " T h e house of men is greater than the house of ca ttle” . he assimilates practices which may differ in all the respects left out of account by the genealogical model. you w h o are b la c k ”) w h en ever it is forced on th e grou p as a last resort. considered 2s reproductive strength and therefore as the prom ise of still greater wealth in m en. the inequalities " nich separate the potential "shares ” and the respective contributions of different lines strongly felt. 18 related. T h e spouses belong to the house of Belaid ”. egroom com es> * m uch richer in men than the line of Y oucef. Because undivided property is never anything other than a refusal to divide. the apparent in coh eren ce o f in form an ts’ accou n ts in fact draw s our attention to th e fun ction al am b ig u ity o f a genealogically (i.is bitter in m y heart. i.Collective beliefs a n d w h ite lies h is e a g e r n e s s 49 to fulfil a d uty of h on ou r tow ards the d augh ter of h is 'amm or even to exercise his right as a m ale m em b er o f the lin ea g e . Wealth in m en. oh m y G od . d ep en d in g prim arily on th e relative p o sitio n s 0f the fam ilies in the social stru ctu re. from which the . a big fam ily in term s both of its num bers (perhaps ten m en of fork in g age and about forty people in all) and of its econom ic capital.

gardening. the least male of male jobs. moreover. his classificatorv parallel cousin (father’s father’s brother’s son’s daughter). with knowledge of the objective truth about a union w hich sanctions the forced alliance between tw o social units sufficiently attached to one another negatively. genealogically. faced w ith su ch accom plished p rod ucts o f the art of m asking con strain ts and in terests u nd er exp ressio n s capable o f sidetrack­ ing sp on tan eou s h erm en eu tics tow ards the less real but m ore presentable m otives o f m orality and d u ty .and Y ou cefs daughter Yasmina. recruited for his . and. "son of the w id o w ”. w ithout in any way com prom ising its external prestige. the holders of p o w e r as usual w ithout consulting Y oucef. he has kept in a marginal position all his life. the collectiv e ju d gem en t should h esitate. now that he is back in the village. him self the son of A hm ed. that of a marriage betw een parallel cousins in a large family anxious to demonstrate its unity by a marriage able to reinforce it at the sam e time as displaying its adherence to the m ost sacred of the ancestral traditions. (A n only son. T h e girl’s father (Y oucef) js totally excluded from power. and leaving his w ife to protest in vain against a union bringing little profit . w hether conflict or cerem onies. the "wise m a n ” who by his mediation and counsel ensures the unity of the group.) as the only hope of the lineage. restricting him self to the work of overseeing. who represents the group in all major external encounters. of his favourable position as possessor of a large share of the patrimony with only a few m ouths to feed. T he official im age. w ho are always sufficiently well inform ed never to be taken in by the representations they are given. are associated w ith the decisions. T h is marriage. kept away from the gam es and work of the other children in order to go to school.) T h ese are som e of the elem ents which m ust be taken into account in order to understand the internal and external political function of the marriage betw een Belaid . not so m uch on account of the difference in age separating him from his uncles (A hcene and A hm ed). and tending (m ills. the uncle of Y oucef . strengthening its links w ith the line rich in land. and A hm ed. It is u nd erstan dab le that.reinforces the position of the dom inant line. and fig-driers) . T h e pre-em inent position of this line is shown by the fact that it has been able to take over the first nam es of the rem ote ancestors of the family and that it includes A hcene. in short. Endless exam ples could be given of this sort of collective bad faith.t h e last son of Amar.e. although much younger than he. since the structure of dom estic power is never declared outwardly. i. but above all because he has cut him self off from com petition betw een m en.5° T h e objective limits o f objectivism ( akham irgazen if akham izgaren). etc. since A h m ed ’s sons. aunts. gardens. T h u s the com plete truth about this marriage resides in its tw ofold truth. After a period of army service and then agricultural labour abroad. is en cou n tered on ly in tales or anthropology' books in the form o f th e sort of purchase of a son -in -law . and even to a certain extent from work on the land. even am ong strangers to the group. to be forced to unite their com plem entary riches. and because even its m ost im poverished mem ber nevertheless shares in the brilliance of the lineage. by w h ich a m an w h o has no male d escen d an ts gives his d augh ter in m arriage to an " h e ir ” (aw rith ) on con d ition that he com es to live in his fath er-in -law ’s h ou se.those tasks w hich require the least initiative and entail the few est responsibilities. But there is n o case in w hich th e ob jective m ean in g o f a m arriage is so strongly marked as to leave n o room for sy m b o lic transfiguration. coexists without contradiction. for better or for w orse. arranged by A hm ed and A hcene. T h u s th e marriage of the so-called mechrut. he takes advantage. coddled by a w hole set o f w om en (m other. from all exceptional contributions.

the fact that the " ill-gotten ” son-in-law was a marabout no doubt lent credibility to the status of "adopted son ” which he was supposed to have received. so as to bind him to her.Collective beliefs an d w h ite lies er§ 0f p rod uction and reprodu ction . a m an w ho cou ld o n ly be d efin ed . The word aw rith . as th e h usband of h is w ife. but vou w ill com e to m y h o m e ”). is no less dishon ou rab le for the aw rith (" h e is the on e w h o is playing the b r id e ”. in the history of one prestigious lineage one finds a series of acquisitions of sons-in-law who are neither seen as nor declared mechrut. w hen his maternal uncles married him to j* orphan under their protection. that m echan ical application o f the °n fo r m a n ts Official p r in c ip le K abyle w orld -view w ould lead u s to see in i t . i. A nd th e grou p is quick to join in the circle of the calculated lies w h ich ten d to con ceal its failure to find an h onou rab le way of savin g th e am engur from resortin g to such extrem ities in order to prevent the " b a n k ru p tcy” ( lakh la) o f h is fam ily. they had given sufficient proof of their adherence to e official image of the aw rith as " h eir ” and "adopted s o n ” to im pose a collective . the woman remarried and had a son. It is clear that th e m an of honour who plays the gam e fairly can cou n t on th e b en evolen t co m p licity o f his ow n group w hen he attem p ts to d isguise as an ad option a u n io n w h ich . Rut on e is eq u ally en titled to claim that there is no fam ily w h ich d oes not in clu d e at least on e a w rith y but an aw rith disguised u nd er the official im age of the " a sso cia te” or th e "adopted s o n ”.8 T h e 4 w ho m en tion it. represents an inversion o f all th e honourable form s of m arriage and which. T h e m ost careful scru tin y of gen ealogies and fam ily h istories w ill not reveal a single case w hich p erfectly m atches the d efin ition (" I g iv e y o u m y d aughter. the " h eir ”. and is called A hm ed u A gouni. this son was not regarded as an aw ritn. although he had put him self in the position of an awrith by coming to live with his w ife’s family (a sign that the latter were in a stronger position) after spending a few m onths with his own fam ily (w hich he was made to do for the sake of appearances). But the genealogies also contain cases about w hich it is hard to understand how they can benefit from similar com plicity. an ingenious solution w hich kept the profits of his labour w hile rem oving the em barrassing situation created by his presence in ls l i f e ’s fam ily. in the h o u se w hich w elcom es him . In one such case. either. th ey say) than for kinsm en su fficien tly self-in terested to give their daughter to th is kind of u np aid d om estic servan t. as su ch . T h e reason was that in n nnging up their quasi-son as "their ow n s o n ” (though he still calls them khal and not dadda.e . although their annexation was im posed not by necessity. a fact w hich one m ight expect to double the sense of scandal. is an official eu p h em ism a llo w in g p eop le to nam e the unnam eable. N evertheless. in w hatever region . but as part of a quasi-systematic effort to increase the capital o f m en. T h en the heads o f the lineage discreetly suggested that he should take outside work. v iew ed cvnically. after his father’s village) and marrying him o one of their quasi-daughters. whom she took back into her ow n lineage w hen her second husband died. For exam ple. After the death of her husband. various subterfuges were resorted to in order to get over the problem of his presence in the h o u se : he was given the job of miller. as is customary in such c^ses. his food was brought to him at the m ill. which made it possible to keep him at a distance. are right in saying that this form of marriage is u n k n ow n am ong th em and on ly to be foun d in other areas.

such as m arriage by exchan ge (a b d a l. If on e accep ts that on e of the principal fu n ctio n s o f m arriage is to reproduce th e social relations of w h ich it is th e p rod u ct. their rem oteness in sp ace. that is. far from o b eyin g a norm w hich w ou ld design ate an ob ligatory spouse from am on g the wT ole set o f official k in. relation ship s through th e m en usable by th e m en and relation ship s through the w o m en usable bv th e w om en . It is logical that the h igher a group is placed in the social hierarchy and h en ce th e richer it is in official relation ship s. w hich allowr and favour the cu ltivation of o n e or th e other field o f relationships. w ith a freq u en cy w hich itself con d em n s th em to the in sign ifican ce o f th e unm arked and the banality of the everyday. w hereas the poor relations. T h e m ost in sid ious of the d istortion s in herent in inform ants' exp lan ations is d ou b tless the fact that they give a disproportionate im portance to extra­ ordinary m arriages. then it is im m ed iately u nd er­ stand able w h y the different types of m arriage w h ich can b e d istin gu ish ed as m u ch b y the criterion o f th e ob jective ch aracteristics o f the groups brought togeth er (th eir p osition in th e social hierarchy.achieve in addition an unexpected result. and on the state of the p ow er relations w ith in th e " h o u s e ”. T h e official kin grou p . It is w ith in practical k insh ip . T he ordin ary and the extra-ordinary T h u s . tw o m en " e x c h a n g e ” their sisters). . p ub licly nam ed and socially recogn ized . the arrangem ent o f m arriages d epends h d irectly on the state o f the practical k insh ip relation s.w hich all tend to transform useful relationships into official ones and hence to ensure that practices which in fact obey altogether different principles appear to be deduced fom the genealogical definition . can m ake d o w ith th e ordinary m arriages that practical k inship en su res for them . w h o have little to spend on so lem n ities. in the field o f relation ship s constantly reused and thus reactivated for future u se. a u n ity at on ce as solem n and as artificial as th e occasion s on w h ich it is celebrated. that is. T h is is how the second-order strategies . w h ich d istin g u ish th em selv es from ordinary m arriages by a p ositive or a negative m ark.) as by the characteristics of the cerem on y itself. A s wr as the various curios wr ell hich the an th ro­ p ologist often finds h im self b ein g offered by w’ell-in ten tio n ed inform ants. in giving a representation of practice seem ingly designed to confirm the representation the structuralist anthro­ pologist has of practice.52 T h e objective lim its o f objectivism recognition of it. sh o u ld correspond very closely to th e characteristics o f th e social relations w h ich have m ade th em p ossib le and w h ich they ten d to reprodu ce. is w hat m akes possible and necessary the official m arriages w hich provide its on ly o p p ortu n ity to m o b ilize practically and thereby to reaffirm its u n ity . that ordinary m arriages are con tracted. b etw een the lineages u n ited b y m arriage in th e p reviou s gen eration. etc. the greater the proportion o f its work o f reprodu ction that is d ev o ted to reprodu c­ ing su ch relation ship s. in particular its solem n ity.

85 T h e m arriages contracted w ithin this area. stand in the sam e relation ship to extra-ordinary m arriages. purity. Thus. and m arriage u n itin g the h ead m en o f tw o trib es or two different clans. in w hich the traditional relationship o f assistance is inverted by the discrepancy betw een the partner’s positions in the social and sexual hierarchies. light. in this case the higher. in all the groups ob served . It is the one w ho g iv es. generally arranged by th e w o m e n . to spare him a humiliating defeat in com petition with the young eagles . wT ich are con clu d ed b y the m en b etw een different h villages or tribes.T he ord in a ry and the extra-ordinary 53 gjfiage b y " a d d itio n ” (th im i. a sim ple paraphrase in parabolic form of the proverb or saying w hich serves as its moral. the tawny ow l. T h en there are the most flagrant misalliances. marking marriages. observation and sta tistics estab ­ lish that.8 7 Extra-ordinary m arriages ex clu d e the w om en . and for th is reason alw ays sealed by solem n cerem on ies. an aw rith and a woman of a fam ily of higher rank. honour are opposed to night. the m ajority of the m arriages b elo n g to the class of ordinary m arriages. than the reprodu ction of those social relationships w hich m ake them p o ssib le . stand to th e extra-ordinary exchan ges on special o cca sio n s. the son marries th e sister or even the daughter of th e secon d w ife o f h is fath er). from err.th ose w hich have no other function. are those about w hich n o th in g is said. a sem i-ritualized didactic narrative.from ordinary m arriages. as w ith everyth in g wfhich can be taken for granted because it has ahvays been as it is . darkness. Contrary to th ese official represen tation s. w hich are 6 generally celebrated w ith o u t cerem on y.8 T h e se m arriages. on his back. the m o st perfect p olitically. up being opposed to dow n as day. tw o b rothers marry tw o sisters. ou tsid e practical k insh ip . and dishonour) between a man at the bottom of the social ladder.a pure m odel of upward marriage (upward socially. apart from b iological rep rod u ction . or m ore sim p ly . happiness. First. there are the different types of parallel-cousin marriage. the solemn gifts solem n ly p roclaim ed (Ikhir) w h ich are exp ected b etw een official kin . m isfortune. wr hich differs in th is respect . whether intended to preserve a political heritage or to prevent the extinction of a lineage (in the case of an only daughter). w ho must g o to the aid of the one who has taken his son-in-law. the tale. b etw een fam ilies u n ited by frequ en t and ancient ex ch an ges along age-old b eaten paths con tin u ou sly kept op en for gen eration after gen era tio n . like the marriage of the tawny ow l and the eagle’s daughter . a particular case of marriage as " rep aration ” ( thiririth. the niost perfect m yth ically.a scandalous situation denounced in the proverb " giving him your daughter and corn to o ’*. w hich 8 . th e little presen ts (thuntichin) exchan ged by w om en to " b in d them in friendship ”. but also m ythically. native discourse also d efines th e extrem e cases: parallel-cousin m arriage. as th e exchan ges o f everyday life. only ever relates marked. w ithin the area of the practical k insh ip or practical relation ship s w hich m ake them possible and w hich they help to stren g th en . to g iv e or take back). the levirate. the second sister being " a d d e d ” to th e first. im purity. or again.alone 8 . as d o es parallel-cousin marnag e.

T h e marriages arranged in the sort o f privileged sub-market (that o f the akham) which the authority of the elder and agnate solidarity set up as a free zone from which all outbidding and all com petition are absolutely excluded.54 T he objective lim its o f objectivism w ould be u nthin k able w ith o u t their in terven tio n . and hence p erfectly legitim ately.9 Insofar as it b rin gs large grou p s in to in terrelation sh ip through 0 the fam ilies and lineages d irectly in volved . as in the lim itin g case o f th e m arriages in ten d ed to set the seal on peace or on an alliance b etw een th e " h e a d s” o f tw o trib es . celebrated w ith cerem on ies w h ich m o b ilize exten sive gro u p s. It is " p u b lish e d ” in the m arket by th e crier (b erra k ). sin ce they on ly bring togeth er k in sm en . u nlike other m arriages w h ich . sin ce th e alliance w ould be d evalued b y b ecom in g co m m on . w hile marriage to a stranger liv in g at a d istance is p restigiou s becau se it bears w itn ess to the extent o f th e lin eage’s p restige. and when this is not the case. B u t. C ontracted o u tsid e th e zon e of everyday relation ship s. a neutral grou n d from w h ich w o m en are exclu d ed and w here lin eages. and tribes w arily m eet. it is totally official and every aspect of the celebration is strictly ritualized and m agically stereo ty p ed : th is is d ou b tless b ecau se the stakes are so h igh and the ch an ces of a rift so great that the agen ts dare not tru st to the regulated im provisation of orchestrated habitus. it is faithful at all tim es to the logic of the accum u lation of sy m b o lic capital. th is typ e o f m arriage is fun d am en tally m ascu lin e and often causes conflict b etw een the father o f th e bride and her m other. First. and thereby to increase th is capital. with the b lessin g o f th e patriarch. T h e celebration of the marriage is reduced to a strict m inim um . at w hich the bride- . its sole justification is p olitical. It treats the w om an as a political in stru m en t. it 9 is m arriage of the m arketplace. in contrast to marriage arranged b etw een brothers. as op posed to ordinary m arriages w hich follow w ell-w orn tracks. the discreet m ediation of the w om en of the fam ily is sufficient to bring it about. Sim ilarly. clans. T h u s m arriage to a stranger w h o has been cut off from his grou p and has fled to o n e s village is sh u n n e d . capable of earning sym b olic profits. political m arriages. co n d em n ed to a life of ex ile ( thaghribth. to m ake a show of k insh ip ties. the ex ile. o r at any rate a m on g the m en of the lin eage. the expenses ( thaqufats) incurred in the reception of the marriage procession by the girl’s fam ily are very m odest. sh e w h o has g o n e off to the w est ). a sort of p led g e or liquid asset. F urth erm ore.8 M ore o fte n . B ein g an op p ortu n ity to ex h ib it p u b licly and officially. d o not in volve so lem n in vitation s. at the cost o f con sid erable eco n o m ic ex p en d itu re. w ho is less appreciative of the sy m b o lic profit w h ich the m arriage m ay b rin g and m ore con cern ed about th e draw backs it m ay entail for her daughter. the imensi cerem ony. a distant m arriage is officially p resen ted as p olitical. unquestionably distinguish them selves from extra-ordinary marriages by their incomparably lower material and sym bolic cost. T h e union is generally regarded as a self-evident necessity. are not and cannot be repeated . the fam ily's sy m b o lic capital.

and m oney from all the men who see her on that day . a illow. T o conceive the am bition of seeking a wife at a distance. the laying dowr of the pledge. as for the w edding-feast expenses. especially the linguistic ones. T h e men of the amily demonstrate how num erous they are w ith the noise of their rifle volleys. one has to be predisposed to do so by the habit of keeping up relationships that are out of the ordinary. a jew'el of value. to be able to m obilize this capital at the right m om ent. at least tw o hundred kilos of sem olina. T he celebration of the marriage is obviously the high point of the sym bolic confrontation of the two grou p s. honey. it is necessary to have invested a lot and for a long tim e. the girl is not yet a cq u ired : a point o f honour is set on allowing her fam ily e time it w ishes to wait and to keep one waiting. w hich the old peasant morality eulogizes (in contrast to marriages w h ich . whatever his power. or a fortiori the religious figure of higher rank who takes part in the procession of iqafafen. thimristh)y which n functions as an appropriation rite (a'ayam . that is to g iv e n ”. are in a sense proportionate to the services rendered . is given new clothes and shoes by the "m aster of the w ed d in g ”. to be slaughtered and eaten by the gu ests or added to the bride’s capital. the visitors also bring provisions (sem olina. he has covered his face with sham e) he has incurred in going to solicit a layman (w ho. T h e glrl s fam ily is sent thaqufats. comparable to that of the first plot of land ploughed. marking. and the gifts he traditionally receives. and "recalled to m in d ” by the m any " sh ares” she has received. T hough granted. the sum agreed upon as the bridew ealth. w hich im plies possession of the skills. they are m inim ized by arranging for the feast to coincide w ith the A id: the sheep traditionally sacrificed on that o c c a s io n is sufficient for the requirem ents of the w edding. butter) and som e cattle. is presented w ithout m uch cerem ony. extra-ordinary marriages differ in every wav. Presents are brought not only for the bride (w ho receives her " pledge ”. O nce the agreem ent is reached (possibly involving the paym ent of thaj'alts to one or another of the girl’s close relatives). w hich are the only source of reliable information and of m ediators necessary to the success of the project. A ll the feasts w hich take place betw een this feast and the w edding are opportunities to bring thislith her " sh are” (el haq): great fam ilies at a great istance from each other cannot be content w’ith exchanging a few dishes of couscous.tiz r i) . in cash at the tim e of religious feasts and in provisions at harvest time. a trunk. and w ithout bluff or pretence. nam ing. tw o scarves. Compared with these ordinary marriages. Presents appropriate to the persons they unite are added. fifty kilos of flour. to take only one case. go beyond the socially recognized lim its of each fam ily).T he ord in a ry an d the extra-ordin ary 55 alth is presented. appropriation on the same term s as land) is in itself alm ost a w'edding. the A id sheep he is given that year is sim ply com pensation for the " sh a m e” ( ihachem udhmis. and also the m om ent of the greatest expense. negotiated in advance in relation to what the girl’s parents have to buy in the market to dower their daughter (a m attress. the heads of marabout fam ilies who have been asked to act as mediators are paid back in countless ways: the taleb of the village. one also needs a large capital of very costly distant relationships. or m ore exactly am lak. "appropriated”. . the bride’s trousseau ( la d ja z) is limit** to three dresses. indis­ pensable in such circum stances. as on the wedding day. and the guests are more likely to be kept at hom e at that time and present their excuses. a haik) . does not "hold in h is heart” Koranic know ledge) and consecrating the marriage wr ith his faith and know ledge. but also for all the other w om en o f the house. the ceremony of " p led gin g” ( asarus. as well as the blankets which are the fam ily’s own work and are handed down from m other to daughter). like ’’w id ow s’ daughters’ m arriages”. or a'allam . In short. and som e other item s (a pair o f shoes. For example. brings together only the m ost im portant representatives o f the * * fafnilies being allied (perhaps tw enty m en) .

T o feed his guests he had to slaughter tw o oxen. The delegation of iqafafen consisted. T h e ritual of the cerem ony of presenting the bridewealth is the occasion for a total confrontation betw een the tw o groups. in w hich the econom ic stakes are no more than an index and pretext. T h e case was mentioned of a marriage in which the girl’s family was taken a calf and five live and one slaughtered sheep. the same expression speaks of a payment of forty duros. at least until recent tim es. the on ly type o f ordinary m arriage to b e p ositively and officially . T he greater the proportion returned. And if one often hears it said that betw een great fam ilies there are no chrut (conditions laid dow n by the father for his daughter before he grants her hand). w ho know how to appreciate it. Although the value of the bridewealth is always subject to strict social supervision. a calf. By a sort of inverted haggling. it is because the status of the fam ilies is in itself a guarantee that the "con d ition s” explicitly stated elsewhere will here be surpassed. And no feat is more highly praised than the prowess of the bride’s father w ho. and thereby to acquire prestige: each side intends to prove its own "worth ”. or by making a brilliant dem onstration of their estim ation of their ow n value through the price they are prepared to pay in order to have partners worthy of them . p a rallel-co u sin m arriage. the greater the honour accruing from it.honev (twenty litres) and butter (tw enty litres). a typical bridewealth was worth around tw o thousand old francs (£20). set on alliance w ith them . must have corresponded to the price paid for two pairs of oxen.w hich the senders know will not all be eaten .56 T h e objective limits o f objectivism abundant meat (on the hoof) . the two groups tacitly agree to step up the amount of the payment by successive bids. elhaq nasnath natsazwijin) . the intention was to make an exchange of honour out of bargaining which could be so overtly keen only because the pursuit of maximum material profit was masked under the contests of honour and the pursuit of maxim um sym bolic profit. either by show ing what price men of honour. and six sheep.an allusion to the fourteen reals paid for the most expensively bought w ife w ho became the mistress of the house of the family which was richest and the most endow ed with men. it is true. together with all the kinsmen and notables exem pted by their age from shooting . A prestigious marriage celebrated with great cerem ony in 1936. T h e proof may be seen in phrases nowadays used as challenges: " Who do you think you are? T h e woman of fourteen [am arba'tach] ? ” . because they have a com m on interest in raising this indisputable index of the sym bolic value of their products on the matrimonial exchange market. disguised under the appearance of ordinary bargaining. T h e bride’s trousseau w hich may in such cases consist of up to thirty item s. to w hich virtually all the m en of the tribe were invited (together with a troupe of tbal who performed for three days and nights) cost the organizer in addition to all his liquid assets. the value of one of his best pieces of land (four days’ ploughing for one m an). T o dem and a large paym ent for one’s daughter. is matched by a similar number of item s given to the various other w om en of the family. For w om en married around 1900-1910. just before the Second World War.91 T h e m ost distant m arriages are p erfectly u nequ ivocal sin ce. or to pay a large sum to marry off one’s son. exceptional marriages may ignore the lim its tacitly set by the group. it w as im possible to marry at a d istance for negative reasons. In fact the econom ic cost is probably insignificant in comparison with the symbolic cost of imensi. solem nly returns a large share of the sum received. of forty rifle-bearing m en. w hich. after vigorous bargaining has been concluded. L ik e all close m arriages. according to the popular notion of equivalence ("W e got her for ’the equivalent of two pairs of oxen*”. as itin crow ning the transaction w ith an act of generosity. is in either case to assert one’s prestige.fifty men in all. for lack of anyone to marry near at hand.

hazardous negotiations. tow ards strangers. its d istin ctiven ess vis-a-vis other u n its. seek in the affectation o f rigour the m eans o f affirm ing their d istin ctio n . in other w ords. is posed anew w ith each m arriage. D istant m arriage. and so on. w h o . security and adventure. parallel-cousin m arriage duplicates the relation ship o f filiation w ith a relationship of alliance. the in sid e and the ou tside. If it en su res the Maximum of integration for the m inim al group. th e m ost econom ical type of u nion. like the ruined n oblem an unable to indicate other than sym b olically his refusal to derogate. any particular marriage is m ean ingfu l o n ly in relation to the totality of sim u ltan eou sly p ossib le m arriages (or. A nd thu s there is no m ore accom plished w ay of making a virtue of n ecessity and of p u ttin g o n eself in lin e w ith the rule. on the other hand. in relation to the range o f potential p artners). 3 BOT . in resorting to th is. op en in g up to th e ou tsid e w orld. the most " d istingu ish ed ” m arriage. often occurs in the poorest lin eages or the poorest lin es o f the dominant lineages (th e clien ts). T h e ch oice b etw een fission and fusion. * e foun dation of the agnatic u n it. a fam ily aiming to affirm th e d istin ctive features of its lineage b y g o in g on e better in purism (alm ost alw ays the case w ith on e fam ily in a m arabout co m m u n ity ). and a costly b ridew ealth. m ore con cretely. sq uan ­ dering by th is redundancy the op p ortu n ity of creating new alliances w hich n^arriage represents.T h e ordin ary and the extra-ordin ary 57 marked. obviating exp en d itu re on the cerem on y. sccu res p restigious aHiances at the cost of lineage integration and the bond b etw een brothers. by the extent to which it rein forces integration and by th e exten t to w h ich it exp an ds alliances. and is therefore necessarily characterized from both stan d p oin ts. T h ese tw o typ es o f m arriage represent the p oints of m axim um intensity of the tw o valu es w hich all m arriages seek to m axim ize: on the one hand the integration of the m inim al unit and its secu rity. su ch as a lineage cut off from its original group and an xious to m aintain its originality. Because it can appear as the m ost sacred and. it is the ch eap est form of extra-ordinary marriage. B ut at the sam e tim e. N ative discou rse repeats th is o b sessively. under certain co n d ition s. that is. it is likely to b e th e tactic of groups characterized by a strong desire to assert their distinction. consequently. because it alw ays has the objective effect of rein forcin g the integration of th e m inim al unit and. H ow ever. a clan seeking to mark its d istin ction from the o p p o sin g clan b y stricter observance of the traditions (like th e A it \la d h i at Ait H ich em ). release the group in the m ost satisfactory wr (if only by ay avoiding m isalliances) from the obligation to marry off tw o of its particularly disadvantaged m em bers. it is situated som ew h ere on a con tinu um ru n nin g from parallel-cousin m arriage to m arriage b etw een members of different trib es. T h u s its am biguity p redisposes it to play the role of th e poor m an ’s p restige m arriage: it offers an elegant w ay ou t for all those w h o. on th e other hand alliance and prestige. the m ost risky b ut m ost p restigious ty p e.

characteristic of the social form ation in q u e stio n ). M ore p recisely.” " I d o n ’t sacrifice adhrum [th e lineage] to aghrum [ w h e a t c a k e ] " T h e in sid e is b etter than the o u tsid e . and in particular the p o sitio n it occupies at a determ in ate point on the co n tin u u m ru n n in g from p olitical m arriage to parallel-cousin m arriage.alw ays calls forth. S econ d m adness to g o p en n iless to m arket. and secon d ly on the co m p eten ce wr hich en ­ ables the strategists to m ake the best u se o f this capital. practical m astery of the (in the w id est sen se) econ om ic axiom atics b ein g th e precondition for p rod u ction o f the p ractices regarded as " rea so n a b le” w ith in th e group and p ositively san ction ed b y the laws o f th e m arket in m aterial and sym bolic g ood s.exaltation of the in tern al.” T h is last sayin g is the m ost significant. T h e m atrim onial gam e is sim ilar to a card gam e. th eir w ealth in in stru m en ts o f production and in m en . con ceivab le and realizable. the cards held (th eir value itself being defined by th e rules of the gam e. given that the ob jectives th e m selv es depend very closely on the m eans available. agnate solidarity . if o n ly to oppose it.e . M atrim on ial strategies an d social reproduction T h e characteristics o f a m arriage. T h e categorical im perative alw ays m asks calcu lation of the m axim u m and the m in im u m . it expressly recogn izes the logic in w h ich it b elon gs. d ep en d on th e aim s o f th e co llectiv e strategies o f the grou p s in v o lv ed .58 T he objective lim its o f objectivism T h e centripetal thrust . in w h ich the o u tco m e d ep en d s partly on the deal. prestige. con sid ered both as p rod u ctive and reproductive p ow er and also. and partly on the players’ s k ill: that is to say. that o f th e ex p lo it. because u n d er the gu ise o f ab solute con d em n a tio n of d istant m arriage. risky ste p ]: to g ive the daughter of 'amm to other m en . prow ess. w h ich is alw ays that of preference: " I t is b etter to protect your p oint o f honou r [nif\ than reveal it to o th e r s. exaltation of th e p restigiou s alliance. autarky. th e cou rageous strangers from w h om the foun ders of the villages had to w in back their w iv es. of secu rity . as figh tin g strength and h en ce sy m b o lic stren gth . the centrifugal thrust. just as it takes en orm ou s cou rage to take on lion s. T h is can be seen from the in form an ts’ syn tax. . in a p revious state of play. the ex cellen ce o f th e b lo o d . firstly on the material and sy m b o lic capital p ossessed b y the fam ilies con cern ed . T h ird m ad n ess: to vie with the lions on th e m oun tain to p s . analysis o f the op eration s w'hich have led u p to different typ es of m arriage sen d s u s back to analysis o f the conditions w h ich had to be fulfilled for th em to be p o ssib le. i. It takes great p restige and w ild audacity to go to m arket w ithout any m oney in ten d in g to b u y th in g s.’1 "F irst m ad n ess [daring. the search for th e m axim u m of alliance com p atib le w ith the m ainten an ce or rein forcem ent o f in tegration b etw een brothers. accord in g to m any leg en d s o f origin.

a ctin g as guarantors exp ressly m andated by the w ill of their grou p and as ex p licitly authorized sp ok esm en .and th e state o f its relations w ith th e other m em b ers of its group. and d irectin g th e cou rse w h ich future n egotiations sh ou ld take. each grou p in its en tirety enters into the d ecision . and especially age differen ce. wards reprodu cing th e structure o f social and id eological relations w ith in which and through w h ich th e a ctivity o f p rod uction is carried on and le g iti­ . esp ecially th ose am ong th e w o m e n ). In a social form ation oriented tow ards sim p le reprodu ction . etc. tow ards the biological reprodu ction of the grou p and the p rod uction of su fficien t g o o d s 0r its su b sisten ce and b iological reprodu ction . i.) but also their grou p s. each fam ily’s p osition in its grou p . It is a striking fact that m atrim onial n egotiation s are really th e b u sin ess of the whole group. p revious m atrim onial h istory. p resen tin g at the sa m e tim e a striking testim on y of th e sym b olic capital p ossessed b y a fam ily capable of m obilizing such p restigiou s m en . Inform ation is ob tain ed on th e eco n o m ic and social history of the fam ilies about to be allied and o f the larger grou p s to w h ich they b elo n g . in cid en tally .e . the structure o f th e pow er an d authority relations w ith in the d o m estic u n it (and. the women w ith their unofficial and recoverable con tacts m ake it p o ssib le to start semi-official n egotiation s w ith ou t th e risk of a h u m iliatin g rebuff. and.M atrim on ial strategies an d social reproduction 59 T h e collective strategy w h ich leads up to a particular " m o v e ” (in the case 0f marriage or in any oth er area of practice) is b u t th e p roduct o f a com b ination 0f the strategies of the in terested parties w h ich ten d s to g iv e their resp ec­ tive interests the w eigh t corresp on d in g to their p ositio n . the tw o grou p s carry ou t a system atic in vestigation to estab lish co m p lete information on th e variables ch aracterizing not on ly th e co u p le (age. at the m o m en t in question. m ed iate and in terced e. and thu s being able to con trib u te to the su ccess or failure o f the project. e tc .a particularly im portant factor b ecau se a display o f p restigiou s k in sm en m ay d isg u ise a d om in ated p osition w ith in an em inent grou p .) . the fam ily’s d egree o f integration (u n d ivid ed o w n ersh ip . esp ecially th e capital o f h onou r and m en o f honour which they c o m m a n d . th ose m ost representative o f official kinsh ip . T h is m ean s. e t c . everyon e p layin g h is part at th e appropriate m o m en t. w ith in the stru cture of p ow er relations w ith in th e d o m estic u n it. the sym bolic p atrim on y. T h e n the most em in en t m en . First o f all. and o f the grou p s to w hich th ey are traditionally o p p o sed . inseparably from this. th e q uality o f th e netw ork o f alliances on w h ich they count. F in ally. evaluatin g the reception g iv en to th e d elegates’ p rop osals. th eo re­ tical and practical kin relation to th e fam ily au th ority h old er. sib lin g order.for th e benefit of those eth n ologists w h o cou n t th em selves satisfied w'hen th ey have charac­ terized a m arriage in exclu sively gen ealogical term s . i. f° r a fam ily m arrying off a d augh ter. passion ately d iscu ssin g th e m atrim onial projects.that b eh in d th e q u asi­ theatrical im age p u t forw ard b y the official kin at the tim e of the m arriage.e .

g .e . M oreover. not o n ly as a labour force but also as fig h tin g power: the value of the land lies on ly in th e m en w h o cu ltivate and also d efen d itT h e patrim on y of th e lin eage.a disguised form of the sale of lab ou r-p ow er). and. at the tim e o f a m arriage).the biological and social reprodu ction o f th e grou p . but also by the p ossessio n of th e m ean s of protecting it. w h ich rule out th e p rod uction and accum u lation of su bstan tial su rp lu ses and h en ce the d ev elo p m en t of clearly m arked eco n o m ic d ifferen tiation (alth ou gh it is p ossib le to see in th e levying o f labour in th e " m u tu a l-h elp /c o rv e es” . for exam ple. in c o m b in in g to fulfil th e sam e fu n ctio n . or ven gean ce ( reqba) w as d ou b tless the basic reason w h y m en were valued as " r ifles” . g o o d s w h ich are p reciou s and therefore vu lnerab le. inheritance. i. . i.6o T h e objective lim its o f objectivism m ated. and m arriage. resid en ce. to force reality into the framework of a realist. th is is s o b ecau se the land and th e w o m en are n ever r e d u c e d to th e statu s of sim p le in stru m en ts o f p rod uction or reprodu ction . a capital of services rendered and gifts bestowed is the best and indeed the only safeguard against the "thousand con tin gen cies’*on w hich.9 In an 2 eco n o m y characterized by the relatively equal d istrib u tion of th e m eans of p rod uction (gen erally o w n e d in com m on b y the lineage) and by th e weakness and stability o f th e p rod u ctive forces. sym b o lized by its nam e. and stih less to the statu s of co m m o d ities or even " p ro p er ty ”. the building of a house. m en . m any activities would be im possible w ithout the help of the group (e . or the transporting of m ill-w heels. If one insists on seein g thinnzi as a corvee (the better. th e strategies o f th e different categories of agen ts. depends the maintenance or loss of working conditions. arise from th e system s of interests ob jectiv ely assigned to them b y the system o f p rin cip les w h ich m ake u p a particular mode 0f reproduction: th ese p rin cip les g overn fertility. In su ch co n d itio n s an ab un dan ce o f m en w ou ld n o d o u b t be a liab ility if. from the accident which causes the loss of an animal to the bad weather w hich destroys the crops. as Marx observes. reified definition o f m odes of production) one must at least take into account the fact that this corvee is disguised under the appearance of mutual aid. but th iw izi may also benefit the poor man in the case of the building of a house (the transporting o f stones and beam s). Ostracism is a terrible sanction which is not only sym bolic: ow in g to the lim ited technical resources. not the p rod u ction of assets. robbery. brawling. th e fa m ily ’s efforts are d irected tow ards th e maintenance and reprodu ction o f th e fam ily.th iw iz i .are ob jectively co n ce rted . w h o se interests w ithin the d om estic u n it m ay be con trad ictory (am on g other o ccasion s. in this econom y of insecurity. taking a strictly eco n o m ic view . In fact th e political in secu rity w h ich perp etu ates itself b y gen­ erating th e d isp o sitio n s required in order to respond to w ar. filiation .e . on e saw in it on ly " a r m s” and therefore " sto m a ch s”. with the transporting of stones. which used to m obilize forty men in non-stop shifts for several days). is d efined not simply by th e p ossession o f th e land and the h ou se. A ttack s on the lan d . In fact th iw izi mainly profits the richer farmers and also the taleb (whose land is ploughed and sow n co llectiv ely ): the poor have no need o f assistance with the harvest.

forbidden. that is. the enclosed space of the house. thus poverty.w hich. is inherently exposed to sacrilegious outrage . the more n if it m ust possess to defend its sacred values.95 Hurma in the sense of the sacred (haram ). M en con stitu te a political and sy m b o lic force on w h ich d ep en d the p rotec*. is " b ou gh t b a ck ” a t a n y price in order to w ipe ou t the sta n d in g insult to the group's h o n o u r . is the .h is " p o te n c y ”. that . the world of the secret. active vigilance of the point o f honour (n if) can guarantee the integrity of honour (hurma) . makes doubly meritorious the man who. its 'physical or sym bolic) fighting capacity. the m ale virtue par excellence. as opposed to the outside. and hurma. literally. being sacred. C o n seq u en tly . all that goes to make up the vulnerability of the group. are different form s of the sam e offence. and sacrilegious outrage). so the m an through w hom on e can m cruelly strike at the grou p is its m ost representative m em ber.e. i. apart from th e sterility of its w o m e n . A lienated land. though particularly exposed to outrage. the sum total of that w hich is haram. What is haram (i. the group o f the agnates. so a piece of ancestral land.Qn and exp an sion of th e p atrim on y. T h u s to the passivity of hurma. or th e w om en are attacks on their m aster. there is opposed the ^ctive susceptibility of nif. fem ale in nature. nif defined as that which can be challenged and w hich enables one to take up the challenge. w hich touches only the point of honour. all those whose death m ust be avenged by blood and all those who are bound to carry °ut blood vengeance. T h e more vulnerable a fam ily. T h e sacred of the right hand is essentially the rifles”. on h is nif. u navenged or m urder. T h e rifle is the sym bolic em bodim ent o f the nif of the agnatic group. its m ost sacred possession (from w hich there follows a distinction betw een the challenge.e . in the 3 logic of challenge and riposte.M atrim on ial strategies and social reproduction 61 house.94 Only the punctilious. the open world of the public square (thajm afth)f reserved for the m en. w h ich alw ays elicits the same response from the grou p 's p oin t of honour: just as a m urder is " paid back’ i but at a h igher rate. b y striking if p ossib le at the person closest to the murderer or the m ost p rom in en t m em ber in his g ro u p . hurma. that the defence of the group’s material and symbolic patrimony . and at the sam e tim e the im p osition its dom in ance and th e satisfaction of its in terests. A being devoid of the sacred could dispense with the point of honour because he w ould in a sense be invulnerable. nif. Conversely. and the greater the m erit and esteem opinion accords i t .s* ^ e inside and more precisely the fem ale universe. ost The ethos of honour is but the transfigured expression of these econom ic and political facts.9 Just as. far from contradicting or prohibiting respectability. are inseparable. A sharp distinction is drawn betw een n if the point of honour. th e best land b oth techn ically and sy m b olically is that m ost closely tied to the p atrim ony. nonetheless manages to w in respect.the source both o f its potency and of its vulnerability depends. his very ^ defined by th e g ro u p . taboo) is essentially the sacred of the left hand. It is ultim ately on nif. the point of honour has a m eaning and a function only in a man for whom there exist things worthy of b ein g defended. and hurma in the sense of respectability.and win the consideration and respectability accorded to the man who has sufficient poin t of honour to keep his honour safe from offence. the "sons of the paternal u n cle”. th e o n ly reat to the pow er of th e grou p . even a not very fertile on e. the d efen ce o f the grou p and its good s against the en croach m en ts of violen ce.

in trod u ce an u n a v o id a b le co n tra d ictio n : n ot only d o th ey threaten to fragm en t th e ancestral lands by p arcelling th em out eq u ally am on g very n u m erou s h eirs. Loan c o n d u c t I .co m p etitio n an d con flict b etw een father and sons." T h e very am b ig u ity of th is say in g . also used to e x p r e s s the taking of revenge. as we have seen. an exchange. T h e opposition between the two " econom ies is so marked that th e expression err arrtal. T h e urge to calcu late. and to d ev o te th e m se lv e s m ore readily to strictly ec o n o m ic practices. O f th e man w ho. repressed in m en . H e n c e th e fertility strategies w h ich aim to p rod u ce as m an y m en as p ossib le as q u ick ly as p o ssib le (th rou gh early m arriage). and it is indeed closer to the econom ic :ruth of exchange than the m en ’s dealings. means the returning o f a g ift. find s m ore overt ex p ressio n in w o m e n .62 The objective lim its o f objectivism fragm en tation of the m aterial and sy m b o lic p atrim on y w h ic h w ould result from quarrels b etw een th e m en . and th e ed u cative strategies w h ich . m e n ’s arm s are silver. in in cu lca tin g an exalted a d h eren ce to th e lineage and to th e v alu es o f h on ou r (th e transfigured exp ression o f the ob jective relation b etw e en th e agen ts an d an extremely vu lnerab le and p erp etu ally threaten ed m aterial and sy m b o lic patrim ony) collaborate to su pp ort th e in tegration of th e lin eage and to divert aggressive ten d e n c ies ou tw ard s: " T h e land is cop p er ( nehas). w h ic h . co m p etitio n and conflict between b rothers or co u sin s w h o . it is said that " his borrowing ( arrtal) is like that of w o m e n ’*. who are stru ctu rally pred isp osed to be less con cern ed w ith the sy m b o lic profits accru in g from political u n ity . too readily seeks loans.97 L en d in g b etw een w om en is regarded as the antithesis of the exchange of honour. w h ich ob jectively tend to attach as m an y m en as p o ssib le to th e p atrim on y by en su rin g eq u ality of in h eritan ce and b y gu aran teein g the u n ity o f th e patrim ony through the d isin h eritin g o f th e w o m e n . in the m en ’s s p e e c h whereas it m eans "giving back a lo a n ” w hen used by the w om en. especially of m on ey.nehas also m ean s jealou sy . predisposes the w om en to be less sensitive to sym bolic profits and freer to pursue material profits. unlike the man of honour anxious not squander his capital of "c r e d it”.p o in ts to the p rin cip le of th e con trad iction w h ich th e su ccessio n a l cu sto m en gen d ers in attaching m en to the land. b u t ab o v e all th ey set at the very heart of th e sy stem the p rin cip le of co m p etitio n for p ow er over th e domestic ec o n o m y and p olitics . T h e ideology which makes wom an a principle of division and discord th u s finds an apparent basis in the effects of the division of labour betw een the sexes. at least w h en th e y in their turn b eco m e fath ers. are d estin ed to find that th eir in terests c o n flic t . T h e su ccessio n a l stra teg ies. wr o m th is m o d e o f pow er tran sm ission c o n d em n s to su b ord in ation so long h as the patriarch lives (m an y p arallel-cou sin m arriages are arranged by th e "old m an ” w ith o u t th e fathers b ein g c o n s u lte d ).9 T h e strategies of agnates are 6 d om in ated b y the an tagon ism b etw een th e sy m b o lic p rofits of p olitical and ec o n o m ic n on -d ivision and th e m aterial profits o f a breakup w h ich are con tin u a lly recalled to m in d b y th e sp irit o f ec o n o m ic ca lcu la tio n . the matf w ho has so often blanched w ith sham e on asking for a loan that he has a "yellow face .

th e b rothers are o b je c tiv e ly d iv id ed . and to th e valu es o f h on ou r and p restig e w h ich m ake a ^reat h o u se ( akham am oqrane).) resid es in fact in a sin gle p erso n . and can be su b lim a ted in to a co m p etitio n of h on ou r on ly at th e co st o f co n tin u o u s control b y th e m en over th e m se lv e s and b y th e g rou p ov er all of th e m . and o f . of th e m aterial co n d itio n s of life . it follow s that the econom ic truth. h Wh° w ° u ld save m e from d ish o n o u r but p u t m e to sh a m e . the sym bolic an d politica l in terests attached to th e unity o f land ow n ersh ip .99 In general. O bjectively u n ited . w ho w ill borrow and certai . even in their solid arity. is th e m an wT o w o u ld d efen d m y h on ou r if m y p o in t o f h onour failed . com p etition for internal p ow er is alm ost in evitab le. are c o n d u c iv e to the breakup of u n d iv id ed o w n e rsh ip . . jor any pUrpose. for th e w orse if n o t for th e b etter. or th e im b alan ce b etw een resp ective co n trib u tio n s to p rod u ction and co n su m p tio n (" T h e hard -w ork in g m a n s labour has b een eaten u p b y th e m an w h o lean s against th e w a ll ”). said an informant. as is sh o w n b y th e fact that th e breaking u p of joint o w n e r sh ip h as b eco m e m ore and m ore freq u en t w ith the g en eralizin g of m on etary exch an ges and th e spread o f the (corresp o n d in g ) calcu lative spirit. or over the fam ily's external relation s (alliances. d irectin g each of the b ro th ers tow ards th e " s p e c ia lity ” w h ich su ited h im in the d iv isio n of d om estic labour. economic in terests (in th e narrow s e n s e ). cou ld I^arry m y w ife and w ou ld b e praised for i t .9 8 E ven in cases in w h ich a h older of d o m e stic p ow er has lo n g prepared for his su c c e ssio n by th e m anip ulation of in d ivid u al asp iration s. In sh o r t. " M y b r o th e r ”. B ut the forces o f coh esion represen ted b y th e n o n -d iv isio n o f th e land and the in tegration of th e fam ily .” A n oth er in form an t reported an acq u aintance as sa y in g : " M y brother is h e w h o . w h o th u s appropriates the sy m b o lic profits wr ich h accrue from g o in g to m arket.clash con stantly w ith forces of fission su ch as th e " je a lo u sy ” arou sed by an u nequ al d istrib u tion of powr ers or resp o n sib ilities.e . p resen ce at °lan assem b lies or th e m ore excep tion al g a th erin gs o f tribal n otab les. e tc . C on versely. if I d ie d . to th e m aterial and sy m b o lic p ow er o f the agnatic g r o u p . etc . — n°t to m en tion th e fact that th ese d u ties have the effect of e x e m p tin g tta person w h o assu m es th em from th e ex ig en cie s o f th e daily w ork rou tine.in stitu tio n s w h ich rein force each other . m ilitate in favour of th e stren g th en in g of corporate b o n d s . held back in lend c joser t0 t he surface in fem ale exchanges in w hich there may be specific svvaP £o r r e p a y m e n t (" when m y daughter gives birth ”) and precise calculation of the quantities lent.M atrim on ial strategies an d social reproduction 63 • 1 * more frequent and more natural am ong the w om en.” T h e h o m o g e n e ity o f th e m ode 0 Production o f h abitus ( i. to the exten t of allian ces. th e con tro l o f exp en d itu re and the m anagem ent of the p atrim on y. au th ority over th e d eleg a tio n of w ork. th o se relatin g to co n su m p tio n .

on e not w anting to a d m it the other’s d augh ter to her h ou se and th e other n o t w ish in g to place her daughter under her sister-in -law ’s au th ority). o f the specific contradiction o f this mode o f reproduction. the in tim ate en em y . w hich a w h ole series o f m echan ism s are d esign ed to su pp ort and stren gth en . som etim es realized in practice.64 The objective lim its o f objectivism ped agogic action) p rod uces a h om ogen ization of d isp o sitio n s and in terests w h ich . the ideolo­ gical resolu tion. But the extrem ely variable relative strength of the te n d e n c ie s to fu sion or fission d ep en d s fu n d am en tally. a m o n o p o listic grou p ing defined. P erhaps the exaltation of m arriage w ith the ben'amm (parallel cou sin ) w ould have been better u nd erstood if it had been realized that ben amm has co m e to designate th e en em y .) and in co n su m p tio n . for con trol over th is capital. in order to resolve id eologically the ten sion w h ich is at its very centre. on the threat of m aled iction . o ften arranged w ith o u t the w om en b ein g in form ed . arising w h e n the father d ies leaving adult so n s n on e o f w h om w ield s a clear estab lish ed au th ority (b y virtue o f th e age gap or any other p rin c ip le ). b y the exclu sive appropriation o f a determ in ate type o f goods (land . nam es. taking turns to do th e h ousew ork. If p arallel-cou sin marriage is a m atter for m e n . It is no accid en t that crisis so often coin cid es w ith the disappearance of this p ositive coh esive factor. e tc . and against their w ill (w hen th e tw o b rothers’ w iv es are on bad term s. stay united am ongst y o u r se lv e s!”) is naturally taken to m ean "M arry you r ch ild ren to o n e a n oth er. djedd. d ivision b etw een the m en . or rather. T h e d om estic u n it. far from exclu d in g com p etition . m ay in so m e cases en g en d er it by in clin in g th ose w h o are the product of th e sam e co n d itio n s of production to recogn ize and pursue the sam e g o o d s.101 con sisten t w ith the m en ’s in terests. k eystone o f the fam ily structure. T h e relationship b etw een brothers. as W eber said.100 startin g w ith parallel-cousin m arriage. and that en m ity is called thaben'ammts "that of th e ch ildren of the paternal u n c le ”. the forces o f ideological coh esion are em b od ied in the elder. at th e level o f the d o m estic u n it . the h igher interests of th e lineage. carry w ater. that is. w h ose authority based o n the pow er to d isin h erit.” E verything takes places as if th is social form ation had had to grant itself officially a p ossib ility rejected as in cestu o u s by m ost so cieties. etc . the reason is that it is in tend ed to counteract. is also its w eakest p oint. w hich co n tin u o u sly threatens to d estroy the capital b y d estroyin g th e fundam ental con d itio n of its p erp etu ation .) is the locus o f a co m p etitio n for th is capital. and above all on adherence to the values sym b olized b y th adjadith. or at least. w h ose rarity m ay arise en tirely from this com p etitio n . for exam p le. can secu re equilibrium b etw een th e b rothers o n ly by m aintain in g th e strictest eq u ality b etw een them (and their w iv es) both in w ork (th e w o m e n . In fact. prepare the m eals. T h is is taken so m uch for granted that th e father’s ritual advice to h is son (" D o n ’t listen to your w iv es. p ractically.

the quality of the "maternal u n cles” they procure. am ong other th in gs. there are several ways of "separating” : the greater the importance and solem nity of the marriage.” T h e n eg a tiv e. fo rced solid arity created by a shared vu ln era b ility . the most long-standing and prestigious relationships naturally being best protected against an ill-considered break. the m ore they are inclined to serve the w orking of the system . w e are able to u nd erstan d the fundam ental p rin cip les o f th e strategies w h ich are con fron ted o n the occasion of a m a rria g e.102" I hate m y brother. the more one has " in v ested ” *n. from the u n d ivid ed fam ily up to th e largest political units. or out tK Se^ ‘*nterested calculation). it is pointed out that he did not pronounce the ormula three tim es. marriages are a sort of short-term and long-term investment in. and without w itnesses.103 T h o u g h it is true that marriage is on e of th e principal o p p ortu n ities to con serve. external or internal alliances intended to reproduce the domestic and political power relations. *he more one has therefore an interest in preserving relations w ith those from Whorn one is separating (either out of kinship or neighbourhood solidarity. H avin g restated the p rin cip les w hich define the system s of in terests of the different ca te g o r ie s of a gen ts in the d om estic pow er relations w h ich result in the d efin itio n o f a co llectiv e m atrim onial strategy. nor is the return refused (" free” . then all sorts of subterfuges are resorted to so as to prevent the total loss of the capital of alliances. that o f th e rivalry b etw een agnates.M atrim on ial strategies and social reproduction 65 m uch as at th e level o f larger u n its like the clan or th e trib e. w hich is reinforced every tim e th ere is a threat to the jointly ow ned m aterial and svm bolic p atrim ony. but I hate the m an w h o hates h im . in crease. on the elationship b etw een the grou p and the external u n its: in secu rity provides a negative principle of coh esion capable of m aking up for the d eficien cy of o sitive p rin cip les. the repudiation proves to be final. attributing the divorce to the youth. of which more is expected than sim ple biological reproduction. T h e husband’s relatives may go and heg the w ife’s relatives to give her back. As the products of elaborate strategies. im petuously. It is understandable that they cannot be lightly dissolved. rests o n the sam e prin cip le as the d iv isiv e ten d e n c y w hich it tem p ora rily thw arts. return of e bridewealth is not dem anded im m ediately. or (b y m isalliance) d im in ish the capital of au th ority conferred b y stron g integration and th e cap ital of p restige stem m in g from an ex ten siv e netw ork o f affines ( nesba). i. the co h esio n en d lessly exalted b y the m yth ological and genealogical ideology lasts no lon ger than the pow er r ela tio n s capable o f h o ld in g in dividu al in terests togeth er. thoughtless ch oice of w ords. S o .. but only once. there may even be th e offer of a new w edding (w ith imensiand a trousseau). If repudiation becom es inevitable. and the greater the discretion of the break. the fact rem ains that the m em b ers of the d om estic u nit w h o take part in arranging th e marriage do not all id e n tify their o w n interests to the sam e degree w ith th e collective interest o f the lineage. and irresponsibility of a husband too young to appreciate the value of alliances. T h e divorce ecomes a case of thutchha (the wife w ho lost her temper and w ent home to her relatives).e. recklessness. if w e now p o sit that the more th e w orking o f th e sy stem serves the agen ts’ in terests.

th e sexual d iv isio n of labour w h ich restricts her to d o m estic tasks leaving the representational fu n ctio n s to th e m an . T h e in h eritan ce tradition w h ich exclu d es w om an from th e h eritage. it m ay not even be expected until the woman remarries. in v estin g m ore econom ic realism (in th e narrow se n se ) than th e m en in th e search for a partner for their so n s or d a u g h ters . b ut also. th e y are th row n back on to practical k insh ip and practical u ses of k in sh ip . not too m uch attention is paid to the precise am ount. in m arrying her daughter in to her ow n lin eage and in ten sify ­ ing th e ex ch an ges b etw een th e grou p s.parallel-cou sin and political m arriages . T h e m arriage o f a son raises for th e m istress o f th e h ou se first and forem ost th e q u estion o f her d om in an ce over the d o m estic eco n o m y . u ncerem onial m arriages .105 M ale and fem ale in terests are m o st likely to d iverge w hen a daughter is to be m arried. th e greater th e m e n ’s au th ority in th e agnatic grou p . that th ey are left resp on sib ility on ly for unrem arkable.battal . con trib u tin g in b oth cases to the g row th o f the lin ea g e’s sy m b o lic capital. or m ore p recisely . N o t only is th e m oth er less sen sitive to th e " fam ily in te r e st” w h ich ten d s to see the d augh ter as an instrument for stren g th en in g th e in tegration o f th e agnatic g ro u p . or as a sort o f sy m b o lic m on ey a llo w in g p restigiou s alliances to be set up w ith other g ro u p s. alw ays d o m in an t officially and te n d in g alw ays to b e so in reality. the m yth ic w orld -v iew w h ich accord s her o n ly a lim ited ex iste n c e and never grants her full participation in th e sy m b o lic capital o f her ad o p tiv e lineage. H er in terest is o n ly n egatively adjusted to that o f the lin eage: in taking a d au gh ter from th e fam ily sh e herself cam e from . sh e ten d s to stren g th en her own p osition in th e d om estic u n it. T h e in terest o f th e m en .66 T h e objective lim its o f objectivism repudiation .10 4 B ein g exclu d ed from representational k in sh ip . and a con flict a m o n g th e w om en resu ltin g from a bad ch o ice w ou ld u ltim ately threaten th e u n ity o f th e agnatic g rou p . im p oses itself all the m ore fu lly th e stron ger th e integration of th e agn atic grou p and th e m ore nearly equal (at least) th e fa th er’s lineage is to th e m o th er’s in th e social hierarchy. it is n o accid en t that th e m arriages for w h ich they are resp on sib le fall in to th e class of ordinary m arriages.ev ery th in g co m b in es to id en tify the in terests o f th e m en w ith the m aterial and particularly the sy m b o lic interests o f the lin eage . A nd th e typ ically m ascu lin e m arriages . It is n o exaggeration to claim that th e g ro u p ’s w h ole m atrim onial h istory is p resen t in the internal transactions . A s for th e w o m e n . and that their strategies are m ore d irectly d esig n ed to rein force th e d o m estic u n it’s integra­ tion or th e fa m ily ’s n etw ork of alliances. are kept away from the divorce settlem ent. all th e m ore so . sh e is fo llo w in g th e path traced b y th e lin eage. and witnesses especially outsiders.being a grave in su lt).testify u n am b ig u o u sly to the fact that m en s’ in terests are more d irectly id en tified w ith th e official in terests o f th e lin eage.

they say.e . e t c .) . requires that a m an sh o u ld n ot b e placed in a su b ord in ate p o sitio n in th e fam ily bv b e in g m arried to a girl of m arkedly h igh er statu s (a m an. for purposes of alliance) . W e m u st also take into con sid eration th e state. outside the usual area. b etw een th e lin eage o f th e person to b e m arried and the lineage offerin g a p ossib le partner. in clu d in g th e b rid ew ealth and th e w ed d in g exp en ses. afld in the objectives . b u t n ot th e o p p o site. helps to d efine th e stru ctu re of relation sh ip s b etw een th e lin eages u n ited by the proposed m arriage . a great fam ily. w h ich rise in p rop ortion to the p restige o f th e m arriage. th e w h o le h istory o f th e official. b y th e d egree of in tegration of th e fam ily . a m ed iation through w h ich th e o b jectiv e relations predisposing tw o grou p s to com e tog eth er are prepared for and realized.from an in ferior). and social d istan ce b etw een th em at th e m om en t of m arriage in term s of econom ic and sy m b o lic capital (m easured b y th e n u m b er of m en and o f m en of honour.g .e .a d au gh ter . Fluctuations in the group’s sym bolic fortunes are follow ed by corresponding changes in the w hole im age of itself w hich the group aim s to present. In d eed . in m en . as m an or w om an or as m em ber o f th is or that lin eage. w hose econom ic situation was in fact ^•proving.106 In fact it w ou ld be m ore accurate to say that the determ inant relation ship . eco n o m ic. in o rd er to d e scr ib e co m p letely th e m u lti-d im en sio n a l and m u lti-fu n ction al relation ship (irred u cib le to k insh ip ties) b etw een th e tw o groups. T h u s the space of tw o generations. can raise a w om an . y o u give .w hich it sets for its marriages. i. ordinary ex ch a n g es co n tin u o u sly carried o n b y th e w o m en w ith th e co m p lic ity o f th e m en and so m etim es w ithout th eir k n ow led ge. It has m ore chance of assertin g itself if th e m an w h o has th e resp on sib ility (at least th e official responsibility) for th e m arriage has not h im self b een m arried ab ove h is sta tu s.g .M a trim on ial strategies an d social reproduction 67 0ver each in ten d ed m arriage. and also th e u nofficial. i.marriages w ithin the close kin or extraurt»nary marriages (arranged by m en. T h e lin ea g e’s in terest. land .w hereas th e other p o ssesses rather th e other form of w ealth . declined from male marriages . th e stru cture of ob jective relation s b etw een th e kin w h o m ake th e matrimonial d ecisio n . In fact. the m ale in terest. In short.to a su perior or an e q u a l.are n o ex c ep tio n s to this): " M en ally w ith their e q u a ls” .e . Whereas econom ic capital is relatively stable. a w h ole set of m ech an ism s. tend to ex clu d e alliances b etw een grou p s too u nequ ally m atched in term s of econ om ic and sy m b o lic capital (th e freq u en t cases in w h ich the fam ily o f on e sp ouse is rich in on e form o f capital . o f th e b alan ce-sh eet of their m aterial and sy m b o lic ex ch an ges.alliance or integration . th e sa y in g g o es medden ( " tsnassaben (naseb) widh m'adhalen”). sym bolic capital is relatively pre­ v i o u s : the death of a prestigious head of the fam ily is som etim es enough to dim inish severely.a d augh ter . extra-ordinary ex ch an ges su ch as m arriages b rou ght ab out or at least co n se­ crated b y the m en . yo u take . it is n ot sufficient to take in to accou n t o n ly th e spatial. is alw ays m ed iated by th e d o m estic power structure.e . at that particular tim e.

w ithin their own network of relationships. but only up to a certain point. generally set up by the w om en. the parents "present a slip p er”.68 T he objective limits o f objectivism . it is up to him to ch o o se. it w ould be the height of absurdity for a father to solicit a husband for his daughter. there m ay be the great age of the parents. T h e sym bolic profit accruing from remarrying after a divorce before the ex-spouse does so often leads both . or he will see his products d e v a l u e d because they are thought to be unsaleable. An only son is also married young* so that he can continue the lineage as quickly as possible. thus "m arking” the girl at a very early age. h is or her age. who had become blind. w hich obviously weakens the agents’ position. F or a girl the p rin cip les o f variation are th e sam e.to ordinary marriages. "is always a man. T h u s th e gro u p ’s m atrim onial strategies and the type of m arriage w hich m ay result from th em are q uite different d ep en d in g on w heth er the m an to be m arried is a b ach elor " o f th e m arrying a g e ” or has already "p assed the a g e ” . whatever his state [unlike the wom an. One of the most im portant constraints on matrimonial strategies is the urgency ot marriage. T h is change in m atrimonial policy coincided w ith the deaths of the two eldest brothers (H ocin e and L aid ). or a w id ow er or d ivorcee w antin g to rem arry (w ith th e situation ch an gin g further d ep en d in g on w heth er or not he has ch ild ren from his first m arriage). marriages tend to go tow ards the w om en’s respective lin eages. leaving vacant the position o f m istress of the house. or is of lower social status. or w h eth er he is an already m arried m an looking for a co-w ife. the wom an who imposes order and silence ( ta'a n thamgarth. T h e girl being the one traditionally "asked fo r ” and " g iv e n ” in marriage. etc. or sim ply because they are past their prime.” H aving the strategic initiative. se x . runs the saying. <d]. Because it is not clear w ho is to succeed thamgarth. even if h e has to pay the price of his delay by marrying a woman w ho has already been m arried. w ho hope to see their son married and to have a daughter-in-law to look after them . T h is is only one aspect of the dyssvm m etry betw een the situation of the man and the woman before marriage: " T h e m an ”. da susm i"obedience to the old wom an is silen ce’ ) the structure of relations betw een the wives reflects the structure of relations between the husbands. in such c ir c u it stances. and som etim es even have the fatxha recited). or the fear of seeing a girl they had counted on g ettin g being given to som eone else (to avoid this happening. the long absence of the oldest men (w ho had gone to France).107 T h e structural ch aracteristics gen ericallv d efin in g the value of a lineage’s prod ucts on th e m atrim onial m arket are ob v io u sly sp ecified by secondary ch aracteristics su ch as the m atrim onial statu s of th e person to be married. A m ong the reasons for hurrying the marriage. intermittently. w ho can disqualify herself. A thm an. A nother difference is that "the man can wait for the woman [to be of age] but the woman cannot wait for the m a n ”: the father with daughters to marrv can play with tim e so as to prolong the conjunctural advantage he derives from his position as the receiver of offers. he can afford to wait: r he is sure to find a w ife. and cast herself into shame. or has some disability. with real power passing into the hands of Boudjemaa and. w ith the d ifferen ce that the depreciation en tailed by p reviou s m arriages is infinitely greater (becau se of the price p u t on virginity and in sp ite of the fact that a reputation as a " m an w h o repu d iates ” is just as dam agin g as that o f a " woman to be r e p u d ia te d ”). and the weakening of the authority o f thamgarth.

to increase its alliances w ith . and a w idow .A n interesting option arises: she may either be taken to w ife by som eone in her h u s b a n d ’s fam ily (the official practice. particularly recom m ended if she has sons) or be found a new husband by her father’s fam ily (w hich happens more often w hen she is childless) or by her husband's fam ily. or in som e cases the grandchildren o f the sam e grandfather) d ep en d s on the m arrying of all the others and th u s varies as a fu n ction o f each c h ild ’s position (defin ed m ainly by sib lin g order. that is.for the sake of another woman ” is the saying applied to a w id o w w ho. But there is great avssymmetry on this point too: a man. whereas a mother 0f 50ns is praised for her sacrifice. although there is no official recogn ition o f an y p rivilege for the eldest (o f the boys. a fam ily rich ln m en has considerable room for m a n o e u v r e : it can ch o o se to in vest each ° f its son s differently accord in g to circu m stan ces.M a tiim o n ia l strategies an d social reproduction 69 seS to arrange hasty marriages (such marriages are unlikely to remain stable. But her situation varies further depending on whether she h a s "left” her children with her deceased husband’s fam ily or gone back to her own family with her children (in which case she is less free and hence harder to marry o f f ) . divorced or w idow ed. for a m an th e situ ation is m ore favourable the closer his kin relation ship to the statutory holder o f authority over the m arriage (w h ich m ay range from so n -fa th e r to you nger b ro th e relder brother. H is p o sitio n is. everyth in g con sp ires to favou r him to th e d etrim en t o f his younger brothers. only having daughters. the children o f the sam e father. how ever. o f co u rse). It is difficult to establish the universe of v a r ia b le s (doubtless including local traditions) determ ining the " ch o ice” of one or the other of these strategies. especially if it is a boy ("a woman c a n n o t remain . ver)r different d ep en d in g on w h eth er he is the eld est o f several so n s. even a very young on e. for work on the land rather than the h o u se’s external p o litics. itself characterized b y their n um ber and se x . to marry him first and as w ell as p ossib le. But it m u st also be borne in m ind . In con trast. that th e m arrying of each o f the ch ildren of the sam e fam ily u n it ( i. and relationship to th e head o f the fa m ily ). o u tsid e rather than inside th e lin eage.a w idow . w ith in the particular configuration of the w hole set of ch ild ren to be m arried. which is all the more meritorious if she is young a n d thus liable to have to live as an outsider am ong her husband’s sisters and her h u s b a n d ’s brothers’ w ives). T h u s . sex .108 T h e fam ily w ith m any d au gh ters. is expected to remarry.e . especially if th ey are poorly Protected ” (by son s) and hence little valu ed b ecau se vu lnerab le and prom islr*g few allies. or the bearer of all h is fa m ily ’s h opes as an on ly so n or on e follow ed b y several daughters . is excluded from the m atrimonial market by her status as a pother expected to bring up her husband’s ch ild . is encouraged to remarry. which plains why som e men seem " con d em n ed ” to marry many tim es). or even the relation ship b etw e en distant co u sin s). the yo u n g er b rothers b ein g d estin ed for Production rather than th e exchanges o f th e m arket or assem b ly. 'hereas a divorced wom an is devalued by the failure of her marriage. is in an u nfavourable p o sitio n and finds itself forced to incur debts tow ards the fam ilies w h ich receive its w o m en . M oreover. contrary to the tradition w h ich treats each marriage as an isolated u n it.

b oth rein fo rcin g in teg ra tio n an d expanding a llia n ces.111 T h is takes us a lo n g w ay from th e p ure . to p u t it an oth er w ay.e .110 M atrim on ial strate­ g ie s. th e im p o rta n t th in g is th a t the a g e n ts’ p ractice b e c o m e s in te llig ib le as so o n as o n e can co n stru ct th e systerfl of th e p rin cip les and o f th e law s of co m b in a tio n of th o se p rin cip les (or.realm o f the " ru les of m a rria g e” and th e " elem en ta ry stru ctu res of k in s h ip ’ • H a v in g d efin ed th e sy ste m o f p rin cip les from w h ich th e a g en ts are a b le to p ro d u c e regu lated and regular m atrim on ial p ractices and to understand p ractically th e m atrim on ial p ractices of oth er a g en ts. It fo llo w s th a t every m arriage tends to rep rod u ce th e co n d itio n s w h ic h have m ad e it p o ssib le . th e sy stem of variab les and op erators) w h ich th e y put in to p ractice w h en th e y id en tify im m ed ia tely th e in d iv id u a ls so cio -lo g ica lly . i. w h ic h itself d e p e n d s first on th e size and in tegration o f th e agnatic g ro u p (m arked b y the jo in t p rod u ction and co n su m p tio n o f m aterial g o o d s) an d se co n d ly on its cap ital o f allian ces. to stre n g th e n its in tegration w ith an oth er. w e co u ld u se statistical a n alysis o f th e relevant in form ation to estab lish th e w eig h t o f th e corresp ond ' in g stru ctural or in d ivid u al variables. d efin ed as th e su m total of th e stra teg ies th rou gh w h ic h in d iv id u a ls or g ro u p s o b jectiv ely ten d to repro­ d u c e th e relation s of p ro d u c tio n associated w ith a d eterm in a te m o d e of p ro d u c tio n b y striv in g to rep rod u ce or im p ro v e their p o sitio n in th e social str u c tu r e . th in g takes place as if. and h is sk ill has to b e lim ited to th e manip. It w ill d o u b tle ss h ave b eco m e clear h o w artificial it is to distinguish b e tw e e n th e en d s and th e m ean s of c o llec tiv e m atrim on ial stra teg ies.b eca u se in fin itely i m p o v e r i s h e d . In fact. b o th th e se form s o f sy m b o lic capital o b v io u sly depending on th e w h o le m atrim on ial h isto ry . o b je ctiv ely o rien ted tow ard s th e rein fo rcin g or in crea sin g o f in tegration w ith in th e lim its o f th e m a in ten a n ce of allian ces (or th e reverse) th e se strategies d ep en d e d for th eir lo g ic and th eir efficacy o n the m aterial and sy m b o lic cap ital o f th e social u n it in q u e stio n . th e stra teg ist’s sk ill can h ave free rein and can effortlessly re co n cile th e irrecon cilab le. T h e m an w h o o n ly has d a u gh ters.70 T h e objective lim its o f objectivism ■ o n e o f th e m . o b jectiv ely d irected tow ard s the con serv a tio n or ex p a n sio n of th e material and sy m b o lic capital jo in tly p o ssessed b y a m ore or less ex te n d ed group. Ever}'. or has to o m a n y o f them . u lation o f th e rela tio n sh ip b etw e en th e field o f p oten tial p artners and th e field o f p o ten tia l co m p etito rs. p la y in g off th e " n e a r ” against th e " d ista n t” . js restricted to n egative strategies. b e lo n g to th e sy stem o f rep rod u ction stra teg ies. n o t o n ly on th e v a lu e o f its m aterial h eritage b u t also on its sy m b o lic h erita g e. the req u est o f a clo se k in sm an again st that o f a stranger (in o rd er to refuse w ith o u t o ffen ce or m ake h im w ait) in su ch a w ay as to reserve th e pow er to op t for th e m o st p restigiou s alternative. to p u t a co u sin ^ o n ly has d au g h ters u n d er an o b ligation b y tak in g o n e of h is g irls for a third ^ In th is case.

m arriage in to tribe for ex a m p le. th e few w o m en oractical k in sh ip w h o are in so m e se n se prom ised to h im an d th o se w h o m u |cj at a stretch b e p erm itted to m arry . is felt as a ch a lle n g e to th e fa m ily co n cern ed .and d o s o in su ch a clear and I wav that any d ev ia tio n from th e m o st lik ely c o u rse. n t0 a particular m a n . w h e n . . th ey d esig n a te. for ex a m p le.M a trim o n ia l strategies a n d social reproduction 7 i inatc * f n wlt ^ hable in a g iven state of th e m atrim on ial m ark et. and anotnei also to the w h ole grou p . or m o r e p rec ise ly .

th e fact is that. or. as the strategy-gen eratin g p rin cip le en ab lin g agen ts to cop e w ith unforeseen and ev er-ch an gin g situ ation s. o f in corporation an d ob jectification . E ven w h e n th ey appear as the realization of the ex p lic it. as p rin cip les o f the generation an d stru ctu rin g o f practices and represen tation s w h ich can be ob jectively " re g u la ted ” &nd " regu lar” w ith ou t in any w ay b ein g th e product o f o b ed ien ce to ru les. [ 72 1 . they are determined b y the past co n d itio n s w h ich have p rod uced the p rin cip le of th eir prod uction . alw ays ten d in g to reproduce th e ob jective structures of w h ich th ey are th e p ro d u ct. th e theory of the m od e of gen eration of practices.2 S tru c tu re s and the h ab itu s M eth od ological o b jectivism . the m aterial co n d itio n s of existen ce characteristic of a class co n d itio n ) produce habitus. A false dilem m a: mechanism an d finalism T h e stru ctu res con stitu tiv e o f a particular typ e o f en v iro n m en t (e. If th ey se e m d eterm in ed b y an ticip ation of their o w n co n seq u en ces. p u rp oses of a project or p lan. transposable dispositions/ stru ctured structures p red isp osed to fu n ctio n as stru cturin g stru ctu res. from statistical regularity or algebraic structure to the p rin cip le o f the produc­ tion of th is ob served order. are on ly apparently d eterm in ed b y th e future. an d explicitly stated. In ord er to escap e the realism o f the structure. that is. more p recisely. and to con stru ct the theory of p ractice. th e p ractices p ro d u ced b y the habitus. d em and s its ow n su p ersession . co llectiv ely orchestrated w ith o u t being the product of th e orchestratin g action o f a con d u ctor. it is necessary to pass from th e opus operatum to the modus operandi. thereby en cou raging the finalist illu sio n . w hich is the p recon d ition for estab lish in g an exp erim en tal scien ce o f the dialectic o f the internalization o f extern ality and the extem a liza tio n o f \n tem a lity. w h ich h ypostatizes system s of ob jective relations b y converting them in to totalities already con stitu ted ou tsid e o f in d iv id u a l h istory and group h istory. a necessary m om en t in all research. ob jectively adapted to th eir g o a ls w ith o u t presupposing a co n scio u s aim in g at en d s or an exp ress m astery of th e op eration s necessary to attain th e m and. or.g . b ein g all th is. sy stem s o f d urable. by the break w ith prim ary exp erien ce and th e con stru ction of ob jective relations w hich it accom p lish es. more sim p ly.

o n the in stant. have to p ostu late in in finite n um ber. like th e chance con figu ration s o f stim uli capable o f triggerin g th em from o u tsid e.A fa lse dilem m a: mechanism an d finalism 73 is by th e actual ou tcom e o f id en tical or in terchan geab le past p ractices. But th e teleological d escrip tion accord in g to which each action has the purpose o f m aking p ossib le th e reaction to the reaction it arou ses (ind ivid ual A p erform in g action ai. the reaction to b i).w h ich w ould p resup pose at least that th ey are p erceived as one strategy am ong other p ossib le stra teg ies . a step p ed -u p g ift or ch allenge) is q u ite as naive as th e m ech an istic d escrip tion w hich p resen ts the action and the riposte as m o m en ts in a se q u en ce o f program m ed actio n s prod uced by a mechanical apparatus. th e m ean in g o f the situ a tio n by p rojectin g the en d s aiming at its tran sform ation . T h u s. d irectly d eterm in ed by the a n tecedent conditions and en tirely redu cible to th e m echan ical fu n ctio n in g of preestablished a ssem b lies. in order to m ake in dividu al B p rod uce action b it a co u n ter-g ift or riposte. a g ift or ch allen ge. th ereb y c o n d em n in g o n eself to the grandiose an d d esperate und ertak ing of th e an th rop olo g ist. everyth in g takes p lace as if the a ctio n s of each of them (say ai f ° r w ere organ ized in relation to the reaction s th ey call forth from any agent p o ssessin g the sam e h abitus (say. T h is is clearly seen in the passages in Being and . T h u s. Sartre makes each action a sort of unprecedented confrontation etween the subject and the w orld. by reference to the anticipated ’ cues as to the reaction to practices. B ’s reaction to ai) so that they objectively im p ly an ticip ation of th e reaction w h ich th e se reactions in turn call forth (say a2. refusing to recognize anything resem bling urable dispositions. b i. " m o d e ls” or " r o l e s w h i c h o n e w o u ld . in the interaction b etw een tw o agen ts or grou p s of agents en d o w ed w ith the sam e habitus (say A and B ). T h e h abitus is the sou rce of th ese series o f m o v es w hich are objectively organized as strategies w ith ou t b ein g th e p rod uct of a g en u in e strategic in ten tio n . and that w e sh ou ld redu ce the objective intentions an d con stitu ted sign ification s o f action s an d w orks to the co n scio u s and deliberate in ten tion s o f their authors. arm ed w ith fine positivist cou rage.g . so as to be able to p erform action a2. e . usually im plicitly. by all those who describe Practices as strategies explicitly oriented by reference to purposes explicitly defined > a free project4 or even.2 It is necessary to ab and on all theories w h ich ex p lic itly or im p licitly treat practice as a m echanical reaction .3 B ut rejection o f m echan istic theories in n o w ay im p lies that. Jean-Paul Sartre deserves credit for having given an ultra-consistent form ulation 0 ^ e philosophy of action accepted. hich coin cid es w ith their ow n ou tco m e to th e exten t ( and on ly to the extent) that the ob jective stru ctu res of w h ich th ey are the p rod uct are p rolon ged in the structures w ith in w h ich th ey fu n ctio n . we sh ould b esto w on som e creative free w ill th e free and w ilfu l p o w er to constitute. with som e interactionists. in accordance w ith an oth er ob ligatory op tio n . m oreover. for exam p le. w h o recorded 480 elem en tary u n its of b eh aviour in tw en ty m inutes' ob servation of his w ife in th e k itch en .

a sort o f " conversion ” of consciousness produced by a sort of imaginary variation . for the for-itself can be only if it has chosen itself. totalizer-less productions. against all likelihood. ” 8 N o doubt one could counterpose to this analysis of Sartrian anthropology the num erous texts (found especially in the earliest and the latest works) in which Sartre recognizes. This is because revolutionaries are serious. it is not by chance that it is found at all tim es and places as the favourite doctrine of the revolutionary. entirely dependent on the decrees of the consciousness w hich creates it and hence totally devoid of objectivity. T h ey com e to know them selves first in terms of the world which oppresses t h e m . he is in bad fa ith .”* T h e same incapacity to encounter "seriousness” other than in the disapproved form of the "spirit o f seriou sn ess” can be seen in an analysis of em otion w hich. revolting because he chooses to be revolted. conscious of no restraint. . the for-itself m ust as a free project of itself give to itself rational or magical existence. .10 T h e fact remains that Sartre rejects with visceral repugnance "those gelatinous realities.T h e serious man is 'o f the w o rld ’ and has no resource in him self. He does not even im agine any longer the possibility of getting o u to i the w o rld . It is responsible for either one. or rather reconstruct. T herefore it is necessary that the for-itself in its project m ust choose being the one by w hom the world is revealed as magical or rational. M y fear is free and m anifests my freedom . if it is m oving because the subject chooses to be moved. It is on the day that we are able to conceive of another state of affairs. . counter-finalities.or th is in order to be manifested waits to be discovered. that a new light is cast on our trouble and our suffering and we decide that they are unbearable. infernal circularities”. as m uch on the side of the things of the world as on the side of the agents. in the rough. com plex but clear-cut field o f passive activity in w hich there are individual organisms and inorganic material realities”. then em otions. > Such a theory of action rT was inevitably to lead to the desperate project of a transcendental genesis of society and history (the Critique de la raison dialectique) to which D urkheim seem ed to be pointing w hen he w rote in The Rules o f Sociological Method: " It is because the imaginary offers the mind no resistance that the m ind. and that he leaves no room for everything that. sad farces in which one is both bad actor and good audience: " It is not by chance that materialism is serious.7 4 Structures an d the habitus Nothingness where he confers on the awakening of revolutionary consciousness . T herefore the for-itself appears as the free foundation of its emotions as of its volitions. m ore or less vaguely haunted by a supra-individual consciousness. and actions are merely gam es of bad faith.. the “ passive syntheses* of a universe of already constituted significations or expressly challenges the very principles of his philosophy.the power to create the m eaning o f the present by creating the revolutionary future which negates it: "For it is necessary to reverse the com m on opinion and acknow ledge that it is not the harshness of a situation or the sufferings it im poses that lead people to conceive of another state of affairs in w hich things would be better for everybody. gives itself up to boundless am bitions and believes it possible to construct. which a sham efaced organicism still seeks to retrieve. m ight seem to blur the sharp line his rigorous dualism seeks to maintain betw een the pure transparency of the subject and the . such as the passage in Being and Nothingness in which he seeks to distinguish his position from the instantaneiste philosophy of D escartes9 or a sentence from the Critique de la raison dialectique in w hich he announces the study of "agentless actions. for exam ple. that is.”5 If the world of action is nothing other than this universe of interchangeable possibles. the world by virtue of its own strength and at the w him of its desires. passions. significantly. is separated by L ’imaginaire ( Psychology of the Imagination) from the less radically subjectivist descriptions in Sketch f o r a Theory o f the Emotions: "W hat will make me decide to choose the magical aspect or the technical aspect of the world ? It cannot be the world itself. .

T h e only lim it this artificialism recognizes to the freedom of the ego is that which freedom sets itself by the free abdication of a pledge or the surrender of bad faith. At the end o f his im m ense imaginary novel of the eath and resurrection of freedom . But it is not H istory w hich causes there to be human relationships in general. m anoeuvres. as the early Sartre used to put i t : " In the course of this action. is a positive challenge to som eone who can only live in the mire transparent universe of consciousness or individual ” praxis”. affirmation o f the " logical ” primacy of "individual praxis”. "objective ” sociology can grasp only X ? s o c ia lit y of inertia”. bluffs.T h e other form of class. .. .”17 Just as for D escartes creation is con tin u ou s”. e tc . " co n g ea led ” in its being. he recognizes the law which others im pose on him in overcom ing their own (recognizes it: this does not mean that he subm its to it). the hypostasis of the subiect’ t^L indefinite task of tearing the social w hole. inasm uch as he produces it. inasm uch as others produce it. W ithin this logic. as Durkheim puts it . t is not the problem s of organization and division of labour that have caused relations to be set up betw een those initially separate objects. the Sartrian name for alienation. or of the "m aterialization of recurrence” in cultural objects. the "externalization . class as a thing. that is to say. o f number (hence the importance accorded to the " series”).A false dilem m a: mechanism an d finalism 75 • ral opacity of the thing. the class reduced to inertia. and as absolute necessity inasmuch as it escapes h im . or the subm ission im posed on it by the alienating freedom of the alter ego in the Hegelian struggles betw een master and slave. . C lass-being as practico-inert being com es to men by m en through the passive syntheses of worked upon m atter.and by his freedom he makes him self what he was.15 alienation consists in the free abdication of freedom in favour of the demands of "worked upon m atter” : "the 19th century worker makes himself w hat he is. the site of these com prom ises betw een thing and meaning which define "objective m ean in g” as m eaning-m ade-thing and dispositions as meaning-made-body. hence to tence. in the last analysis. that is. such as the Party. is born at the heart of the passive form and as Its negation.1 recurrence.. for exam ple. out of e e inertia of the " practico-inert ”. the individual discovers the dialectic as rational transparency.e .s o the typically Cartesian refusal of the viscous opacity of "objective potentialities” and objective m eaning leads Sartre to entrust to the absolute initiative c mdividual or collective "historical a g en ts”. i. finally.reduced to "the reciprocity of constraints and autonom ies ” . in other w ords. leads Sartre to pose the problem of the genesis of society in the same terms as those employed by the theoreticians of the social contract: "H istory determ ines the content ° f human relationships in its totality and these relationships. quite sim ply.”1 T h e transcendence of the social can only be the effect of . constituted Reason.”16 Elsewhere. precisely insofar as he recognizes him self in overcom ing his needs.) as a foreign power and the autonom y of others as the inexorable law which allows him to coerce th em . m en .”12 T h e social w orld. an essence. he practically and rationally determ ines the order o f his expenditure hence he decides in his free praxis . with its tw ofold m ovem ent. being who defines him self as a hum anized t h i n g . as Jean Wahl puts it. over history. what he m ust be: a m achine w hose wages represent no more than its running c o s t s . or the class.13 without a second thought he subordinates the transcendence of the social . S eeing "in social arrangments onlv artificial and more or less arbitrary com b in ation s”.relate back to every­ thing. constituent R eason.God being ^vested w ith the ever-renewed task of recreating the world ex nihilo by a free decree 0 his w i l l . he recognizes his ow n autonom y (inasmuch as it can be used by another and daily is. what he is. "because tim e is n o t” and because extended substance does not contain w ithin itself the power to subsist . that is. in its "having 1 ' »> « Class seriality makes the individual (w hoever he is and whatever the class) . that * the group totalizing in a praxis.to the " transcendence of the ego ”. .

never ruled ou t that the resp onses o f the h abitus m ay be accom pan ied b y a strategic calculation ten d in g to carry on quasi-consciously th e operation th e habitus carries on in a q u ite d ifferen t w ay. by the abrupt shortcuts of the awakening of consciousness and the " fusion of consciousnesses ”. it w o u ld b e necessary to estab lish in each case a com plete d escrip tion (w h ich invocation o f rules allow s one to d isp en se w ith ) of the relation b etw een th e h abitus. seen as a series of acts of com m itm ent indispen­ sable for saving the group from annihilation in pure m ateriality.19 S ym b o lic .liberet si liceret . T o elim in a te the n eed to resort to ‘'r u le s” . the juridical or custom ary rule is never m ore than a secondary p rin ciple o f the d eterm in ation of p ractices. "from praxis to the practicoin ert”. as W eber in d ica ted . th in g s to d o or not to d o . nam ely an estim ation o f ch an ces w h ich assu m es the transform ation o f the past effect into the exp ected o b jectiv e.76 Structures an d the habitus of internality”. w hich leads from freedom to alienation. from consciousness to the materialization of consciousness. fa ils . in terest. im m ed ia tely inscribed in the presen t.e. the w orld o f practicality. betw een the inertia of the group reduced to its " essen ce”. in relation to a forthcom ing reality w hich . consciousness and thing are as irremediably separate as they were at the outset. between materiality and praxis. T h e w orld of u rgen cies and of goals already ach ieved . w h ich act on ly on co n d itio n th ey en cou n ter agen ts co n d itio n ed to perceive th em . in terv en in g w hen the prim ary p rin cip le. conventional and conditional . in H u sse rl’s phrase. tend to im pose th e m se lv e s u n con d ition ally and n ecessarily w h en in cu lcation of the arbitrary ab olish es the arbitrariness of b oth the in cu lca tio n and th e sign ifica­ tio n s in cu lcated .rather like that of the m agnetic n eed le w h ich L eib n iz im agined . and the “ internalization of externality” w hich.stim u la tio n s. projected by the pure project o f a " n egative fr e e d o m ” . o f cou rse. It w ould th en b ecom e clear that. as a socially con stitu ted sy stem of co g n itiv e and m otivatin g stru ctu res. and th e socially stru ctured situ a tio n in w h ich the a g en ts’ interests are d efin ed . T h e appearances of a dialectical discourse (or the dialectical appearances of the discourse) cannot mask the endless oscillation betw een the in-itself and the for-itself. of u ses to b e m ade and path s to be taken. But the fact rem ains that these resp on ses are defined first in relation to a system o f ob jective p oten tialities.p u ts itself forw ard w ith an u rg en cy and a claim to existen ce exclu d in g all d elib eration . tools. o f ob jects en d o w e d w ith a "permanent teleological ch a ra cter”. in stru m en ts and institu* tion s. as the title puts it.in contrast to th e future co n ceiv ed as " absolute p o ssib ility ” ( absolute M oglich keit). i. or. from th e reified state of the alienated group to the authentic existence of the historical agent. in H e g e l’s sen se. and w ith th em the o b jectiv e fu n ctio n s and su bjective m otivation s o f their p ractices. leads "from the group to h istory”. can grant on ly a co n d itio n a l freedom . to say or not to say. to its outlived past and its necessity (abandoned to sociologists) and the continuous creation of the free collective project.18 It is.that is. w ithout anything resem bling an institution or a socially constituted agent ever having been observed or constructed. or in the new language.

to refuse wr hat is an yw ay refu sed and to love th e in evitab le.” And Marx in the Economic and Philosophical M anuscripts: " If I have n o m oney for travel. If one regularly o b serves a very close rrelation betw een the scien tifically co n stru cted objective probabilities (e . as unthinkable. the m ost im probable practices are ex clu d ed . b etw een the a posteriori or ex post probability know n from past exp erien ce and the a p rio ri ox ex ante probability attributed to it. am ou n ted to anthropological descriptions of practice. w'e can. to travel. seek in th e scien tific theory of p rob abilities (or strategies) not an an th rop olo­ gical m odel of practice. no real. I have no need. true v o ca tio n .g . necessity m ade into a virtu e.20 "We are n o soon er acquainted w ith the im p o ssib ility o f sa tisfy in g any d esire ”. b u t n o m on ey for it.” Because th e d isp o sitio n s durably in cu lcated b y ob jective co n d itio n s (w h ich science ap preh en ds through statistical regularities as the p rob abilities ob jec­ tively attached to a grou p or class) en gen d er asp iration s and practices ob jec­ tively com p atib le w ith th ose ob jective req u irem en ts. com m o n p la ces. forgettin g th e "every th in g takes place as if”. d eterm in es" rea so n a b le ” and ''u n reason ab le” con d u ct for every agen t su b jected to th o se regu larities .e . " th an the d esire itself v a n ish e s. in other term s. the u n co n scio u s principles of the ethos w h ich . If I have a vocation to stu d y . says H u m e in A T reatise o f H um an N a tu re. as one im plicitly p resup poses w h en ever. at a d eep er lev el. I have no vocation to study. eith er totally w ith o u t exam in a tio n . i. no real and self-realizin g n eed .e . the chances of access to a particular g o o d ) and subjective aspirations (" m o tiv a ­ tions” or " n e e d s”) or.g . T h e very co n d ition s of p rod uction o f the e th o s. b ein g the p rod u ct of a learn ing p rocess d o m i­ nated by a d eterm inate typ e of ob jective regularities. the p rosp en sity to p rivilege early exp erien ces) w h ich th e scien tific theory necessarily con tain s becau se it is explicitly con stru cted against that log ic. U n lik e th e estim a tio n o f p rob abili­ ties w hich scien ce con stru cts m eth od ically on th e basis of con trolled ex p eri­ ments from data estab lish ed according to precise rules. but the elem en ts o f a negative description o f the im p licit logic of th e spontaneous interpretation o f statistics (e . each constructed against sp on tan eou s d isp o sitio n s. like a player regulating his bets as a function of perfect inform ation as to h is ch an ces o f w in n in g. practical evaluation of the lik elihood o f the su ccess o f a given action in a g iv en situ ation brings into play a w'hole b ody of w isd om . this is not becau se agen ts co n sc io u sly adjust their aspirations t0 an exact evaluation o f their ch an ces o f su c c e ss. sayin g s. one proceeds as if gam e theory or the calcu lation of p rob abilities. or at the co st o f the double negation w hich in clin e s agen ts to m ake a virtu e of necessity. ethical p recepts ("that’s not for th e likes of u s ”) and. on th e contrary. C om pletely reversin g the ten d en cy of ob jectiv ism . ^ e su ch that the ex p ectation s to w hich it g ives rise ten d to ignore the .A false dilem m a: mechanism an d finalism 77 tid ily en joyed tu rn in g northw ards. i. that is.

in and th rou gh th e p rod u ction o f practice. short o f a radical transform ation. or from th e con d itions w h ich p rod u ced the durable p rin cip le of their p ro d u ctio n . habitus an d practices T h e habitus. it is th e habitus. d om estic m orality. p rod uce the stru ctu res of the h abitus w h ich b ecom e in turn th e basis of p erception and ap preciation of all su b seq u en t ex p erien ce. T h e " u n c o n s c io u s ” is never an yth ing other than the forgettin g of h istory w h ich h isto ry itself p rod uces by . b y co n d itio n s of existence w h ich . T h is is w h y g en eration con flicts oppose not age-classes separated by natural p rop erties. represents a particular sta te o f th is structure. or m ore p recisely . that is. d en ied as such. th e durably installed gen erative p rin cip le o f regulated im provi­ sation s. that is. through the eco n o m ic and social n ecessity w h ich th ey b rin g to bear on th e relatively a u to n om ou s u n iverse o f fam ily relation ship s. n am ely that the co n d ition s o f th e ex p erim en ts sh o u ld not have b een m od ified . cares. ta stes. U n lik e scien tific estim ation s. in im p o sin g different d efin ition s of th e im p o ssib le. i. Structures. as a result o f th e hysteresis effect necessarily im plied in the logic o f th e co n stitu tio n of habitus. w h ile ad justing to the d em and s inscribed as ob jectiv e p oten tialities in the situ ation . and vice versa. p rod u ces practices w h ich ten d to reproduce th e regularities im m anent in the ob jective co n d ition s of the p rod u ction o f their gen era tiv e principle. It fo llo w s that these practices can n ot b e d irectly d ed u ced either from the ob jective con d itio n s. to th e conjuncture w hich. and the probable.). defined as the in stan tan eou s su m o f th e stim uli w h ich m ay appear to have d irectly triggered th em . cau se on e grou p to exp erien ce as natural or reasonable practices or aspirations w h ich another grou p finds unthin k able or scand alous. T h e se practices can b e accou n ted for on ly b y relatin g the ob jective structure d efin in g the social co n d ition s of th e p rod u ction of the h abitus w h ich en g en d ered th e m to the co n d ition s in w h ich th is h ab itu s is op eratin g. h istory turned into n atu re. through the m ediation of th e specifically fam ilial m an ifestation s of th is external necessity (sexual d iv isio n of labour. w hich acco m p lish es practically th e relating o f th ese tw o sy stem s o f relations. the p o ssib le. In practice. etc. p ractices are alw ays liable to incur n egative san ction s w h en the en viron m en t w ith w h ich th e y are actually con fron ted is to o distant from that to w hich they are ob jectively fitted .e . practical esti­ m ates g iv e d isp rop ortion ate w eigh t to early e x p e r ie n c e s: th e stru ctu res charac­ teristic of a d eterm in ate ty p e of co n d ition s o f ex iste n c e.78 Structures and the habitus restriction to w h ich the valid ity of any calcu lu s o f p ro b a b ilities is sub­ ordinated. T h u s . strife. as d efined b y the cogn itive and m otivatin g stru ctu res m aking up the h ab itu s. but h ab itu s w h ich have been p roduced by d ifferen t modes o f generation. w h ich are corrected after each exp erim en t in accordance w ith rigorous rules o f ca lcu lation .

strictly sp eak ing. • • in each o f u s. and im p ress as m uch b y their retrospective n ecessity as b y their n ov elty . it IS yesterd ay’s m an w h o in evitab ly p red om in ates in u s. the reason is that the trouvaille appears as the sim p le u nearthin g. b ein g recent. the v irtu oso finds in the opus operatum n ew triggers and new su p p orts for the modus operandi from w h ich th ey arise. graspin g the p rod uct of h istory as an opus operatum . a fa it accom pli. w h eth er it be the internal coherence o f w orks or in stitu tion s su ch as m yth s. w ith w h ich he m aintains a relation of "carry and b e ca r ried ”.Structures . T h e sch em es o f th o u g h t and expression he has acquired are the basis for th e intentionless invention of regulated im p rovisation . w ittin g ly or u n w ittin gly. w e are very m uch aware of th e m ost recent attain m en ts of civilization . is a p roducer and repro­ ducer of ob jective m ean in g. Y et w e d o n ot sen se this m an of the p ast. w ith ou t eith er ex p licit reason or sig n ify in g in ten t. so that h is d iscou rse co n tin u o u sly feeds off itse lf like a train b rin gin g alon g its ow n ra ils . th ey contain an " ob jective in ten tion ”. w illy n illy . know w hat they are d o in g that w hat th ey d o has m ore m ean in g than th ey know . can on ly invoke the m ysteries of p re-esta b lish ed harm ony or the prodigies of co n scio u s orchestration to acco u n t for w h at. he m akes u p th e u n c o n scio u s part 0f ourselves. as th e S ch o la stics put it. as N ico la i H artm ann put it. E n d lessly overtaken by h is o w n w ord s. T h a t part o f practices w h ich rem ains °bscure in th e ey es of their ow n producers is th e aspect b y w h ich th ey are objectively adjusted to other p ractices and to th e stru ctures o f w h ich the Principle o f their p rod u ction is itself th e p rod u ct . It is b ecau se su bjects d o not. corporating th e ob jective stru ctures it p rod u ces in the seco n d natures of habitus: " . there is part of y esterd a y ’s man. T h e habitus is th e u n iversalizin g m ediation w h ich cau ses an in dividu al a g en t’s practices. b ecau se. apprehended in pure sy n ch ron y. w h ich always o u tru n s his co n scio u s in ten tio n s. appears as ob jective m ean in g. Each agen t.23 .”21 G enesis am nesia is also en cou raged (if n ot en tailed ) b y th e ob jectivist apprehension w h ich . Because h is action s and w orks are the p rod uct of a modus operandi of w h ich he is not th e p rod ucer an d has n o co n scio u s mastery. or the objective co-ordin ation w h ich th e con cordan t or co n flictin g p ractices of the m em bers o f the sam e grou p or class at on ce m anifest and p resup pose (inasmuch as they im p ly a com m u n ity o f d isp o sitio n s). rites. C on versely . sin ce the resent a m ou n ts to little com pared w ith th e lo n g past in the course o f w hich we were form ed and from w hich w e resu lt. C on seq u en tly w e are led to take no accou n t of h im . or b o d ies of law . they have n ot yet had tim e to settle in to our u n c o n sc io u s .22 If w itticism s surprise their author no less than their au d ien ce. to be none the less " s e n s ib le ” and " r ea so n a b le”. in varying prop ortions. habitus an d practices jg . any m ore than w e take accou n t o f his legitim ate d em an d s. b ecause he is inveterate in u s. of a buried p o ssib ility . at o n ce accid en tal and irresistib le.

o f th e personal sin gu larities of an " in te n tio n ” w h ich is not their true origin." Im agine ”. in dividu al or co llectiv e (in festivals. ex p lic it c o -o r d in a tio n . th e third is to con stru ct th ese clock s w ith su ch art and p recision that on e can b e assured o f their su b se q u en t a g reem en t .”25 S o lon g as.26 If th e p ractices o f the m em b ers o f th e sam e grou p or class .e . on e is con d em ned to th e naive artificialism w h ich recogn izes no other p rin cip le u n ify in g a group s or class’s ordinary or extraordinary action than th e co n scio u s co-ordination of a co n sp ira c y . unnecessary'and u ncertain . and th is even in th e ab sen ce o f any sp on tan eou s or extern ally im p osed organ ization of in dividual projects. for exa m p le). o f lin gu istic and cultural co m p eten ce s). as th e early D iith e y p u ts it) o f lived ex p erien ces and the reco n stitu tio n . and sy stem a ticity to the p ractices of a grou p or class. on e ignores th e tru e p rin cip le o f th e conductorless orchestration w h ich g iv e s regularity. T h is m ay occur in o n e of three w ays. T h is practical com p reh en sion ob viates th e " in te n tio n ” and "intentional transfer in to th e O th e r ” dear to th e p h en om en o lo g ists. a fortiori. A u tom atic and im person al. ordinary practices lend th em selv es to an u n d ersta n d in g no less au tom atic and im p e rso n a l: th e p ick in g u p of th e ob jective in ten tio n th e y exp ress in no way im plies " r ea ctiv a tio n ” of th e " liv e d ” in ten tion of th e agent w h o performs th e m . of sim ilar or id en tical ex p erien ces.cau ses practices and works to b e im m ed iately in telligib le and foreseeable. T h e h o m o g e n e ity o f h ab itu s is w hat w ith in th e lim its of th e grou p of agen ts p ossessin g th e sch em es (o f production and in terp retation ) im p lied in their p rod uction .24 " C om m u n ica tio n of c o n sc io u sn e sse s” p resu p p o ses co m m u n ity of " u n c o n sc io u se s” (i. T h e ob jective h o m o g en izin g of group or class h abitus w h ich resu lts from th e h o m o g en eity of th e co n d itio n s o f existen ce is w hat en ab les practices to be o b jectively h arm onized w ith o u t any in ten tion al calcu lation or conscious reference to a norm and m utually adjusted in the absence o f a n y d irect interaction or. b y d isp en sin g . u n ity . " tw o clocks or w atches in p erfect agreem en t as to the tim e. significant w ith o u t in ten d in g to signify. L e ib n iz su g g ests. for th e ordinary occasion s of life. sayings). th e seco n d is to a p p o in t a skilful w orkm an to correct th em and syn ch ron ize th e m at all tim es. T h e first co n sists in m utual in flu e n c e. in other words th e h arm onization o f ag en ts’ exp erien ces and th e co n tin u o u s reinforcem ent that each o f th em receives from th e exp ression . and h en ce taken for granted. im p rovised or program m ed (co m m o n p la ces. T h e d eciph er­ in g of th e ob jective in ten tion of practices and w orks has n o th in g to d o with th e " r ep ro d u c tio n ” ( N achbildung. w ith close an alysis o f th e n uan ces o f another’s practice and tacit or ex p licit in q u iry (" W hat d o you mean ? ”) in to h is inten­ tio n s. retaining o n ly th e first or at a p in ch the seco n d h y p o th esis.8o Structures and the habitus O n e of th e fun dam en tal effects of the orchestration o f h abitus is the p ro d u ction o f a com m o n sen se w orld en d ow ed w ith th e o bjectivity secu red by co n se n su s on th e m ean in g (sens) of practices and th e w o rld .

each " n o n e th e less agrees % the o th e r ”. academics taking part in a sy m p o siu m ). reducing the ob jective stru cture of th e relation ship b etw een th e assem b led tfidividuals to the con jun ctural stru cture of their in teraction in a particular situation and grou p . they seek to explain everyth in g that occu rs in an ex p eri­ m ental or ob served in teraction in term s of the exp erim en tally con trolled characteristics o f the situ ation . it is becau se. So it is becau se th ey are th e p rod u ct o f d isp o sitio n s w h ich . laid vith j 0wn in each agent by h is earliest u p b rin gin g. are ob jectiv ely con certed that (he practices of the m em b ers o f th e sam e grou p or.Structures .g .29 T h u s. except in appearance. through th ese h ab itu s.) and the d isp o sitio n s o f th o se w h o se aspirations and w o rld -v iew th ey exp ress. for exam p le. w h en w e speak o f class h abitus. the sam e class are en d ow ed w ith an ob jective m ean in g that is at on ce unitary and system atic.27 T h e h ab itu s is p recisely th is im m an en t law . against all form s of the occasion alist illu sion w h ich co n sists in d irectly relating p ractices to properties in scrib ed in th e situ ation . lex in sita. in d ividu al-to-in dividu al relation ship s and that th e truth °f the in teraction is never en tirely con tain ed in the in teraction . p rop h et. stru ctures w h ich are active on ly w hen em bodied in a co m p eten ce acquired in th e cou rse of a particular h istory (w ith th e d ifferen t ty p es of bilingualism or p ron u n ciation . e tc . «ince th e correction s and ad ju stm en ts the agen ts th em selv es co n scio u sly carry out presuppose their m astery o f a co m m o n code and sin ce u nd ertak ings o f collective m ob ilization cannot su cceed w ith o u t a m in im u m o f con cordan ce between the h ab itu s o f th e m o b ilizin g agen ts (e . stem m in g from d ifferen t m o d es of a cq u isition ). habitus an d practices 81 are m ore and b etter h arm onized than th e agen ts know or w ish . in a differen tiated so c iety . E very co n fro n ­ tation b etw een agen ts in fact b rin gs togeth er. that " in terp erso n a l” relations are never. Leibniz puts it. system s of d isp o sitio n s (carried by 'natural p e r so n s”) su ch as a lin g u istic com p eten ce and a cultural co m p eten ce and.28 T o d escrib e th e p rocess o f ob jectification and orchestration in th e lan guage o f interaction and m utual a d ju stm ent is to forget that the in teraction itself ow es its form to th e o b jectiv e stru ctures which have p rod uced th e d isp o sitio n s of th e in teracting agen ts and w h ich allot them their relative p o sitio n s in the in teraction and elsew h ere. party leader. in an interaction d efined by the objective structure of th e relation b etw een th e groups th e y b elo n g to ( e . w e are in sistin g . b ein g th e internalization o f th e sam e ob jective stru ctu res. su ch as the relative spatial p o sitio n s o f the . colleagu es d iscu ssin g th eir p u p ils. " fo llo w in g on ly [his] ow n la w s”. a boss g iv in g orders to a su b ord in ate. w hich is th e p recon d ition not onlv for the co-ord in ation of p ractices b u t also for practices o f co-ord in ation . T h is is w hat social p sy ch o lo g y and in teraction ism or eth n o m eth o d o lo g y forget w h en .g . tran scen d in g su b jective in ten tion s and co n sc io u s projects whether in d ivid u al or c o lle c tiv e . all th e ob jective stru ctures o f w h ich they are the product.

u n d erstood as a sy stem of lastin g. revolutionary action ) is co n stitu ted in th e d ialectical relation ship b etw een .a past w h ich survives in th e p resen t and ten d s to p erp etu ate itself in to th e future b y m akin g itself p resen t in p ractices stru ctured accord in g to its p rin cip les. m ore p recisely. refusin g to " take lib erties ” and " p u t o n ese lf forw ard ”. on the on e hand. E ven th o se form s o f in teraction seem in g ly m o st am en able to description in term s of " in ten tion al transfer in to th e O th e r ”. that is. " stan d in g on o n e ’s d ig n ity ”. a habitus. th e h arm on y o f eth o s and tastes . n ot "becom ing fa m ilia r”. T h e illu sio n o f mutual election or p red estin ation arises from ignorance o f th e social co n d itio n s for th e h arm ony of aesth etic tastes or eth ical lean in g s.is th e p rin cip le o f th e co n tin u ity and regularity w h ich o b jectivism d iscern s in th e social w orld w ith o u t b ein g able to g iv e th em a rational b asis. in th e form o f d isp o sitio n s w h ich are so m any m arks o f social position and h en ce o f th e social d istance b etw een objective p o sitio n s. that is to say. A n d it is at th e sam e tim e the p rin cip le o f the tran sform ation s and regulated revolu tion s w h ich n either th e extrin sic and in stan tan eou s d eterm in ism s o f a m ech an istic so cio lo g ism nor th e purely internal b u t eq u ally p u n ctu al d eterm in ation o f volu ntarist or spontaneist su b jectiv ism are cap ab le of a ccou n tin g for. in sh ort. b etw een social p erson s con jun cturally b rou ght together (in p hysical sp ace. or sim p ly m aintain if (b y n ot " lettin g o n ese lf g o ”.b y th e objective stru cture of th e relation s b etw e en social co n d itio n s. friend­ sh ip . through th e harm ony o f h abitus. and h en ce h istory. w h ich is not th e sam e th in g as social sp a ce) and correlativelv. in accord ance w ith th e schem es en gen d ered b y h istory. . are d om in ated (as class h om ogam y a tte s ts ). In sh ort. in s h o r t" k n o w in g o n es p la c e ” and stayin g th ere). so m any rem in d ers o f th is d istan ce and of th e co n d u ct required in order to " k eep o n e ’s d ista n c e ” or to m an ip u late it strategically. w hich is th ereb y perceived as ev id en ce o f th e ineffable affinities w h ich sp rin g from it. In fact it is th eir p resen t and past p ositio n s in th e social stru ctu re that b iological in d ivid u als carry with th em . p rod u ces in d ivid u al and co llectiv e practices. at all tim es and in all p laces.82 Structures an d the habitus participants or th e nature o f th e ch an n els u sed . transposable d isp o sitio n s w h ich .g . an internal law relayin g th e co n tin u o u s exercise of th e law of external n ecessities (irreducible to im m ed iate con jun ctural con strain ts) . in to collective action ( e . T h e con ju n ctu re cap ab le o f transform ­ in g practices ob jectively co-ordin ated b ecau se su b ord in ated to partially or w h olly id en tical ob jective n ecessities. th e h abitus.d ou b tless sen sed in th e im p ercep tib le cu es of b o d y hexis . w h eth er sym bolically or actually. T h e sy stem o f d isp o sitio n s . to reduce it (easier for th e d om in a n t than for th e d om in ated ). or lo v e . th e p rod u ct of h istory. It is just as true and just as u n tru e to say that co llectiv e actio n s produce th e even t or that th ey are its p rod u ct. increase it. su ch as sy m p a th y . or on th e other hand.

Structures , habitus an d practices


tegrating past ex p erien ces, fu n ctio n s at every m o m en t as a m atrix o f percep* its ap p rec^ ons* an(* a c*i°ns an^ rnakes p ossib le th e a ch iev em en t o f infinin 11 diversified tasks, thanks to analogical transfers o f sc h e m e s p erm ittin g the olution of sim ilarly sh aped p ro b lem s, and thanks to the u n cea sin g correction s of the results ob tain ed , d ialectically p rod u ced by th ose resu lts, and on th e other hand, an objective even t w h ich exerts its action of co n d itio n a l stim u lation calling for or d em a n d in g a d eterm in ate resp on se, on ly on th o se w h o are disposed to con stitu te it as su ch b ecau se th e y are en d ow ed w ith a d eterm in ate type o f d isp osition s (w h ich are am en able to red u p lication and rein forcem en t by the ’'aw akening of class c o n sc io u sn e ss” , that is, b y th e d irect or in direct possession of a d iscou rse cap ab le o f secu rin g sy m b o lic m astery o f th e practi­ cally m astered p rin cip les o f th e class h a b itu s). W ith ou t ever b ein g totally co-ordinated, since they are th e p rod uct o f "causal s e r ie s ” characterized by different structural d uration s, th e d isp o sitio n s and th e situ a tio n s w h ich com bine syn ch ron ically to co n stitu te a d eterm in ate co n ju n ctu re are n ever whollv in d ep en d en t, sin ce th ey are en gen d ered by th e o b jectiv e stru ctures, that is, in th e last an alysis, b y th e eco n o m ic bases o f th e social form ation in question. T h e h ysteresis o f h ab itu s, w h ich is in h eren t in th e social co n d itio n s of the reproduction of th e stru ctures in h ab itu s, is d o u b tless on e of the foundations of th e structural lag b etw een op p ortu n ities and th e d isp o sitio n s to grasp them w h ich is th e cau se of m issed op p ortu n ities and, in particular, of the frequ en tly ob served in cap acity to thin k historical crises in categories of perception and th o u g h t oth er than th o se o f th e p ast, a lb eit a revolu tionary past. If one ignores th e dialectical relation ship b etw een the o b jectiv e stru ctures and the cogn itive and m otivatin g stru ctu res w h ich th ey p rod u ce and w h ich tend to reproduce th em , if o n e forgets that th ese ob jectiv e stru ctures are them selves products o f historical practices and are co n sta n tly reprodu ced and transformed by h istorical practices w h o se p rod u ctive p rin cip le is itself the product o f the stru ctures w h ich it co n seq u en tly ten d s to rep rod u ce, then on e is condem ned to redu ce th e relation sh ip b etw een th e d ifferen t social agen cies ( instances), treated as " d ifferen t tran slation s o f th e sam e s e n te n c e ” - i n a Spinozist m etaphor w h ich con tain s th e truth of th e o b jectiv ist lan guage of articulation ” - to th e logical form ula en a b lin g any on e o f th e m to b e derived from any other. T h e u n ify in g p rin cip le o f practices in d ifferen t d o m a in s w h ich objectivist analysis w ou ld assign to separate " s u b -s y s te m s ”, su ch at, P atrim onial strategies, fertility strategies, or eco n o m ic ch o ic es, is n o th in g other than the h ab itu s, th e lo cu s o f practical realization o f th e " a r ticu la tio n ” ° f fields w hich ob jectivism (from Parsons to th e stru cturalist readers of M arx) lavs out side b y sid e w ith o u t secu rin g th e m ean s o f d isco v erin g the real Principle o f the structural h om o lo g ies or relations of transform ation o b ject­


Structures an d the habitus


iv ely estab lish ed b etw een th e m (w h ich is n ot to d en y that th e structures are o b jectiv ities irred u cib le to th eir m an ifestation in th e h a b itu s w h ich they p rod u ce and w h ich ten d to rep rod u ce th e m ). S o lo n g as o n e accepts the ca n on ic o p p o sitio n w h ich , en d lessly reappearing in n ew form s through out the h istory o f social th o u g h t, n ow ad ays p its "h u m a n is t” a g a in st" str u c tu r a list readings o f M arx, to declare diam etrical o p p o sitio n to su b jectivism is n ot g en u in e ly to break w ith it, b u t to fall in to th e fetish ism of social laws t0 w h ich ob jectivism co n sig n s itself w h e n in esta b lish in g b etw e en structure and p ractice th e relation o f th e virtual to the actual, of th e sco re to th e performance of essen ce to ex iste n c e, it m erely su b stitu tes for th e creative m an of subjects vism a m an su bjugated to th e dead law s of a natural h istory. A n d h ow could o n e u n d erestim a te th e stren gth o f th e id eological cou p le su bjectivism /objec­ tiv ism w h en o n e sees that th e critiq ue of th e in d ivid u a l co n sid ered as ens realissimum on ly leads to h is b ein g m ade an ep ip h e n o m en o n of hypostatized stru ctu re, and that the w ell-fo u n d ed assertion o f th e p rim acy of objective relation s resu lts in p ro d u cts o f h um an action , th e stru ctu res, b ein g credited w ith th e p ow er to d ev elo p in accord ance w ith their o w n law s and to determine an d o v erd eterm in e other stru ctu res? , Ju st as th e o p p o sitio n o f lan gu age to sp eech as m ere ex e cu tio n or even as a p recon stru cted o b ject m asks th e op p osition b etw een th e o b jectiv e relations o f th e lan guage and th e d isp o sitio n s m aking up lin g u istic co m p eten ce , so th e o p p o sitio n b etw e en th e stru ctu re and the in d iv id u a l again st w h om the stru ctu re has to be w o n and en d lessly rew’on stand s in th e w ay o f construction of th e dialectical relation sh ip b etw een the stru cture and th e dispositions m aking u p th e h abitus.
If the debate on the relationship between " cu ltu re” and " p erson ality” which dom inated a w hole era of Am erican anthropology now seem s so artificial and sterile, it is because, am idst a host o f logical and epistem ological fallacies, it was organized around the relation betw een tw o com plem entary products of the sam e realist, substantialist representation of the scientific object. In its m ost exaggerated form s, the theory of "basic personality” ten d s to define personality as a miniature replica (obtained by " m o u ld in g ”) of the " cu ltu re”, to be found in all m em bers of the sam e society, except deviants. Cora D u B ois’s celebrated analyses on the Alor Island natives provide a very typical exam ple of th e con fu sion s and contradictions resulting from the theory that " cu ltu re” and personality can each be deduced from the other: determ ined to reconcile the anthropologist’s con clu sion s, based on the postulate that the same influences produce the sam e basic personality, with her ow n clinical observations of four subjects w ho seem to her to be "highly individual characters”, each "moulded by the specific factors in his individual fa te ”, the psychoanalyst w ho struggles to find individual incarnations of the basic personality is condem ned to recantations and contradictions.30 T h u s, she can see M angm a as "the m ost ty p ica l” of the four ("his personality corresponds to the basic personality stru ctu re”) after having written: " ll is difficult to decide how typical M angm a is. I w ould venture to say that if he were typical, the society could not con tin u e to ex ist.” Ripalda, w ho is passive and has

S tructu res , habitus an d practices

S 5

super-ego, is " atyp ical’*, S o is Fantan, w h o has "the strongest character a StfCfion devoid of inhibitions toward w o m e n ” (extrem e heterosexual inhibition *°fnl the rule), and "differs from the other m en as m uch as a citv-slicker differs from kc!°£ner ,\ T h e fourth, M alekala, w hose biography is typical at every point, is a 3 known prophet w ho tried to start a revivalist m ovem ent, and his personality seem s ^ resem b le that of Ripalda, another sorcerer w ho, as we have seen, is described as t0 ical. All this is capped by the analyst’s observation that "characters such as ngflia, Ripalda and Fantan can be found in any society ”. A nthony F . W allace, from Vhom this critique is taken,31 is no doubt right in p ointing out that the notion o f modal ' -onality has the advantage of avoiding the illogicalities resulting from indifference ^differences (and thus to statistics) usually im plicit in recourse to the notion of basic r s o n a l i t v . But what m ight pass for a m ere refinem ent of the m easuring and checking techniques used to test the validity o f a theoretical construct am ounts in fact to the - u b s t i t u t i o n of one object for another: a system o f h ypotheses as to the structure of personality, conceived as a hom eostatic system w hich changes by reinterpreting external pressures in accordance with its ow n logic, is replaced by a sim ple description of the central tendency in the distribution of the values of a variable, or rather a c o m b i n a t i o n of variables. Wallace thus com es to the tautological conclusion that in a population of Tuscarora Indians, the m odal personality type defined by reference to twenty-seven variables is to be found in only 37 per cen t of the subjects stu d ied . The construction of a class ethos m ay, for exam ple, make use of a reading of statistical regularities treated as indices, w ithout the principle w hich unifies and explains these regularities being reducible to the regularities in w hich it m anifests itself. In short, failing to see in the notion of "basic p erson ality’* anything other than a way of pointing to a directly observable " d a tu m ”, i.e . the "personality type*’ shared by the greatest number o f m em bers of a given society, the advocates o f th is notion cannot, in all logic, take issue w ith those w ho subm it th is theory to the test of statistical critique, in the name of the sam e realist representation of the scientific object.

The h abitus is the p rod uct o f the w ork of in cu lca tio n and appropriation necessary in order for th o se p rod u cts of co llec tiv e h istory, th e ob jective structures (e .g . o f lan gu age, e c o n o m y , e tc .) to su cceed in rep ro d u cin g th e m ­ selves m ore or less co m p letely , in th e form o f d urable d isp o sitio n s, in the organisms (w h ich on e can, if o n e w ish es, call in d ivid u a ls) lastingly su b jected to the sam e co n d itio n in g s, and h en ce placed in th e sam e m aterial co n d itio n s ° f existence. T h er efo re so c io lo g y treats as id en tical all th e b io lo g ica l in d iv i­ duals w h o, b ein g the p rod uct o f th e sam e o b jectiv e co n d itio n s, are the supports o f th e sam e h ab itu s: social class, u n d erstood as a sy stem o f o b jective
determ inations, m u st be b rou gh t in to relation not w ith th e in d iv id u a l or w ith " c la ss” as a popu lation , i.e . as an aggregate of en u m erab le, m easurable

biological in d ivid u als, b u t w ith th e class h ab itu s, th e sy stem of d isp o sitio n s ^partially) co m m o n to all p ro d u cts o f th e sam e stru ctu res. T h o u g h it is
^ p o s s ib le for a ll m em b ers o f th e sam e class (or even tw o o f th em ) to have h& the sam e ex p erien ces, in th e sam e ord er, it is certain that each m em b er d the sam e class is m ore likely than any m em b er o f another class to have een con fron ted w ith th e situ ation s m ost freq u en t for the m em b ers o f that C,ass- T h e ob jectiv e stru ctu res w h ich sc ien ce ap p reh en d s in the form of


Structures a n d the habitus

statistical regu larities (e .g . e m p lo y m e n t rates, in co m e cu rv es, p rob abilities 0f a ccess to secon d ary ed u ca tio n , freq u en cy of h olid a y s, e tc .) in cu lca te , through th e direct or in d irect b u t alw ays co n vergen t ex p erien ces w h ich g iv e a social e n v iro n m en t its ph ysiogn om y, w ith its " clo sed d o o r s ”, " d ead e n d s ”, and lim ited " p r o s p e c ts ”, that "art of a ssessin g lik e lih o o d s”, as L e ib n iz put it, 0f a n ticip atin g th e ob jective fu tu re, in sh ort, th e sen se o f reality or realities which is perh ap s th e b est-co n cea led p rin cip le o f th eir efficacy. In order to d efin e the relation s b etw e en class, h ab itu s and th e organic in d iv id u a lity w h ich can never en tirely b e rem oved from so cio lo g ica l discourse, in a sm u ch as, b ein g giv en im m ed ia tely to im m ed ia te p ercep tio n (intuitus personae), it is also socially d esig n a ted and reco g n ized (n am e, legal identity, e tc .) and is d efin ed b y a social trajectory strictly sp eak ing irred u cib le to any o th er, th e h ab itu s cou ld b e con sid ered as a su b jectiv e b u t not in d iv id u a l system of in tern alized stru ctu res, sc h e m e s of p ercep tio n , co n ce p tio n , and action co m m o n to all m em b ers of th e sam e grou p or class and co n stitu tin g the p reco n d ition for all ob jectification and a p p ercep tio n : and th e o b jectiv e co­ ord in ation o f p ractices and the sh arin g o f a w orld -v iew cou ld be fou n d ed on the p erfect im p erson ality and in terch an geab ility o f sin gular practices and v iew s. B ut th is w ou ld am ou n t to regarding all the practices or representations prod uced in accord ance w ith id en tical sc h e m e s as im person al and su b stitu ­ table, like sin gular in tu itio n s of sp a ce w h ich , acco rd in g to K a n t, reflect none o f th e p ecu liarities o f th e in d ivid u al ego. In fact, it is in a relation of h o m o lo g y , of d iversity w ith in h o m o g en eity reflectin g th e d iv er sity within h o m o g e n e ity ch aracteristic of their social c o n d itio n s o f p ro d u ctio n , that the sin gular h a b itu s of th e d ifferen t m em b ers o f th e sam e class are u n ite d ; the h o m o lo g y of w orld -v iew s im p lies th e sy stem a tic d ifferen ces w h ich separate sin gular w o rld -v iew s, ad op ted from sin gular b u t con certed stand points. S in ce the h istory o f th e in d ivid u al is never a n y th in g other th an a certain sp ecification o f th e co llec tiv e h istory o f h is grou p or class, each individual system o f dispositions m ay b e seen as a structural v a r ia n t o f all th e o th er group or class h ab itu s, ex p ressin g th e d ifferen ce b etw e en trajectories and positions in sid e or o u tsid e th e cla ss. " P e r so n a l” sty le, th e particular stam p m arking all th e p ro d u cts of th e sam e h ab itu s, w h eth er p ractices or w orks, is n ev er more than a deviation in relation to th e style of a p eriod or class so that it relates back to th e co m m o n sty le n ot o n ly b y its co n fo rm ity - like P h id ias, who, accord in g to H e g el, had no " m ann er ” - b u t also b y th e d ifferen ce w h ich makes th e w h ole " m a n n e r ” . T h e p rin cip le o f th ese in d ivid u al d ifferen ces lies in th e fact that, b ein g the p rod u ct o f a ch ron o lo g ica lly ordered series of stru ctu rin g d eterm in a tio n s, the h a b itu s, w h ich at every m o m e n t stru ctu res in term s o f th e structuring ex p erien ces w h ich p rod u ced it th e stru ctu rin g ex p erien ces w h ich affect its

T h e dialectic o f objectification a n d em bodiment


tructure, b rin gs ab ou t a u n iq u e in tegration , d om in a ted b y th e earliest S neriences, o f th e ex p erien ces statistically co m m o n to th e m em b e rs o f the sam class. T h u s , for ex a m p le, th e h ab itu s acq u ired in th e fa m ily u n d erlies e the structuring of sch o o l ex p erien ces (in particular th e recep tio n and a ssim i­ lation of the sp ecifically p ed agogic m essa g e ), and th e h a b itu s tran sform ed b y schooling, itself d iversified , in tu rn u n d erlies th e stru ctu rin g o f all su b seq u en t experiences (e .g . th e recep tio n and assim ilation o f th e m essa g es o f th e cu ltu re industry or w ork ex p er ie n c es), and so o n , from restru ctu rin g to restru cturin g.
Springing from th e en co u n te r in an in tegrative organ ism o f relatively independent causal series, su ch as b iological an d social d eter m in ism s, th e habitus m akes co h eren ce and n ecessity o u t o f accid en t and co n tin g e n c y : for

example, th e eq u iv a len ces it esta b lish es b etw e en p o sitio n s in th e d iv isio n o f
labour and p o sitio n s in th e d iv isio n b etw e en th e se x es are d o u b tle ss not peculiar to so c ietie s in w h ich th e d iv isio n o f labour and th e d iv isio n b etw een the sexes co in c id e alm ost p erfectly. In a class so c iety , all th e p ro d u cts o f a given agen t, b y an essen tial overdeterm ination , speak in sep arab ly an d sim u l­ taneously o f h is class - or, m ore, p recisely, h is p ositio n in th e social stru cture and his risin g or fallin g trajectory - and of h is (or h er) b o d y - or, m ore precisely, all th e p rop erties, alw ays socia lly qualified, o f w h ich he or sh e is the bearer - sexu al p rop erties o f cou rse, b u t also p hysical p rop erties, p raised, like strength or b eau ty, or stig m a tized .

T h e dialectic o f objectification a n d em bodiment So long as th e w ork o f ed u cation is n ot clearly in stitu tio n a lized as a sp ecific, autonom ous p ractice, and it is a w h o le g rou p and a w h o le sy m b o lica lly stru c­ tured en v iro n m en t, w ith o u t sp ecialized agen ts or sp ecific m o m e n ts, w h ich exerts an an o n y m o u s, p ervasive p ed agogic actio n , th e essen tia l part o f the modus operandi w h ich d efin es practical m astery is tra n sm itted in practice, in its practical state, w ith o u t attain in g th e le v el of d iscou rse. T h e ch ild im itates not ,fm o d e ls ” b u t other p eop le's a ctio n s. B od y hexis sp eak s d irectly to the niotor fu n ctio n , in th e form o f a pattern of p ostu res that is b o th in d ivid u al and sy stem atic, b ecau se linked to a w h o le sy stem of tec h n iq u es in v o lv in g th e body and to o ls, and ch arged w ith a h ost of social m ea n in g s and va lu es: *n all so c ietie s, ch ild ren are particularly atten tive to th e g estu res an d p ostu res w hich, in their ey es, exp ress ev e ry th in g that goes to m ake an a cco m p lish ed adult - a w ay o f w alk in g, a tilt of the h ead , facial ex p ressio n s, w ays of sittin g and of u sin g im p lem en ts, alw ays associated w ith a to n e o f v o ic e , a sty le of sp eech , and (h o w cou ld it be o th erw ise? ) a certain su b jectiv e ex p erien ce. B ut the fact that sc h e m e s are able to pass from practice to p ractice w ith o u t g o in g through d isco u rse or co n sc io u sn e ss d o e s n ot m ean that acq u isitio n o f the

gift exch an ges. such as tools. in ob jects. sayin gs.e . grou p battles. w h ich can be learnt o n ly gradually through repeated attem p ts and w ith con tin u o u s p redictable p rogress.of the processes practically applied. every society provides for structural exercises ten d in g to transm it th is or that form o f practical m astery. . or again. that in all th is en d lessly redundant m aterial. based on his study of the training of the guslar. subjects who are unable to state the principle of classification nonetheless attain higher scores than they w ould if they were guessing a t random. thereby dem onstrating that they achieve a practical mastery of the classificatory schem es which in no way implies sym bolic mastery . in p racticcs such as con tests of honour. Experimental analyses of learning w hich establish that " neither the form ation nor the application of a concept requires conscious recognition of the com m on elements or relationship involved in the specific i n s t a n c e s e n a b l e us to understand the dialectic of objectification and incorporation w hereby the systematic objectifications of system atic dispositions tend in their turn to give rise to systematic dispositions: when faced w ith series of sym bols . S uch are the riddles and ritual con tests w h ich test the " sen se o f ritual language ” and all th e gam es. he h has no difficulty in graspin g th e rationale o f w hat are clearly series and in m aking it h is ow n in the form of a p rin cip le gen erating con d uct organized in accordance w ith the sam e rationale.distributed into classes w ith arbitrary but objectively based names. at the other extrem e. so n g s. the Y u g o s l a v bard.32 wr ich m ean s. Lord's analysis o f the acquiring of structured material in a natural environm ent. often structured accord in g to th e logic of the wager.. B etw een ap p ren ticesh ip through sim p le fam iliarization. sequences of words "regularly em ployed under the sam e metrical conditions to express a given id ea”. ridd les. the capacity to im provise by com bining "form ulae”.in clu d in g th ose w h ich are not know n to th e producer of the p ractices or w orks im itated . th e h ou se. or the village.C hinese characters (H u ll) or pictures varying sim ultaneously the colour. Albert B. exp licit and express tran sm ission by precept and p rescription . e tc . and num ber of the objects represented (Heidbreder) . in w h ich th e ap­ prentice in sen sib ly and u n con scio u sly acquires th e p rin cip les of th e "art and the art of living . and.i.88 Structures an d the habitus habitus co m es d ow n to a q u estion of m echanical learn ing by trial and error U nlike an in coh eren t series o f figures.34 is acquired through sheer familiarization.35 w ithout the learner’s having any sense o f learning and subsequently mani­ pulating this or that form ula or any set of form ulae:36 the constraints of rhythm are internalized at the same tim e as m elody and m eaning. the m aterial w h ich the K a b y le ch ild has to assim ilate is the p rod u ct of th e system atic application of principles coherent in practice . entirely confirm s the experim ental findings: the practical mastery of what Lord calls "the form ula”. nature. a num e­ rical series is m astered m ore easily b ecause it con tain s a structure w h ich makes it unnecessary to m em orize all the n um bers on e by o n e : in verbal products such as proverbs. conscious recognition and verbal expression . w ithout being attended to for their own sake. the ch allenge or th e com bat (d u els. "by hearing the poem s”. m axim s. that is. or gam es. rites. target-shootin g.

inseparably. and. the appropriating b y the w orld o f a body th u s enabled to appropriate the w orld. constitute one of th e op p ortu n ities to in tern alize. m ore especially. the retreats of haram . b etw een religion (m ale) and m agic (fem a le). b etw een n if and h aram .is the principal lo cu s for the objectification o f the gen erative sc h e m e s. is reproduced in the spatial d ivision b etw een m ale space. T h ere is silen t ob servation o f th e d iscu ssio n s in the men’s assem b ly. the m arket. as we have seen . T h ere are the interactions w ith their relatives. fecun datin g virtu es. But it is in th e dialectical relation ship b etw een the b o d y and a space structured accord in g to the m yth ico-ritu al o p p osition s that on e finds the form par ex cellen ce o f the structural ap pren ticesh ip w hich leads to the em -b o d y in g of the structures of th e w orld. there are th e relation ship s w ith the m oth er and the father. correlatively. and fem ale sp ace. the op position b etw een the sacred o f the right hand and th e sacred of th e left hand. w ith their effects o f elo q u en ce. w h ich lead them to ex p lo re th e structured space of ob jective kin relationships in all d irection s b y m ean s o f reversals requiring the person w h o saw him self and b ehaved as a n ep h ew o f his fath er’s brother to see h im self and behave as a paternal uncle tow ards h is b rother’s son. and th u s to acquire m astery o f the transform ational sch em es w h ich p erm it the passage from th e sy stem of d isp o sitio n s attached to on e p o sitio n to the system appropriate to the sym m etrically op p o site p o sitio n .and above all the h ou se . and w om an . and. b y their d yssym m etry in an tagon istic co m p lem en tarity. p ersons. In a social form ation in w h ich the absence o f th e svm b olic-p rod u ct-con servin g tech n iq u es associated w ith literacy retards the ob jectification o f sy m b o lic and particularly cultural capital. or th e fields. the sch em es of the sexual division o f labour and of the division o f sexual labour. Wlth the place of assem b ly. inhabited space .37 T h e n there is daily participation in gift exchan ges and all their su b tleties. their s t r a t e g ie s . b etw een m an. the chetfies gen erating the strategies of h on ou r . ^ v ested w ith p rotective. at a d eep er level.T he dialectic o f objectification a n d embodiment 89 etc ) which require the b oys to set to w ork.38 T h us. this tangible classifyin g system con tin u o u sly in cu lcates and reinforces the taxonom ic p rin cip les u nd erlyin g all th e arbitrary p rovision s of this cu ltu re . w h ich . their rituals. at on ce sacred and charged w ith m aleficen t forces. through th e interm ediary of the divisions and hierarchies it sets up b etw een th in gs. and practices. T o d iscover h ow this spatial organization (m atch ed b y a tem poral organization o b ey in g the sam e logic) . A n d . in th e m ode o f " le t’s p retend ”. that is. the house and its gard en . w h ich the b o y s derive from their role as m essengers an d. T h ere are the lexical and gram m atical com m u tation s ( " I ” and " y o u ” d esig n a tin g the sam e person accord in g to the relation to the speaker) w h ich in stil the sen se o f the interchangeability o f p osition s and of reciprocity as w ell as a sen se of the lim its of each. their ritual strategies and strategic u ses o f ritual. as interm ediaries b etw een th e fem ale xvofld and the m ale w orld .

and natural activities sleep. T h is analysis of the relation sh ip b etw een the ob jectified sch em es and the sch em es incorporated or b ein g incorporated p resu p p o ses a structural analysis of the social organization of th e in tern al sp ace of the h ouse and th e relation of th is internal space to external sp ace. len d s itself as su ch to a d ecip h erin g . is the on ly m eans o f fully grasping the stru cturin g stru ctu res w h ich . is reserved for human use. T h e house.the loom . b u t on ly to a d eciph ering w h ich does not forget that the " b o o k ” from w h ich th e ch ild ren learn their v isio n of the w orld is read w ith the b o d y . it j8 necessary to grasp the dialectic o f objectification and em b o d im en t in the p rivileged locu s o f th e sp ace of th e h ouse and the earliest learn ing processes. is opposed to the high. the other side. that is. T h e low er.far b eyon d the frequ en tly described rough d ivision s b etw een the m ale w orld and the fem ale w orld . fire and fire-made objects. In the upper part is the hearth and. or the wall of the invalid: a sick person’s bed is placed next to it. and "to face the east ”) is invited to sit in front of the loom . and action. green fodder . rectangular in shape. T h e opposition betw een the male and the female also reappears in the opposition betw een the " master beam and the main pillar. fertility).and also of death. in and through the m o v em en ts and displacem ents w h ich make the space w ith in wr ich th ey are enacted as m uch as they are h m ade by it. nocturnal part of the house. th e assembly and the fou n tain . th e sym bol of all protection. T h e washing o f the dead takes place at the entrance to the stable. w ood. light-filled. T h e guest to be honoured (qabel. the place also of the tw o specifically cultural activities performed w ithin the house. sex. the w eaving loom . is divided into two parts by a low w all: the larger of these tw o parts. an analysis w h ich is not an end in itself but w h ich . p recisely on accou n t of the (dan gerous) affinity betw een ob jectivism and all that is already objectified. T h e low dark part is opposed to the upper part as the fem ale to the m ale: it is the m ost intim ate place w ithin the world o f intim acy (sexuality. the lam p. cooking and weaving.water jars set on the benches on either side of the entrance to the stable or against the "wall of darkness ”. T h e opposite wall is called the wall of darkness. slightly higher than the other. the rifle . a verb also m eaning "to stand up t o ”. T he m eaning objectified in things or places is fully revealed only in the practices structured according to the sam e schem es which are organized in relation to them (and vice versa). kitchen utensils. an opus operatum. A door w ith tw o w ings gives access to both room s. or raw objects . birth .the place too of natural beings .the attribute of the manly point of honour ( tiif) w hich protects fem ale honour ( hurma) .and thereby con trib utes to the durable im p osition of th e sc h e m e s o f p ercep tion . the place of damp. p ub lic life and in tim acy .oxen and co w s. are revealed on ly in the ob jects th e y stru cture. dark. donkeys and m ules . T h e interior of the Kabyle house. green. facing the door.90 Structures an d the habitus gov ern s practices and represen tation s . noble place of humans and in particular of the guest. th o u g h t. a fork op en skywards. rem aining ob scu re to them selves. T h u s. the house is organized according to a set of hom ologous oppositions fire: water :: cook ed : raw :: h ig h : low :: lig h t: shade :: d a y : night :: m a le: fem ale ♦ « nif: hurma:: fertilizing: able to be fertilized. has a loft above it. occupied by the anim als. the . But in fact the same oppositions are established between the house as a w hole and the rest of the universe.

either in its internal o r g a n i z a t i o n or in its relationship w ith the external w orld. But one or the other s0 o f the two system s of oppositions which define the house.and particularly rites . wom an the lamp o f the in sid e 99 m ust be taken to mean that man is the true light. w h eth er to evoke or revoke it. o p en in g and sh u ttin g . and the market. dark brightness. and h en ce in th e work ° f biological and social rep rod u ction .) insofar as it partakes of the universe of the U Se an<! secondarily as male or fem ale insofar as it belongs to one or the other 0 f the divisions of that universe. the place of assem bly. starting w ith d isp lace­ m ents w ith in a m yth ically structured sp a ce . the fields. each practice co m e s to be in vested w ith an ob jective m eaning. filling and em p ty in g . w h ich organize m agical practices and rep resen tation s: g o in g in and co m in g ou t. T h ro u g h the m agic of a world of ob jects w hich is th e p rod u ct o f th e ap plication o f th e sam e sch em es to the m ost d iverse d om ain s. T h e m ind is a m etaphor of the w orld of ob jects w h ich is itself b u t an endless circle of m utually reflecting m etap h ors. T h u s. a w orld in w h ich each th in g speaks m etaph ori­ cally of all th e others.have to reckon at all tim es. for exam ple. If t as female (nocturnal. g o in g leftw ards and g o in g righ t­ wards. the m o v em en ts of g o in g in and com in g o u t. All the sym b olic m anip ulations o f b od y exp erien ce.g . the house is not so m uch a nlace he enters as a place he com es out of. the m ental stru ctures w h ich con stru ct the world o f ob jects are con stru cted in th e practice of a w orld o f ob jects constructed accord in g to th e sam e stru ctu r es . depending on whether the house is considered from the male point of viewr o r the female point of view : whereas for th e man. It follow s that each ^ th e s e two parts of the house (and. a m ean in g w ith w h ich practices . is brought to the fore­ g r o u n d . by the sam e token. etc. All the actions p erform ed in a space con stru cted in this way are im m ediately qualified sym b olically and fu n ctio n as so m a n y structural ex ercises through which is b u ilt up practical m astery of th e fun dam en tal sch e m e s. etc.T h e dialectic o f objectification an d embodiment 91 w o r l d . F or exam p le. g oin g w estw ard s and g o in g eastw ard s. an d we a* knowr that she is to the m oon as man is to the sun. the o p p o sitio n b etw een . each of the objects placed it a n d each of the activities carried out in it) is in a sense qualified at two degrees. and wom an th e light of darkness. m ovem ent inwards properly befits the 30 woman. the proverb "M an is the lamp o f the outside.4 T h e m ind born o f th e w orld 0 of objects d oes not rise as a su b jectiv ity con fron tin g an o b jectiv ity : the objective u niverse is m ade u p of ob jects w h ich are the p rod u ct o f ob jectifyin g operations structured according to th e very stru ctures w h ich th e m in d applies t0 it. e . that of the day. dark. T h e con stru ction of the world of ob jects is clearly not the so vereign operation o f c o n scio u sn ess w h ich the n eo-K antian tradition co n ce iv e s of. ten d to im p ose th e integration o f the b od y sp ace w ith co sm ic space by graspin g in term s of th e sam e c o n c e p ts (and naturally at the price great laxity in logic) th e relation ship b etw e en m an and th e natural w orld and the com p lem en tarity and op p osed sta tes and action s o f th e tw o sex es in the d iv ision of sexual w ork and sexual d iv isio n o f w ork.

m ale orien tation and th e centripetal fem ale orien tation . is th e true p rin cip le of the organization of d om estic sp ace. a " b o d y g e o g r a p h y ” . a particular case of geo g ra p h y . . tow ards th e accum ulati0ri and con su m p tio n of th e p ro d u cts of w ork . w ith E rikson. and the fem ale b o d y . b u t that their d iscou rse is d om in ated by th e m ale v alu es of v irility . and the in terp retation s they o g iv e of grap h ic sy m b o ls . and p sy ch o lo g y . w h o are n either co n scio u s of nor con cern ed w ith th e fem ale orgasm but seek the affirm ation o f their p oten cy in repetition rather than prolongation o f th e sexual act. the d isen ch a n tin g p rod uct o f th e d isen ch a n tm en t of the w o rld . u te n sils.92 Structures an d the habitus m o v em en t ou tw ard s tow ards th e fie ld s or th e m arket. w h ich lead s to a d o m a in of sign ification that ism y th ica lly overdetermined to b e co n stitu ted as suchy forgets and cau ses it to b e forgotten that on e's own body and o th er p e o p le ’s b o d ies are o n ly ever p erceiv ed through categories of p ercep tion w h ich it w o u ld be naive to treat as sex u a l. self-en clo sed and d irected towards the o u tsid e w orld . A s for the w o m e n . so m etim es very co n cretely . resem b lin g th e dark.the sp ecifically m ale relation to se x u a lity is that of sublim ation. w h ich assign m en to p o litics. th e ey e s o f th e group alw ays threaten their in tim acy. tow ards th e production and circulation of g o o d s. A s in every so ciety d o m in ated b y m ale values .and E u rop ean so c ietie s. are not unawr are th at. etc. even if. it is true to say. are n o ex cep tio n . wr ich is en tered and left b y th e same h in evitab ly so iled o p e n in g . th e n ovel. so that all reference to specifically fem ale sexu al " in te r e sts” is exclu d ed from th is aggressive and sh am e-filled cu lt o f m ale p o ten cy . As naive as it w ou ld b e to reduce to th eir strictly sexu al d im en sio n th e countless acts of d iffu se in cu lcation th rou gh w h ich th e b o d y and the w orld ten d to be set in order. through th e interm ediary o f th e female g o ssip that th ey b oth fear and d esp ise. that male d om in ation ten d s to "restrict their verbal c o n sc io u s n e s s ”42 so lo n g as this is taken to m ean n ot that th ey are forb id d en all talk o f se x . history. th e sy m b olism of h onou r ten d in g at on ce to refuse any d irect ex p ressio n o f sex u a lity and to en cou rage its transfigured m an ifestation in th e form o f m an ly p row ess: the m en . or better. th e se categories alw ays relate back. and m o v em en t in w ard s. P sych oan alysis. corresp on d s sy m b o lica lly to the o p p o sitio n b etw een th e m ale b o d y . and ch ild ren . is d o u b tless also th e b asis o f th e relationship o f each o f th e se x es to their " p s y c h e ”. b y m ean s of a sy m b o lic m an ip u lation of the relation to th e body and to th e w orld aim in g to im p ose w hat has to be called . p ottery or carpet d esig n s.m ural p ain tin gs. w h ich . to their b o d ies and more precisely to their sexu ality. d am p house fu ll of fo o d . as is attested b y the wT m e n ’s lau ghter d u r in g con versation s.41 T h e op p o sitio n b etw een th e centrifugal. as w e have seen . to the o p p osition b etw een the b iologically defined p rop erties of th e tw o se x es. that is. in M elan ie Klein s term . or war and w o m en to th e hearth.

T h e ch ild co n stru cts its sexual identity. w hat is im posed th rou gh a certain social d efin ition of m alen ess (and . w ho is regarded as " kinder ” and more affectionate than the father and is the object of a m ore em otional and more agreeable relationship. of fem alen ess). w h ich offers th e m ost lC practice. at the sam e tim e as it con stru cts its im age of th e d iv isio n of orfc betw een th e se x es. not least sexual ex p erien ces th e m selv es. o u t o f th e sam e socially d efined set o f inseparably biological and social in d ices. Everything suggests that the awareness of sexual differences and the distinction betw een paternal and m aternal functions are constituted simultaneously. sexual p o te n c y inseparable from so cia l p o ten cy . i. so to speak. It is not hard to im agin e th e w eigh t that m u st b e b ro u g h t to bear o n the construction o f self-im age and w orld -im age b y the o p p o sitio n b etw een masculinity and fem in in ity w h e n it co n stitu tes th e fu n d a m en ta l p rin cip le o f division o f th e social and sy m b o lic w orld . In other w ord s. secret an d.e . the "u topia of fu ll orgasm ic re cip r o city ”) is o n ly a sp ecifica tio n o f th e opposition b etw een the extraversion o f p o litics or p u b lic religion and th e x tro v ersio n of p sy ch o lo g y or private m agic. From the num erous analyses of the differential perception of mother and father it may be gathered that the father is generally seen as more com petent and more severe than the mother. and fem ale sex u a lity . th e m ajor elem en t in its social id en tity. underlying all these differences is the fact that children attribute more pow er to the father than to the m other. Psychologists’ work on the perception of sexual differences makes it clear that children establish clear-cut distin ction s very early (about age five) betw een male and female functions. alienated ” (w ith resp ect to E r ik so n s " u top ia of u niversal g e n ita lity ”. turned into a permanent lsposition. by d erivation . excep t insofar as that initial relation is set u p w ith ob jects w h o se sex is d efin ed sy m b o lica lly and not biologically. A s is em p h a sized b y th e tw ofold meaning o f th e w ord nif. Bodily /texts is political m ythology realized. a durable m anner of standing. the aw akening o f co n scio u sn ess of sexual id en tity and th e in corporation of th e d isp o sitio n s associated w ith a determinate social d efin ition o f th e social fu n ctio n s in cu m b en t on m en and women com e hand in hand w ith th e ad op tion of a socially d efined v isio n of the sexual d ivision of labour. speaking. or in other 3 00 t0 the paternal b o d y and m aternal b o d y . pub lic and su b lim ated . can n ot be fou n d as the b asis of the acq u isitio n o f the !f matic op portu nity to exp erien ce all th e fu n d am en tal o p p o sitio n s o f m yth oP nCiples of th e stru ctu rin g of th e ego and th e w orld.T h e dialectic o f objectification an d em bodim ent 9 3 sinology -4 T h e ch ild ’s in itial relation to its father or m o th er. T h u s . as Emmerich very rightly points out. assigning dom estic tasks to w om en and m others and econom ic activities to m en and fathers. th e op p o sitio n b etw een m ale sexuality. In fact. em-bodied. m ad e up for th e m o st part of n tes aim ed at d o m estica tin g th e m ale p artners. is a p olitical m y th o lo g y w h ich g overn s all b o d ily ex p erien ces. and in particular o f very hom osexual and h eterosexu al relation sh ip . and thereby of feeling and .

running being weak and frivolous conduct . her gait m ust avoid the excessive sw in g of the hips which com es from a heavy stride. C onversely. because ever threatened. sign ifican tly. all the "totalitarian in stitu tio n s ”. she m ust always be girdled with the thimehremth. nif. that seek to produce a n ew m an through a process of " d ec u ltu ra tio n ” and " r ec u ltu ra tio n ” set su ch store on the se em in g ly most in sign ifican t d etails of dress. the fear of com m itm ents and the incapacity to fulfil them At the sam e tim e it is a measured p a ce: it contrasts as m uch with the haste of the man w ho "throw s his feet up as high as his h ea d ”. 35 opposed to the hesitant gait (th ikli thamahmahth) announcing indecision. If all so c ietie s and. an eth ic.e . form th e fu n d am en ta l p rin cip les o f th e arbitrary co n ten t of th e cu ltu re. p hysical and verbal manners. capable of in stillin g a w h o le co sm o lo g y .44 T h e lo g ic of sc h e m e transfer w h ich m akes each tech n iq u e o f th e b ody a sort o f pa rs totalis. m ade b o d y b y th e transubstantiation ach ieved b y th e h id d en p ersuasion of an im p licit p ed a g o g y . i. ever on the alert. the specifically fem inine virtue. w ho has nothing to fear because he has no responsibilities in his group. and h en ce cannot b e to u ch ed b y voluntary. for exam p le ^ the gestures and m ovem ents of the b od y. bearing. m ore in co m m u n ica b le. " T h e Kabyle is like th heather. red. whereas a gaze that is up in the clouds or fixed on the ground is the mark of an irresponsible m an. than th e v alu es g iv en b o d y . w hatever the obstacles. he lets nothing that happens around him escape him . "walks along w ith great strides” " dances ” . he w ould rather break than b e n d . is asserted in m ovem ent upwards. a w om an is expected to walk with a slight stoop. they en tru st to it in ab breviated and practical. n o th in g se em s more in effab le. reserve. a m etap h y sic. a rectangular piece of cloth w ith yellow . m n em o n ic. or betw een assurance and restraint. especially if she happens to have to walk past the thajma'th. and black stripes worn over her dress. half-hearted prom ises ( a v a l amahmah). treatin g th e b ody as a m em ory. can n ot even be m ade ex p licit. m ore in im ita b le.as it does w ith the sluggishness of the man w ho "trails a lo n g ”. a p olitical p h ilosop h y. lahia. in G off m an ’s p hrase. and. T h e w h o le trick o f p edagogic . looking down. H is way of walking. T h e p rin cip les em -b o d ied in th is w ay are p laced beyond th e grasp of co n sc io u sn e ss. th e reason is th at. restraint. orients the w hole fem ale b ody dow nwards. m odesty. revealing her hair. that of a man w h o know s w here he is goin g and knovv8 he will arrive in tim e. T h e oppositions w hich m ythico-ritual logic makes betw een the male ancj the fem ale and w hich organize the w hole system o f values reappear. the inside. gives a very general sco p e to the se em in g ly m ost circu m scrib ed and circu m stan tial ob servan ces. through in ju n ction s as in sign ifican t as " stand u p straigh t ” or " d o n ’t hold your knife in you r left h a n d ”. keeping her eyes on the spot where she w ill next put her foot. T h e m anly man stands up straight and honours the person he approaches or w ishes to w elcom e by looking him right in the eves. the house.9 4 Structures an d the habitus thinking. th erefo re. expresses strength and resolution. towards other m en. w’hereas male excellence. more p reciou s. in the form of the opposition between the straight and the bent. In short. outw’ards. d elib erate tran sform ation . and take care that her headscarf does not com e unknotted. tow ards the ground.” T h e man of honour’s pace is steady and determ ined. p red isp osed to fu n ctio n in accordance w ith th e fallacy p a rs p ro totot and h en ce to evok e th e w h o le system o f w h ich it is a part.

even in con ceivab le. .The dialectic o f objectification and em bodiment 95 reason I*68 precisely in the w ay it extorts th e essen tial w h ile se em in g to dem and the in sign ifican t: in o b tain in g th e respect for form and form s o f resp ect w h ich constitute th e m ost v isib le and at th e sam e tim e th e b est-h id d en (b ecau se most * n a tu ra l”) m an ifestation o f su b m issio n to th e esta b lish ed order. . th e sy m b o lic taxes d ue from individuals in the ex ch an ges w h ich are set up in every grou p b etw een th e individuals and th e grou p .4 8 . co n d itio n in g and creativity (lik e C h om sk y. th e stru ctu re w h ich has p rod uced it g o v ern s practice. th e h ab itu s en gen d ers all the th ou gh ts. B ecau se. T h e term obsequium u sed by S p in o za to d en o te th e " con stan t *iH" produced by th e co n d itio n in g through w h ich " th e S ta te fash ion s u s for its own use and w hich en ab les it to s u r v iv e ”4 co u ld be reserved to d esign ate 5 the public testim o n ies of recogn ition w h ich every grou p ex p ec ts o f its members (especially at m om en ts of co -o p tio n ). T h e co n cessio n s o f politeness alw ays con tain p o litica l c o n c e s s io n s . as in g ift ex ch a n g e. th e in c o r p o r a t io n o f th e arbitrary ab olish es w hat R aym on d R uyer calls " lateral possibilities” . that is. th e ex ch a n g e is an end in itself. the conditioned and con d ition al freed om it secu res is as rem ote from a creation u npredictable n ovelty as it is from a sim p le m ech an ical reprodu ction of the initial c o n d itio n in g s . B ecause the h abitus is an en d less cap acity to en gen d er products . that is. th e " n a tu r e” “ of th e hum an m in d ). th e cerem on ials o f etiquette.47 A s an acquired system o f gen erative sch em es o b jectiv ely adjusted to the particular co n d itio n s in w h ich it is co n stitu ted . that is. and no oth ers. and all th e action s co n siste n t w ith th ose conditions. .th ou gh ts. exp ressio n s. action s .i. all th e p ercep tio n s. all th e eccen tricities and d evia tio n s w h ich are th e sm all change o f m ad n ess. not by th e p rocesses of a m ech an ical d eterm in ism . o n ly so lo n g as on e rem ains locked in th e d ilem m a o f determinism and freed om . e t c . ” : and seem su ch or a ch a llen g e. the trib u te d em an d ed b y th e grou p gen erally co m es d o w n to a matter o f trifles.) . T h is paradoxical product is difficult to co n ceiv e. ”) that ab sten tio n a m o u n ts to a refusal T hrou gh th e habitus. w h o th ou gh t th e on ly escap e from B loom fieldian b eh aviou rism lay in seek ing " fre ed o m ” and '‘ cr ea tiv ity ” in th e " str u c tu re” .4* “ It w ou ld n ’t cost h im an yth in g t o .w h o se lim its are set bV the h istorically and socially situated co n d itio n s o f its p ro d u ctio n . p ercep tio n s. for example. form alities and form alism s w h ich " cost n o th in g ” to perform n atu ra l” th in g s to d em and (" It's th e least on e can d o . b ut th ro u g h th e m ed iation of the orien tation s and lim its it assign s to th e habitus's op eration s of invention. to sy m b o lic rituals (rites of passage. .e .

Aristotle. the q u a si-b o d ilv " a im in g ” w h ich en tails no rep resen ta tio n o f eith er th e b o d y or th e w orld . provoke a contrary action. that a ctiv e p resen ce in th e w orld th ro u gh w h ich th e w orld im p o ses its p resen ce. w h o sta n d s back so as to ob serve it an d.3 G e n e ra tiv e sch em es an d p ractical lo g ic : in ve n tio n w ith in lim its T h e opposite gesture. 1448b O b jectivism co n stitu tes the social w orld as a sp ecta cle p resen ted to an observer w h o takes up a " p o in t of v ie w ” on th e action . T h is p o in t o f v iew is the on e afforded b y h ig h p o sitio n s in th e social stru ctu re. that th e p rin cip le o f th is co n stru ctio n is practical a ctiv ity orien ted tow ards practical fu n ctio n s. stage parts. S ch u lz. th in g s " m a d e ” to be said and said "to be d o n e ”. tran sferrin g in to th e ob ject th e p rin cip les o f h is relation to th e o b ject. Poetics. T h is is what the w ife of a fqih does. There's N o One L ike You. Snoopy M an differs from other anim als in that he is the one m ost given to mim icry ( mimetikotaton) and learns his first lessons through m im esis (d ia mimeseos). th e th eory of practice as p ractice insists. from w h ich the social w orld appears as a rep resen tation (in the sen se of idealist p h ilo so p h y b u t also as u sed in p ain tin g or the th eatre) and p ractices are n o m ore than " e x e c u tio n s’ . ” " What is it ? ” " If you hold your hands upside dow n. in th e practical relation to th e w o rld . against p o sitiv ist m aterialism . that th e ob jects of k n o w led g e are constructed. c o n ce iv e s of it as a to ta lity in te n d ed for co g n itio n alo n e. or the im p lem en tin g o f p lans. you get the opposite of what you pray fo r !” Charles M . w ith o u t b ein g forced to relin q u ish th e "active asp ect ” o f ap p reh en sio n o f the w orld by red u cin g co g n itio n to a m ere record in g: it suffices to situ ate on eself w ithin "real activity as s u c h ”. . M ots et choses berberes " I think I ’ve made a new theological d isc o v e ry . It is p o ssib le to a b a n d o n th e sovereign p oin t o f view from w h ich o b jectiv ist id ealism ord ers th e w orld. sh ou ld autom atically. w ith its u rg en cies. in which a ll in teraction s are red u ced to sy m b o lic ex ch a n g es. W ith the M arx o f the Theses on Feuerbach. its th in gs to b e d o n e or said . among the M tougga. L aoust. i. . still less o f their relation sh ip . as it w ere.e . to ward off im m inent rainfall. perform an ces of scores. and against idealist in tellectu a lism . that o f inverting a sp oon . w hich [9 1 6 . E .

th ey ten d to reproduce . The a rgu m en ts that have d ev elo p ed as m u ch am on g a n th ro p o lo g ists (eth n o science) as am on g so c io lo g ists (eth n o m e th o d o lo g y ) around classification s and classificatory sy stem s have on e th in g in co m m o n : th ey forget that th ese instruments of cogn itio n fulfil as su ch fu n ctio n s other than th o se o f pure cognition. T h is d o es not m ean that they can b e ad eq u ately treated by "structu ral ”. th ese sc h e m e s o f p ercep tio n . b y reference to practical fu n ctio n s.T h e calen dar an d the synoptic illusion 97 directly com m an d w ord s and d eed s w ith o u t ever d ep lo y in g th e m se lv e s as a spectacle. the o p p o sitio n s and h ierarchies w h ich actu ally organ ize social groups.3 T h e organ ization . in sertin g th e m in to th e stru ctu re o f a sy stem o f sy m b o lic relations. O w in g to th e extrem ely im p ortan t social fu n ction w h ich it fu lfils in orchestratin g th e g rou p 's a ctiv ity . P rod u ced b y th e p ractice of su cc essiv e gen era tio n s. systems of classification (ta x o n o m ies) w h ich organ ize p ercep tio n and structure practice. T h e calen dar an d the synoptic illusion A nalysis o f th e agrarian calendar w ill en ab le u s to d em o n stra te. a practical operation 0f construction w h ich se ts to w ork. in co n d itio n s of existence o f a d eterm in ate ty p e . in stru m en ts o f cognition and com m u n ica tio n w h ich are th e p reco n d itio n for th e esta b lish ­ ment of m ea n in g and the co n se n su s on m ean in g. and action. ap p reciation . Practice alw ays im p lies a co g n itiv e op eration . fu n ctio n as practical op era­ tors through w h ich th e ob jective stru ctu res of w h ich th e y are the p ro d u ct ten d to reproduce th em selv es in practices.1 T h e co h eren ce to be ob served in all p ro d u cts of the ap p lication o f the sam e habitus has n o other basis than th e co h eren ce w h ich th e gen erative p rin cip les con stitutin g th at h ab itu s ow e to th e social stru ctu res (stru ctu res o f relation s between grou p s . or any other form of strictly internal an alysis w h ich . in artificially w ren ch in g th em from their co n d itio n s o f p rod u ction and u se. Practical taxon o m ies.2 T h e practical op erators w h ich co n stitu te th e h ab itu s and w h ich function in th eir practical state in gestu re or u tterance rep rod u ce in a trans­ form ed fo rm .or b etw een social cla sses) of w h ich they are th e p rod u ct and w h ich . th e error w h ich resu lts from th e in tellectu a list theory ° f social sy stem s o f classification .th e se x es or age-classes . b y a sort of proof p e r absurdum . exert th eir structuring efficacy only to th e ex ten t that th ey are th em selv es structured. " co m p o n en tia l ”. w h ich are acq u ired th rou gh practice and ap plied in their practical state w ith ou t a cced in g to ex p lic it rep resen tation . th e calendar is indeed o n e o f th e m ost cod ified asp ects o f social e x iste n c e . and w h ich th ey h elp to leg itim ate by p resen tin g th em in a m isrecognizable form . as D u rk h eim and M au ss saw . in ev ita b ly fails to und erstan d their social fu n c tio n s .

M oreover. d ep en d in g on the region.98 G en erative schemes an d practical logic of practices is n ot entrusted in th is case ex clu siv ely to th e practical schem es of th e habitus: it is the object of exp licit in ju n ction s and express recom m en ­ d ation s. servin g a fu n ction analogous to that perform ed in a different order b y custom ary rules or gen ea lo g ies. wr hen it is a m atter o f transm itting all the useful inform ation as q u ick ly as p ossib le. th e trib e. is a m ixtu re. on e B erber. w h ich perm its the rapid u n fo ld in g o f th e su cces­ sion of " p erio d s” and " m o m e n ts” (treatin g rival accoun ts as " v a ria n ts”). A lthough th ey are never m ore than rationalization s d evised for sem i-scholarly purposes. 2). is selected and o ften reinterpreted in term s o f the sch em es o f the h abitus and of representations produced a d hoc from the sam e sch em es. im p overish ed perform ances . and are thus pred isp osed to m ake u p for th e lap ses or u ncertain ties o f the habitus by settin g out cod ified references and strict g u id e lin e s . and still m ore often . thereby in vitin g th em to adopt a q uasi-scien tific attitu de.5 T h e p rob lem is that th e calendar cannot be u nd erstood u nless it is set d ow n on paper. T h ere is a great tem p tation to am ass and collate th ese different productions in order to con stru ct a lacuna-free. id en tical nam es cover periods varying con si­ derably in length and situ ated at different tim es in the year. a sort o f unwritten h score of w hich all th e calendars d erived from in form an ts are then regarded as im perfect. con trad iction -free wT o le.8 M oreover. and that it is im possible to understand h ow it w orks u n less on e fully realizes that it exists o n ly on paper (see fig. and so they are them selves organized in accordance w ith th e stru ctures co n stitu tin g that sy stem of classification . sayin gs.4 W hat on e derives from q u estio n in g in form an ts. in variable p rop ortions. of know ledges draw n from on e or th e other o f th e available traditions w hich. those w h ich are socially recogn ized as the m ost representative and su ccessfu l. those w orthiest of b ein g preserved b y the collectiv e m em ory. an inform ant m ay offer tw o different nam es (e. there is no m ore efficient and c o n v e n i e n t w ay than a linear narrative. or a set o f particular calendars) one com es up against a prim ary d iffic u lty : id en tical p eriods are g iv en different nam es.g . and taboos. at two different p oin ts in the sam e con versation. o f all the products of habitus structured in accordancc w ith the prevailing sy stem of classification. p roverbs. ex cep t w hen m echan ically reprodu ced. th e village. T h e y thereby com e to be en d ow ed w ith a com m on " p h y sio g n o m y ” rend erin g them im m ed iately " in te llig ib le ” for any agent eq u ipp ed w ith the " s e n s e ” o f lin gu istic an d /or m y th ic roots. th ese m ore or less cod ified ob jectification s are. . on e draw n from th e Islam ic tradition) for the same m o m en t of th e year. and even the inform ant. A s soon as on e undertakes to draw u p a synoptic calendar w h ich co m b in es th e features m ost freq u en tly attested and indicates the m ost im portant variants (instead o f p resen tin g a sin g le calendar chosen for the sake o f its particular " q u a lity ”.


but w ithin th e same universe it may also be defined in opposition to lyali. repairing their tools w hen th ey cannot leave th e h ou se. d ep en d in g on th e region and the year. and the corresponding tem poral unit. as soon as the land is su fficien tly m o ist. are defined practically. the special attention given to th e oxen weakened by treading ou t. the black n ig h ts (a d istinction w h ich . lahlal yifer. T h e tillage period (u su ally called lah lal. after the d o gd ays o f sm aim and at the b eg in n in g of la k h rif: on that day. the peasants keep th e m selv es b u sy . w ith sm aim .io o G en erative schemes an d practical logic M ost in form an ts sp o n ta n eo u sly make th e year start w ith autum n ( lakhrif) F or som e of th em . O n ce the autum n w ork is over. But for other in form an ts. each fam ily sacrifices a cock. form al p rin cip le of d ivision . but it is con trasted in another resp ect w ith the . contrasted. the sum m er garden. P lou gh in g and so w in g . for others on th e ist of D ec em b e r. as is su gg ested b y its range of ap plications.7 T h e heart o f w inter is called ly a li} th e n igh ts. and associations and con tracts are renewed. for others. or. the slack m om ent in w inter. it starts on about the 15th of A u g u st. the licit period for sow ing turnips (from the seventeenth day of autum n. the 3rd of Septem ber in the Julian calendar). within the universe of the wet season. gath erin g grass and leaves for the cattle. w ith in w hich a d istin ction is alm ost alw ays draw n b etw een tw o equal parts. lahlal lafth. etc. althou gh inform ants find jus­ tification s for it in clim atic ch an ges). the licit period for stripping the fig-trees (the end of Septem ber). gardening work in thabhirth. w h ich begin im m ediately after the inaugural cerem on y (w h ich is also a rain-m aking rite). after an ox b o u g h t co llectiv ely has been sacrificed ( thimechret) and the m eat shared out am ongst all the m em bers of the co m m u n ity (adhrum or villa g e). and ly a li thiberkanine. w ith lahlaU a tim e of in ten se a ctivity. w in ter b egin s on the 15th o f N o v em b er. T h is is the slack season o f the year. as su ch . the m ost d ecisiv e tu rn in g -p o in t of the transitional period. so as to prepare them for ploughing) . and w ith la la f. in opposition to lakhrif (ploughing and sow ing being opposed to the picking and drying of the figs. W ithin a quite different logic it can also be contrasted w ith all the other periods held to be licit for a particular type of work which w ould be haram (the illicit) if done outside those periods: for exam ple. is the p rod u ct o f an en tirely abstract. the slack p eriod of th e dry season . on the day called "th e door of the y ea r” ( thabburth usugas). but so m etim es hartadem ) begins w ith the first d ay’s p lo u g h in g (azvdjeb). It is doubtless incorrect to speak of lahlal as a “ p erio d ”: this term . the season starts around the ist o f S ep tem b er in the Julian calendar. th e " d oor of the y e a r ” is th e first day o f ploughing ( lahlal natsharats or lah lal n thagersa). w ith o u t any sp ecial rite (w h ich ten ds to sh o w that the o p p o sitio n b etw een a u tu m n and w in ter is not stro n g ly m arked) . w h ich marks th e entry in to the wet p eriod. as w e have seen . and clearing the paths after heavy sn ow falls. "a period of forty d a y s ” . m ay go on u n til m id -D ecem b er or even lon ger. F or so m e in form an ts. ly a li thimellalinef the w h ite n igh ts.

relating to highly unpropitious periods. as on e in form an t p u t it. it is "th e o p e n in g ” (el ftuh ). " C om e o u t. T h is is b eg in n in g of a lo n g transitional p eriod. or February to March. one o f the sem i-explicit dichotom ies which always involve an attempt at rationalization: the first two periods are m align and come the end of winter. w h ich som e inform an ts extend to the w hole period of issemaden (th e cold d ays) ru n n in g from late D ecem b er to early January. they are made to include the four " w eek s” which divide up the m onth of February. as h e d oes so . th e se are th e "great n ig h ts ” (ly a li kbira) as op posed ^ t h e l e s s er n ig h ts ” (ly a li esghira) o f February and M arch. we find here. alm ost all m a lig n . concentrating within it all the features characteristic of the period as a w h ole. w ith a sort o f play on w ords w hich is no d ou b t also a play on m ythic roots.ahgan bu akii. inform ants w ho identify husum w ith the fortnight straddling the end °f January and the beginning o f February. el mivalah (som etim es called \mirghane). the salt days. and variously named. num erous inform ants (especially in the jurdjura region) distinguish tw o ahgans (or hayans) . and m arriages start to be celebrated ”). the pungent days. to th e " sh ep h erd ’s nights” a n d to the " n igh ts o f H a y a n ” . covered by a term in o lo g y as rich as it is con fu sed : w hereas autu m n is "a w h o le ”. a learned term of Arabic origin. a tim e of waiting. T h e farm er goes out into th e fields and se ts up oleander b ranches. as in the case of the nights of January. coexists w ith hayan (or ahgan) to denote the passage from furar to maghres. referring to a sura of the Koran. i. w h ich have th e pow er to drive away m aras.11 As the nam es of this series them selves testify. are som etim es used to denote the w hole transitional period from late January to m id-M arch: *n this case. €l fyjatah. or January to February. and from et a n o t h e r point of v iew . and even. the peasants g o to their stables b efore sunrise and sh ou t in th e ears of the oxen : "G ood new s! E n n ayer is over! ” S om e in form an ts say 'a zri} the bachelor. the old w om en. the old w om an. the last tw o are benign and com e at the beginning of spring. the " s e v e n s ”). he savs. j^ore favourable week. maras! T h e khammes is g o in g to kill y o u ! ” O n the sam e day. known collectively as essba't ("the se v e n s”) . s e p a r a t io n from ennayer: life has em erged on the face of the earth. Husum. or the m om ent of transition from winter to spring. And sim ilarly. is m arked by a w h ole set o f renew al rites and taboos (in particular on sw eep in g an d w ea v in g ). distinguish a first. the cockchafer g r u b . T h e end of ly a li is m arked by the ritual celebration of el'a zla gennayer. for 'azla ("because from that day on . in the depth o f w in ter. T h e first day of ennayer (January). elsw a la h .T he calen dar and the synoptic illusion 10 1 ransition from w in ter to sp rin g (essba't or essubu'. the benign days. or thamgharth. Thus. sp rin g is co m in g .10 so that the terms thimgharine or husum. from March to A pril). the hayan of . th e first shoots are appearing on th e trees. the open d ays. 9 But the logic o f m agic insists that it is never possible to know exactly which is the most unpropitious m om ent in a period which is uncertain as a w h o le. denotes either the m om ent of transition from one m onth to another (from D ecem ber to January. el quarah. it is said. th e passage from w inter to spring is a patchwork of m o m en ts w h ich are ill d efin ed . the term thimgharine. n the sam e way. at Ain A ghbel. dangerous week and a second.8 also known as amerdil (the loan) in Great Kabvlia.e.

T h ese term s. th e tim e for c o m in g o u t.from hearing what is said about " th e len gth en in g of t h e davg” for if they heard it. m an has to w ait for life to d o its w ork . excessive . th e eu p h e m is tic n am e for w hich is th a farah th . and take a g o o d lo o k ” . D u rin g " hayan w eek ” (th e first w eek of M arch). it is th e r e f o r e an occasion for acts of propitiation (alm sgivin g) and divination. th e feast o f g reen n ess and in fa n c y .13 has already b een celeb ra ted .10 2 G en era tive schemes a n d p ra ctica l logic the N egro. " g o an d look at yo u r cro p s. Man m not disturb it by goin g into the fields or orch ard s. if it rains. T h e ch ild ren g o ou t into th e field s to m ee t sp rin g . and e ls e w h e r e :" the su n o f th e flow erin g [of th e lo n g -a w a ited p eas an d beans] em p tie s th e d o u a r ” T h e fo o d sto ck s are ex h a u sted . and w h ich . there will be m any partridge e g g s ). A ll the ritual o f th is inaugural day of an augural p eriod is p laced u n d er th e sig n of jo y and o f o b jects that b rin g g o o d fo rtu n e and p rosp erity . th e flock is reckoned to be sa v ed : it is now el fw a ta h . b o th on th e cu ltivated land an d a m o n g th e flock . w ill b rin g joy. and th e le n g th e n in g of th e d ays is accen tuated b y th e ban on g o in g ou t in to th e field s (natah is not over) and o n eatin g b ean s or oth er green v eg eta b les. In th e o p en air th ey w ill eat a se m o lin a o f grilled cereals an d b utter. from f a r ah .' on the day of the spring eq u in ox (a d h w a l gitij. T h e w om en ab an d on th e tab oos o f th e p lo u g h in g p erio d and dye th eir h an d s w ith hen na. that is a sign o f p le n ty if there is snow at the b egin n in g. an d th e y o u n g lin g s are no lo n g er th reaten ed b y th e rigou rs o f w in ter. as it is k now n lo cally. m ade in joy. A tin ca^ is struck to make a noise w hich w ill prevent the oxen . " I n M arch ”. an d " T h e d a y s o f M arch are sev en -sn ack d a y s. th ey say in G reat K ab ylia. they w ould take fright at having to work harder. and ahgQ tl hari. th e tran sition al p eriod co m e s to an e n d . T h e first day o f sp rin g ( thafsuth). in th e cycle of the day (for e x a m p l e . has sh ifte d to th is tim e o f the yea r). T h e d a y s grow lon ger.character very sim ilar to that conferred on the m orning.12 T h e anim als too seem to ^ com pleted their grow th: w eaning (el h iya z) is carried out at the end of hayan weej. T h e r e is n ot m u ch w ork to b e d o n e (apart from tillage in the fig o rc h a r d s). D u r in g natch " th e trees are sh aken and knock to g e th e r ” . husum (or hayan) is endow ed w ith an inaugural . th e tim e o f births. O n ce th e d ays of th e old w om an and husum are ov er. seven days in w hich “ everything on earth comesK u to life ”. life com p letes its work. a p lant w h ich causes sw e llin g . By virtue o f position. the wells w ill not be full all year.” W ith natah or thiftirine. or rather ahgan. are b o th o f Arabic origin and are rarely k n ow n to th e p easan ts o f th e D jurdjura reg io n (w here h a ya n . the len gth en in g o f the su n ). the hayan of the freem an. th ap sia.w ho can understand human speech on that day . T h e y g o off in g ro u p s o f fifteen or tw e n ty and bring back heath sh ru b s to m ake b ro o m s. joy. if does not rain. T h e c o u sc o u s served on that d ay is co ok ed in th e steam o f a broth co n ta in in g a dh ris (seksu w a d h ris) . seven intensely cold days d uring w hich work is su sp en d ed .and augural . w h ich d en ote th e sam e p eriod to w ith in a few d ays. H e n c e th e proverbs: "M arch ( maghres) clim b s like a h ills id e ” .

the sh eep are sh orn and th e n ew lam b s are b ran d ed . after w ea n in g . gome in form an ts d iv id e thiftirin e or natah in to an u n fa v o u ra b le p erio d . W ork o f all sorts starts up again: in th e field s. and th e w eath er is so cold th at " th e boar sh iv er s in its la ir 5 *. n ow b eg in to tu rn y e llo w .14A n d s o . A fter h l*egzaw en co m e iw ragh en . F or natah is also the on of n atu re’s a w ak en in g. leaves early in th e m o rn in g . b y a fam iliar d ev ice. or. at a m ysterio u s h our k n ow n to n o n e ). the o n ly im p ortan t activ ity (w h ich u sed to b e in augu rated by the a b d u ction of M ata. im ellalen. and m arriages. b rin gin g fertility and p rosp erity to every liv in g th in g . a trou b le-free p eriod o f relative p len ty b eg in s. wT here th e critical p eriod o f g ro w th is ov er. ill defined in relation to th e o p p o sitio n b etw e en th e dry and th e w e t. T h e ch aracteristic tasks .T h e calen dar a n d the syn optic illusion 10 3 is likely. th e green fields an d th e g a rd en s are now ready to receive th e rays o f th e su n . at th e b e g in n in g of M ay: fro m th at day on. in March (“ th e d ifficu lt d a y s ”) and a favourable p eriod (" th e easy d a y s ”) in April- The passage from th e w et season to th e dry season is effected ritually and collectively. T h e changing ap pearan ce o f th e corn field s is in d icated b y th e n a m es of th e ten ­ or seven -d ay p erio d s in to wT ich th e m o n th o f magu (or m ayu) is d iv id e d . th e w h ite d a y s. th e dry d ays.) . w h ich up to th en w en t o u t late in th e m o rn in g and cam e back relatively early. at th e v ery latest. th e " brid e ” o f th e field . there is a ban o n en terin g th e cu ltiv a ted field s and th e orchards fear o f ca u sin g th e d eath o f a p erson or an a n im a l). celeb ra tin g w e d d in g s. and retu rn s at su n se t. el h iy a z . o f th e b lo sso m in g o f cro p s. in th e gard en s. is in vok ed wr ith all so rts o f rites. and tquranen. wr ich had b een h as 'te n d e r ” ( th aleqaqth ) as a n ew -b o rn b a b y . h coming eith er in M arch. A s th e p eriod k n ow n as ize g za w e n " th e green d a y s ” co m e s to an en d . d u rin g n atah. th e last traces o f g reen ery fade from th e la n d sc a p e . th e cerea ls. m arked b y various taboos (pruning or graftin g. w h ite w a sh in g h o u se s. th e 1 st of M ay. It is the m om en t for w e d d in g s an d village fe a sts .15 on a date wT ich varies from region to region b ecau se o f clim a tic differen ces. o n e a u sp icio u s an d the other inauspicious. husum . is here expressed not in a d iv isio n in to tw o p eriod s. S u m m e r (anebdhu) has b eg u n . e t c . w ith ibril. T h e fact that nisan. D u r in g th e p eriod o f nisany w h o se b en eficen t rain. the flock. co m e s back and g o es o u t again in the early a ftern o o n . at sh ea rin g tim e or just after. a p articu larly b en eficen t m on th (" A p ril is a dow'nw'ard slope”). T h is is th e start o f th e cy c le of d ryn ess and ripenin g. o n th e day o f tharurith v ia z a l (th e return o f a z a l ). for e x a m p le ). like all transitional p erio d s (n atah . th e m en can start th e h o ein g . settin g up *he lo o m . T he bad w eath er is o ver for g o o d . a rite in te n d ed to call dow n the rain n eed ed for th e ears of th e corn to d e v e lo p ) . life . or in A p ril. b u t b y th e ex iste n c e o f in a u sp icio u s m o m e n ts ( eddbagh . th e first beans are p ick ed . se ttin g eg g s to b e h atch ed . th e yellow* d a y s. is an a m b ig u o u s p erio d .

and fields. the work o f iqachachen (" th e last d a y s ”). T h is lin ear diagram o f th e agrarian year (lik e all d isco u rse) at o n ce m asks . T h e o n ly con cern is to p rotect th e rip en in g crops against th e dangers w h ich threaten th em (hail. w h en purificatory fires are lit ev e ry w h er e . th e forty d ogd ays o f smaim b egin and w ork is su sp en d ed (just as it is in ly a li.g . k n ow n as "a fiery em b er has fallen into th e w ater” (thagli thirgith egw am an ). T h e means u sed again st predators . to start rip en in g ). w h ich is p erm itted in the "green d a y s ”. w ith fines for d iso b ed ien ce. sw eet p ep p ers. W hen ichakhen co m es round (ichakh lakh rif. b u sh . w ith thaqachachth la k h rif (th e last fruit is shaken from th e trees and the rem ain in g leaves are strip p ed off) and " th e rooting u p of th e g a r d e n ”. th e is t o f O ctob er is lah al y ife r (o f th e le a v es). w h ich is com p leted around in sla. e tc . T h is d ate is the signal for th e "w ith d raw al of lif e ”. to m a toes. grap es. and th e ch ild ren are all kep t busy. from chrew. m elo n s. an exp ression w h ich allu d es to th e tem p erin g o f iron. or heap o f sto n e s. scarecrow s th e co llec tiv e ex p u lsion rites (asifedh) that are in ten d ed to transfer the m align an t forces from th e territory to b e p rotected in to a cave.). I t is also a period d ev o ted to rest an d to th e celeb ration s of a p len tifu l h a rv est .a ban on fig-p ick in g. th e action p rop er to th e sm ith . g o u rd s.19 as w ell as the n ew ly h arvested grain th ere are figs. th e land is ready for p lo u g h in g .sh o w ers o f sto n e s. th e m om ent w hen th e first ripe figs appear. sterility . b ird s. w h ich are d ev o ted to a th orou gh clea n in g o f th e kitchen g ard en s. it is la k h rif ev ery w h ere). W hen all traces o f life p ersistin g in th e fields after the harvest have th u s been rem oved . A cco rd in g to m o st in form an ts.fever. after " fixing ” th em on o b jects (d o lls) or an im als (e. th e fig -h arv est is at its peak. m ad n ess (p o ssessio n b y a d jin ). also called mut el ardh " th e d ea th o f th e la n d ”. the day o f th e su m m er solstice (24 J u n e ). a pair o f birds) w h ich are th e n sacrificed. lo cu sts. L a k h r if is so m etim es said to b egin in m id -A u g u st.16 By the last day o f iquraranen. la k h rif is seen as a slack p eriod in th e agrarian year. and various fresh vegetables. etc . ev eryon e sh o u ld have started harvesting ( essaif) .17 W hen treading-out and w in n o w in g are co m p leted . su m m er b eg in s on th e sev en teen th day of the m o n th of m agu. tillage (in th e fig orchards) and so w in g . and el haq " th e la w ” is im p osed . a p eriod to w h ich smaim is always o p p o se d ). an d th e m e n . are ab so lu tely b ann ed from the p eriod known as th e " y ello w d a y s”. th e w o m e n .104 G en erative schemes an d practica l logic o f the w et sea so n . or rather in th e grain cy cle. at thissemtith (from sem ti. sh o u ts (ah ah i).18 In o p p o sitio n to the h arvestin g and tread in g-o u t. and n ow th e leaves m ay be strip p ed from th e fig-trees (ach raw . are sim p ly ap p lica tio n s o f the sch em e of " tran sferen ce o f e v il” w h ich is se t to w ork in th e treatm en t o f a large number of d iseases . orchards. to strip ) to feed th e oxen.and also in rites p erform ed on fixed dates in certain villages. ev e n from o n e ’s o w n trees.

which every inform ant m entions. w h ich is m ade up of in com m en su rab le islan d s o f d u ration . jn an oth er order. p atchy space o f practical p ath s by the h o m o g e n e o u s. the statistical an alysis o f g en ea lo g ies. has the effect of im posing an attitude to tem porality w hich is the exact . th ey have the effect 0 f fo rcin g u s to call in to q u estio n the very op eration w h ich g ave rise to th em . o n th e fu n c­ tions con ferred on it b y th e activ ity in p rogress. h om o g en eo u s. is not "a period of forty d a y s” (all that is said is "W e are entering ly a li”) but a sim ple scansion of passing tim e. inseparably from th is. the "old w o m e n ”) shift according to the region and the inform ant. ranked and organized to su it the n eed s of the m om ent and b rou gh t in to practical e x iste n c e gradually and in term itten tly . but never beyond the bounds o f w inter. and e n d e a v o u r s in stead to fix th em sim u lta n eo u sly so as to cu m u la te th em s y s te m a tic a lly .T h e calen dar an d the synoptic illusion d reveals th e d ifficulties that are en cou n tered as soo n as o n e ceases to take actical relations o f an alogy or h o m o lo g y sin g ly (or in pairs) and su cc essiv ely . but rather that on e sh o u ld m ake th em th e object of a reflection capable of d isco v e rin g in th em b oth th e logic o f the practical use of tem poral o p p o sitio n s (from w h ich the con tra d ictio n s arise) a n d . th e p rin cip le of th e tran sm u tation to w h ich scholarly ob jectifica­ tion su b jects this logic. th e tim e that flies b y or drags. ^ v itin g an inform ant to situate tw o " periods ” in relation to one another in a continuous time (w hich does no more than state what the genealogical or chronological diagram does im plicitly). i.e . o n e turns th em in to d ivid in g marks u n ited in a relation o f sim p le su cc essio n .g . Proof that lyali. A num ber °f ill-defined guide-m arks (e . estab lish ed o n ce and for all. so a calen dar su b stitu tes a linear. T h e sam e logic is found in *he belief that it is im possible to know exactly w hen a certain action should be avoided. n o d o u b t. so as to fall into lin e w ith the rules of the p rofession . co n tin u o u s sp ace o f g eo m etry . Rigour d em ands n ot that o n e sh o u ld o cc lu d e th ese co n tra d ictio n s b y m ean s of som e rhetorical or m ath em atical d ev ic e. d e p e n d in g on w hat o n e is doing. thereby dem onstrating that the practical grasp of the structure w hich leads him to think of lyali as the winter of winter overrides calculative reason. is found in the fact that different inform ants ascribe to it different durations and different d a te s: one of them even situates the first day of ennayer both in the m iddle of w inter and in the m iddle o f ly a li. By d istrib u tin g gu ide-m arks (cerem onies and tasks) alon g a co n tin u o u s lin e. Just as gen ealogy su b stitu tes a sp ace of u n eq u ivoca l. thereby creatin g ex nihilo the question o f the in tervals and corresp o n d en ces b etw een p o in ts w h ich are no longer to p ologically b u t m etrically eq u iv a len t. c o n tin u o u s tim e for practical tim e. as w ith . although he d oes not set ly a li in the (geom etric) middle of winter. each w ith its ow n rh y th m . T h e se d ifficu lties w o u ld . h o m o g en eo u s rela­ tionships. not m erit our atten tion (in sp ite o f th e trou b le and tim e th ey have co st) w ere it not that. for a sp atially and tem p orally d isc o n ­ tinuous set of island s of k in sh ip . and just as a m ap replaces th e d isco n tin u o u s. the " p eriod ” b ein g nothing other than the field of uncertainty betw een two guide-marks. A question as innocuous in appearance as "And what com es n ex t? ”.

and iquranen. one unw ittingly constructs an object which exists only by virtue of this unconscious construction of both it and its operations. by tacitly excluding all reference to the practical interest which a socially characterized agent . w h ich can n ev er all be m ob ilized togeth er in p ractice (b ecau se th e n ece ssitie s o f e x iste n c e never require th is sort of sy n o p tic ap p reh en sion . and in using such-and-such a tem poral gu id e. the m onths of the M oslem calendar or the " h o u ses”. an adult or a shepherd. b ut b y the sam e tok en . a farmer or a sm ith. w hen they do not send the anthropologist (w hom they always see as a scholar) to other scholars w ith his scholar’s questions. that is.may have in dividing up the year in such-and-such a w ay. ten d in g rather to d isco u ra g e it by their u rgen cy) g iv es full rein to the theoretical n eu tralization w h ich th e inquiry . or izegzazven. imellalen. instead o f ask in g h im self w h eth er th e essen tial ch aracteristic o f practice is n ot p recisely th e fact that it ex clu d es su ch q u e stio n s. they endeavour to produce the form s o f learning w hich seem to them w orthiest of being offered in reply to scholarly interrogation. everything about the inquiry relationship itself betrays the interrogator's "theoretical ” (i. the calendar as an object o f thought.a man or a w om an. and fw atah . predisposed to becom e an object o f discourse and to be unfolded as a totality ex istin g beyond its "applications” and independently of the needs and interests o f its u sers. . w ith d ifferen t fu n ctio n s. T h e can cellin g ou t o f th e practical fu n ctio n s o f tem poral gu id e-m a rk s that resu lts from th e co n tex t of in terrogation and from scien tific reco rd in g is the h id d en co n d ition o f cu m u la tin g and seriatin g the aggregate o f th e o p p o si­ tio n s w h ich can be p rod u ced in relation to d ifferen t u n iv erses of discou rse.e . the interrogation itself tacitly substitutes for d iscontinuous marks intended to be used for practical ends. A nd also w hy. H e th u s se cu re s the m ean s o f a p p reh en d in g th e lo g ic of th e system wrh ich a partial or d iscrete view w ould m iss.th e analyst w in s th e privileg e o f totalization (th ank s to th e pow er to perpetuate that w ritin g and all the various tec h n iq u es for reco rd in g give h im . etc. iwraghen. and also to th e abundant tim e h e has for an a ly sis). "non-practical ”) disposition and invites th e interrogatee to adopt a quasi-theoretical attitude: the situation in w hich the interrogation is carried on rules out any reference to the use and conditions of use of th e temporal guide-m arks. B y cu m u latin g in form ation wT ich is n ot and h can n ot alw ays b e m astered b y any sin g le in form an t .20 In short. and co n seq u en tly that h e w ill in sist on tryin g to an sw er q u estio n s w h ich are n ot and can n ot b e q u estio n s for practice. there is every lik elih ood th a t he w ill overlook th e ch an ge in statu s to w hich he is su b jectin g practice and its p rod u cts.at any rate. su b stitu tin g for the guides w hich really organize their practice as m uch as they can m obilize of the series of the constructed calendar. such as mtvalah. T h e totalization wr ich th e diagram effects by ju xta p o sin g in th e sim u lta n eity h of a sin gle sp ace th e com p lete series of th e tem poral o p p o sitio n s applied su ccessiv ely b y d ifferen t agen ts at d ifferen t tim es. This explains w hy inform ants w ho are invited to give the calendar often start by setting out the scholarly series of successive units. rw alah. never on th e in stan t .io 6 G en erative schemes an d practica l logic opposite of the attitude involved practically in the ordinary use of tem poral terms Q uite apart from the form w hich the questioning m ust take so as to elicit an ordered sequ en ce of answ ers.

thinking in term s of the cycle of the fig harvest. m onothetically. ( i ) " y fo llo w s x ” ex c lu d e s " x follo w s y ” . it can also be opposed. b ein g o d u ced and u sed in d ifferen t situ a tio n s. step by step . on the nature of the event. When one knows that m any other oppositions could be produced. T h e esta b lish m en t of a sin g le series th u s creates ex nihilo a w h o le host of relation s (o f sim u lta n eity .e. to " lyali of January”. and only in relation to them . and on the social status of the agent concerned. w ith the "w hite d a y s” and the "dry d ays” . not o n ly on e after an oth er. the licit period for ploughing. to the divisions or sub-divisions of the " p eriods” to w hich they are op p osed . T h e same informant may at one m om ent. never arises in practice. or achakh (the ripeness of the figs). political space of graduated scales of op in ion . that is to say. T h is m akes it p ossib le to ap preh en d at a glan ce.22 D epending on the precision w ith w hich the event considered has to be localized. oppose lahlal to achraw . and " essba't of su m m er”. G iven that all the d ivisions and sub-divisions w hich the observer may record and cum ulate are produced and used ln different situations and on different occasions. {or example) b etw een term s and gu ide-m ark s of d ifferen t levels. T h e s y n o p tic diagram takes all th e tem poral op p o sitio n s w h ich can be collected and a sse m b le d and d istrib u tes th em in accordance w ith th e law s o f su ccessio n (i. w hich is the end of lakhrif and one o f the activities of thaqachachth. and betw een smaim of sum m er and smaim of autum n). different svstems o f oppositions are seen to em erge: for exam ple. can be opposed to smaim as well as to el husum or thimgharine\ as we have seen . and practical political positions. one m ight suggest that the relation betw een the constructed series obeying the laws of succession. and the very next m om en t. and the tem poral oppositions put mto practice successively so that they cannot be telescoped into the sam e spot. thinking in term s of ritual practices. as H u sserl put it .21 m ean in gs w h ich are p rod u ced and u sed p o ly th e tic a lly . are never b rou ght face to face in practice a n d are th u s com p atib le practically even w h en logically con trad ictory. su cc essio n . betw een " es-ba't of late sp rin g ”. ( 2) if y fo llo w s x and z fo llo w s y . If another seem ingly ethnocentric analogy' be perm itted. far from being defined . is hom ologous with the relation betw een the continuous.as in a perfectly ordinate series . w ith the M green days” and the "yellow d a y s”. be opposed as the "great n ig h ts” to the "lesser nights of fu ra r” and the "lesser nights of maghres (the sam e com binative logic w hich leads to the oppositions betw een " essba't of w inter” and "essba't of sp rin g ” .T he calen dar an d the syn optic illusion r e la tio n s h ip itself p rod u ces. a fortiori. as " lya li o f D ece m b e r”. or. uno intuitu et tota sim ul. the period known as ly a li. b u t on e by o n e. oppose lakhrif taken as a w hole ("autum n is w ithout d iv isio n s”) to lahlal. w hich are always taken UP in response to a particular situation and particular interlocutors or opponents and make d istinctions and divisions of greater or lesser refinem ent depending on the Political distance betw een the interlocutors (le ft:r ig h t::left o f the left:righ t o f the left:: left of the left of the le f t: right of the left o f the le ft: :e tc. by a different logic. hom ogeneous. or. through w hich it is im plicitly opposed to thissemtith (the first figs). as D esca rtes said. the question of h ow each of them relates to the unit at a higher level.) so that the sam e agent . or sy m m etry . w h ich . one sees the artificiality and indeed unreality of a calendar w hich assim ilates and aligns u nits of different levels and of very unequal im portance. th en z fo llo w s x \ ( 3) eith er y fo llo w s x or x fo llo w s >•).in relation to the period which preceded it and the period w hich follow s it.

at Ait H ichem ). the (no doubt frequent) disappearance. the house. covering all the people bearing the name of the same ancestor (as far as the third or fourth generation) . (c) adhrum.A li ou X . w ould show that the vagueness of the social term inolo­ gies they offer could only result from a certain familiarity with K abyle reality com bined w ith ignorance of the theoretical traditions and of the corresponding pre­ tensions to theoretical system aticitv. with his arbitrarily devised concepts. to know one another). equivalent to akham or adhrum (elsew here. nothing is more suspect than the ostentatious rigour o f the diagram s of the social organization o f Berber societies offered by anthropologists. and the concepts which agents use in ritual actions to express structural relations. T h e synonym s. starting with the m ost restricted and hence most real unit. It also often happens that the words are used indifferently to refer to social divisions at the same level. the undivided family (called akham. produced in the main by administrators and soldiers (or law professors). perfect taxonom y of political organization which she opposes to the anthropological tradition. thakharubth) may not have been used . M s Favret w ould not have gone to the "innocent and m eticulous ethnography of Hanoteau and L etourneux” for the basis of the pure. are (a) el hara. marked by the splitting up. this is the case in the Sidi Alch region. som etim es also designated by a terra probably suggested by the topography. is alm ost always the opposite of what M s Favret. thakharubth includes adhrum. A few cases can be found in w hich. Indeed. T hough the vocabulary of social divisions varies from place to place. since the path bends as one passes from one akham to another: thaghamurth. the fact remains that the hierarchy o f the basic social units. (e) the village. those designated by the words thakharubth and adhrum. accusing the latter both of being "m erely more sophisticated and more ignorant of its lim its” than the general’s military anthropology and of failing to observe the distinctions which his work makes it possible to draw. a group of acquaintances. the extended fam ily. as Virginia W oolf would have put it. as Hanoteau maintains. in this case including the tw o leagues.23 A more penetrating reading of the texts in question. a purely local unit. akham n A it A li. one can only restate certain basic points of the description of the structure of the village of A lt H ichem 24 which perhaps erred only by excessive "rationalization” of native categories. (d) the suff. in w hich the terms used. probably because term inologies collected at particular times and places designate the results of different histories. or aharumy bringing together the people w hose com m on origin goes back beyond the fourth generation. to the opposition betw een the "com pletely unam biguous” terminology of *he anthropologist. in particular. or sim ply "those a b ove” or "those b elow ”. says it is. If her taste for provocative paradox had not led her to rehabilitate the worthy brigadier-general’s "wild [sauvage] ethnography” against professional ethnology (which happens to be somewhat under-professionalized in this area). W ithout entering into detailed discussion of M s Favret’s schem atic presentation o f the term inology collected by Hanoteau. Jeanne Favret provides an exam ple in a recent article in w hich she follow s Hanoteau on to a " field ” on which her general ideas are most redolent of generals’ ideas. the elbow . and the annexation of lineages. or. contradicting the third law o f succession. akharub (or thakharubth). T h e same analysis applies to the term inologies serving to designate social units: ignorance of the uncertainties and am biguities w hich these products of a practical lo g ic ow e to their functions and to the conditions in w hich they are used leads to the production of artefacts as im peccable as they are unreal.io 8 G en erative schemes an d practica l logic may find him self successively on his own right and on his ow n left in the " absolute ” space of geom etry. Perhaps no anthropologist has been more sensitive than Edm und Leach to "the essential difference betw een the ritual description of structural relations and the anthropologist’s scientific description ”. to which must be added tha'rifth (from 'arf. (b) akham. following Hanoteau.

with which it coincides at A il H ichem . if on e is to avoid asking of it m ore lo g ic than it can g iv e. ) . p rin cip les w hich are not on ly coh eren t . i. for exam ple. aharum). used to suggest a n " a r b i t r a r y ” unit. Everything takes place as if one passed by in s e n s i b l e gradations from the patriarchal fam ily to the clan {adhrum or thakharubth). a conventional alliance as opposed to the other term s which denote n d i v i d u a l s bearing a com m on name (A it. n eutralization o f fu n ction s.25 A nalysis of the various b u t clo sely interrelated asp ects ° f the theorization effect (forced sy n ch ron ization of the su cc essiv e. bringing jars of w a t e r o r som e vegetables. by helping w ith the cooking. ^ g p h a z a rd ly . c o n s t i t u t e tw o thakharubth) and the real lim its may disappear (the Ait Isaad group t o g e t h e r several reduced thakharubth in a single thakharubth). as can be seen. with the intermediate units corresponding to m ore-or-less a r b i t r a r y points of segm entation (w hich would explain the inform ants’ uncertainty with v o c a b u l a r y they often indequatelv m aster). the Ait M endil. and the m ost distant relatives . Su/f. in th eir practical state. is often distinguished from adhrum. in the different shades of obligation in t h e c a s e of m ourning. T h ese points becom e especially apparent w h e n conflict arises ( b y virtue of the fact that the units are separated only by d i f f e r e n c e s of degree. presented by " w ild ” or civilized anthropologists from H a n o t e a u through Durkheim to Jeanne Favret. ignores the unceasing dynam ism of u n i t s which are constantly form ing and reform ing. im m ediately m astered and m anageable because obeying a " p o o r ” and econom ical logic. su b stitu tio n o f th e sy stem of products . the system atic p i c t u r e of interlocking units. thereby con d em n in g o n ese lf either to w rin g in coh eren ces out of it or to thrust upon *t a forced c o h er en ce . What is true of genealogical and political taxonom ies is equally true of the tem poral taxonom ies of the agrarian calendar: the level at which t h e oppositions actually m obilized are situated depends fundam entally on the situation -th a t is to say.Econom y o f logic since they emphasize either integration and internal cohesion ( akham or adhrum) or the contrast with other groups ( taghamurth.i. .g i v i n g a m e a l for the fam ily of the deceased after the m ourning is over). and also their irregularities and even in coh eren ces (b oth eq u ally necessary b ecause inscribed in the logic of their gen esis and fu n ctio n in g ) to the fact that they are the p rod uct o f practices w hich can n ot perform their practical fu n ctio n s except insofar as th ey brin g into play.e .b u t also practical. on the relationship betw een the groups or individuals who are to be demarcated by m eans of taxonom ies.e . that is. in the sense o f con v en ien t. In short.or friends from another clan . . their regularities. O ne th u s has to acknow ledge that practice has a logic w h ich is not that of logic. and they a r e s u b j e c t to constant change: the virtual lim its may becom e real ones w hen the group e x t e n d s itself (thus at A it H ichem . and the others m a k in g their own small contribution. capable of en gen d erin g in trin sically coh eren t practices com p atib le w ith the ob jective co n d itio n s . Econom y o f logic Sym bolic sy stem s ow e their practical coherence. th e f u n d a m e n t a l social unit. and the fuzziness which is an i n t e g r a l part of native notions inasmuch as it is at once the precondition and the p r o d u c t of their functioning. with the closest relatives offering the meal. fictitious totalization . who were originally united.

e tc . application of the sam e sch em es to different logical u niverses. self-su fficien t u n its owe their im m ed iate transparency not on ly to th e sch em es w hich are realized in them .) w h ich .e . w h en con sid ered from o u tsid e . especially in w in te r . b ut necessarily approxim ate. p ercep tions. for exam p le. dam p. i. h ave d ifferent th in gs as its com p lem en t and m ay. even o p p o sed . e tc . m eans that th e universe of d iscou rse in relation to w hich this or that class (an d therefore the com p lem en tary class) is co n stitu ted . Practical logic . th em selves redu cible in the last analysis to a fundam ental dicho­ to m y . w hereby no m ore logic is m ob ilized than is required by the n eed s of p ractice. w h ich is based on th e principle of the econ om y of logic. in o p p o sitio n to the external w orld . on ly because its w hole econ om y. properties. sin ce they are con stitu tive of that ap preh en sion. resu lting from the highly econ om ical. o f im precision ) w ith w hich th e y are d efined. and action s by m eans of a few generative p rin cip les. b u t also to the situation ap p reh en d ed through th ese schem es and to the a gen t’s practical relation to that situ ation . p resu p p oses a loss of rigour for th e sake o f greater sim p licity and generality and because it finds in " p oly th esis ” the conditions required for the correct use of p olysem y. can rem ain im p licit.1 10 G en erative schemes and practical logic for the system of p rin cip les o f p rod u ction .. w hich for the w o m en it indeed is.e . according to the u n iv e rse . from th e m ale p oin t of v iew . G iven that it is unlikely that tw o contradictory ap p lication s of the sam e sch em es w ill be b rou ght face to face in w hat w e m ust call a universe o f practice (rather than a universe of d isco u rse). therefore. at the d egree of p recision (i. as the logician s call it.practical in both sen ses o f the w ord . e tc . g o in g in /co m in g ou t. b ut it can be d ivid ed in to a m ale-fem ale part and a fem ale-fem ale part w hen it ceases to be seen by reference to a universe o f practice co exten sive w ith the u niverse.is ab le to organize the totality of an agent's th ou gh ts. in different u niverses of practice.) brings o u t. in negative form ( certain properties of th e logic o f practice w h ich by definition escape theoretical ap p reh en sion . is glob ally defined as fem ale. an d is treated instead as a universe (of practice and d iscou rse) in its ow n righ t. N o one takes the trouble to system atically record and com pare th e su ccessiv e products o f the application of the generative sch em es: th ese discrete.27 T h e fact that sym b olic ob jects and practices can enter w ith ou t contradiction in to su ccessiv e relation ship s set up from different p oin ts of v iew m eans that they are subject to overdeterm ination through indetermination: the application to the sam e ob jects or practices of different sch em es (such as o p en in g /clo sin g . can pass u nn o ticed because it entails no practical co n seq u en ces. because it is im plicitly defined in each case in and b y the practical relation to th e situ ation . T h an k s to " p o ly th e sis”. are all practically . the sam e thing m ay. g o in g u p /g o in g d o w n .26 T h e h ou se. T h e p rin cip le of the ec o n o m y of lo g ic. the " con fu sion of sp h e r e s”. receive differen t.

and op posed to h o n e y ). the colou r or size of the strokes. W ithou t w ish in g to p ush the m usical m etaph or too far. like gall. th e desire to stack all the od ds on one's ow n s id e . through the m ediation of som e com m on term ). b ittern ess (it is eq u ivalen t to oleander. wormwr ood. 28 T h is m ode of apprehension never ex p licitly or system atically lim its itself to any on e aspect of the term s it links. although on e of the d ifferen t aspects o through w h ich a " d a tu m ” like gall can be con n ected w ith other (equally equivocal) data .w hich are also fo u n d . is con d u cive to the logic o f developm ent. wr am ong the d ifferen t aspects hy of the at on ce u n d eterm in ed and overdeterm in ed sy m b o ls it m anipulates. or in its inverted form . u n ites b itterness and greenness) or m od u latin g in to rem oter tonalities by playing on th e associations °f the secondary h arm onics ( l i z a r d t o a d ). or the field s) con d en ses a good n um ber of th e system 's fundam ental op p o sitio n s . as a w h o le. and h o stility (inherent in the p revious tw o q ualities) necessarily com es to th e forefront.e . in relation ship s as accessary in appearance as those between the cook in g-p ot and the w heatcake griddle or the stable and the kanun. green ness (it is associated w ith lizards and the colour green ). at least in directly (i. these m od u lation s play on the harm onic p rop erties o f ritual sym bols. th ose w h ich define it as a system coh eren t in practice.viz. etc. T h is exp lain s. exp lo itin g to the full the fact that tw o " d a ta ” are never entirely alike in a ll respects but are always alike in som e resp ect. For exam p le. T h u s a relation sh ip su ch as that b etw een th e h ou se and the ihajm ath (for w h ich one cou ld su b stitu te th e m arket. ritual practice never clearly op p oses asp ects sym b olizin g so m eth in g to aspects sym bolizing n o th in g and h en ce disregarded (such as. in the case o f the letters of the alphabet. T he m ost sp ecific properties o f a ritual corpu s. b ut takes each on e. with only sligh t d ifferen ces.29 . each tim e. first. or tar. w h eth er d u p licatin g on e of th e th em es w ith a strict eq u ivalen t in all respects (gall evok in g wr orm w ood. n ight and day. cannot be perceived or ad eq uately understood unless the corpu s is seen as th e product (opus operatum ) of a practical m astery (modus operandi) ow in g its practical efficacy to the fact that it m akes connections based on w hat Jean N ico d calls overall resemblance. the vertical wr rd -ord er). w h ich . or. w h e n th e fun dam en tal quality is em p h a sized . w hich are alw ays d eterm in ed in several respects at o n ce. the sym b olic chord m ay be so u n d ed eith er in its fundam ental form . in a page of w riting. . the other aspects do not th ereb y cease to be perceived sim u ltan eou sly. is r e la tio n s h ip s in iii the sou rce of the polysem y characterizing th e fundam ental the sym b olic system . one m ight n on eth eless su g g est that a n um ber of ritual seq u en ces can b e seen as Modulations: occurring w ith particular frequ en cy because the sp ecific principle ° f ritual action .th e full and the empty. w ith variations against a background o f redundancy. the fem ale and th e m ale.Econom y o f logic e q u iv a le n t.

) . though it seem s to break all the rules of logical d ivision (for ex a m p le.112 G en erative schemes and practica l logic Ritual practice effects a fluid. as W allon says of th in k in g in cou p les. the n eed to stick to that p rin cip le at all tim es. thereby ob v ia tin g the need to define in each case th e prin cip le g overn in g the ch oice o f the aspect se lec te d . prin cip les w h ich are all in directly redu cible to on e another. colour. "f u z z y ” abstraction. b rin gin g th e sam e sym bol in to different relations through different aspects or b rin gin g d ifferen t aspects o f the sam e referent in to th e sam e relation o f o p p o sitio n . the "analogical s e n s e ” in cu lcated in th e earliest years o f life is. In other w ords. overd eterm in ed p rin cip les ( h o t : c o ld : : m ale: fe m a le ::d a y :n ig h t::e tc . fluid abstraction is also false abstraction.) w h ich differ from the p rin cip les gen eratin g other h o m ologies in to wT ich either o f the tw o term s in q u estio n m ig h t enter h (m a n :w o m a n ::e a st:w e st or s u n : m o o n : : d r y : w e t). The u n iv erse th u s u n d ergoes a d ivision w h ich can be said to be logical. is alw ays exp ressed ellip tically . the su n and th e m oon ) is n ot d efined and u sually com es d o w n to a sim p le contrariety (w hereas con trad iction im p lies a prelim inary analysis) analogy (w h ic h . " p e t it ”. the assim ilation is com p reh en sive and com p lete even w hen fun dam en tally m oti­ vated in on ly on e resp ect. b ein g in th e last analysis the product of a single principium division is. In sh ort. this practical taxon om y ap plies. w h ich g iv e s rise to the co u n tless ap p lication s of a few basic contrasts capable o f p rovid in g a m in im u m ."w om an is the m o o n ”) estab lish es a h o m ology b etw een o p p o sitio n s (m a n :w o m a n ::su n :m o o n ) set up in accor­ dance w4th tw o in d eterm in ate. for all its dichotom ies are in d efin itely redu n dan t. it ex clu d es th e S ocratic q u estion o f the respect in which th e referent is appreh en ded (shap e. B ecause the p rin cip le o p p o sin g the term s w h ich have b een related (e . a sort o f " sen se o f th e con tra ry ” . B ut in relating objects and selectin g asp ects. w h en it d oes not fu n ction purely in its practical state. and this en ab les it to classify the sam e " d a ta ” from several different stand­ p o in ts w ith ou t classifyin g them in different w ays (w h ereas a m ore rigorous sy stem w o u ld m ake as m any classification s as it fou n d p rop erties). in other w ords. fu n ctio n . T h e aspect o f each o f the term s w h ich is (im p licitly) selected from a sin gle stan d p oin t in any particular con n ectio n m ade betw een them rem ains attached to th e other asp ects through w h ich it can su b seq u en tly be o p p osed to oth er asp ects of an oth er referent in other co n n ectio n s. Ritual practice p roceed s n o differen tly from th e ch ild who drove A ndre G id e to despair b y in sistin g that th e o p p o site o f "blanc w as " b la n c h e ” and the fem in in e o f " g r a n d ” . su ccessiv ely or sim u ltan eou sly. and.g . by making d ivision s w hich are n eith er exclu sive nor ex h a u stiv e). e t c . T h e same term cou ld th u s en ter in to an infinite n um ber o f co n n ectio n s if the num ber of w ays of relating to wr hat is not itself w ere not lim ited to a few fundamental o p p o sitio n s. B ecau se the properties d istin g u ish in g one " d a tu m ” from another rem ain attached to n on -p ertin en t p rop erties. a fo rtiori.

> a toad is not a frog) and cannot ive anv inform ation about the relations it relates. T h e question-begging and the approxim ations in this series are obvious: the cat. w ho w ill be given a meal with m eat. if it goes towards the stable. is engendered by the schem e w hich structures the internal space of the house. i. the season of milk .30 . Sym patheia ton holon. this presages the arrival of guests. that a given task or rite corresponds to a particular period of the year or is excluded from another. i. an intruder w hich enters by chance and is driven out again. if it heads for the hearth.to give the ox and the co w . the place reserved for the anim als. and by reference to practical en d s w h ich are su ch as to im p ose on them a necessity w h ich is not that of logic. T h e u ncertain ties and m isunderstandings in herent in th is logic of su g g estio n and a m b igu ity are thu s the price that has to be paid for the economy w h ich resu lts from redu cing the universe o f the relations b etw een o p p osites and o f the relation s b etw een these relations to a few basic relations from w hich all the o th ers can be generated. to be able to produce or understand a sym bolic series such as the follow ing: w hen a cat enters the house with a feather or a wisp of w hite wool in its fur. the centre of the rite. H e only needs to possess. the dry and the w et. the feather is im plicitly treated as the equivalent of the w ool. is ach ieved at the cost of the fu zzin ess and vagu en ess of each of the elem en ts and each of the relation ship s b etw een th em : lo g ic can be everyw here on ly b ecause it is really n ow h ere. that a given act or object requires a particular place inside the house. a set of schem es functioning in their im plicit state and in the absence of any precise delim itation of the universe of discourse. th is is b ecause the schem es o f wr ich they are the product can be q uasi-u n iversally applied on ly h because th ey fu n ction in their practical state. b ecause it is p recisely their indeterm inacy and fu zzin ess that perm it it to op erate. in their practical state.e . the affinity b etw een all the objects of a universe in w h ich m ean in g is everyw h ere. as th e S to ics called it.Econom y o f logic "3 0f determ ination (a m an is not a w om an . this is because they are th e p rod uct o f a sm all n um ber of g en erative sch em es that are pra ctically interchangeable. the tim e of the collective sacrifice of an ox follow ed by the ploughing.autum n. capable o f p rod u cin g eq u ivalen t resu lts from the p oint of view o f the " lo g ic a l” d em an d s of practice. If ritual p ractices and represen ­ tations are ob jectively en d ow ed w ith partial. If th ey never have more than partial and ap proxim ate sy stem aticity . the male and the fem ale. "the w h ite” .e . and spring. the opposition betw een the hearth and the stable. is only there as a bearer of sym bols. It is by "practical sense ” that an agent know s. an ox if it autumn. this m eans that a cow w ill be bought if the season is spring. for exam ple. T h is schem e only has to be com bined with the schem e generating the opposition betw een two seasons . opposing the top and the bottom . and everyw here superabundant. and the lower part. the noble part where guests are received and where meat is roasted (the dish served to guests par excellen ce). approxim ate sy stem a ticity . on the h ith er side of exp licit statem ent and co n seq u en tly ou tsid e o f all logical con trol. no doubt because both substances are called upon to function as the mere supports of a beneficent quality. which realizes practically the m ovem ent of entering.

W hen con fron ted w ith m yth and ritual. are d efin ed . T h e cure is logically self-evident.e. It can im m ediately be seen that to produce this narrative. concealed in dum plings: her belly sw ells and people think she is pregnant. from the high to the low . When this is done. in their fem ale state. i.carries it towards the inside. and return to maleness inopportunely. by adding to it what is pre-em inently dry. T h e sw elling which results from this inverted procreation is sterile and pernicious. T he dry m ust be made to move in the opposite direction. A girl who has seven brothers falls foul of the jealousy of her sisters-in-law. with a lot of salt. T h e girl marries. of sem en. it is the heart .the girl sim ply has to be turned upside dow n . a sym bol of the male life-principle. the story of Heb-H eb-er-Rem m an. T h ey make her eat seven snake’s eggs.that is eaten ). in the state to w hich they are structurally assigned as sym bols o f male seed. and reinforcing its propensity tow ards the moist. She goes back to her brothers. and thus of the dry. are ingested in the form of eggs. towards the damp w om b of woman or of the earth opened by the ploughshare. and the m ean s it u ses to attain th em .which cannot be done by a sim ple mechanical operation: the dry must be further dried. show ing them the seven snakes which she has dried and salted. social theory has alwr ays h esitated b etw een the lofty d istan ce w h ich the m ost com p rehensive scien ce seek s to keep b etw een itself and th e elem en tary form s o f reason and . reco n stitu tin g . i. the w om an’s fecundity is proved by the birth of H eb-H eb-er-R em m an ‘'pom egranate se e d s ” (the sym bol par excellence of female fecundity.a male part of the snake .and from the inside to the outside . o f the ancestor w ho must die in order to be reborn.procreation or sowing .e.e . it is sufficient to possess the set of schem es which are at wr ork in the production of any fertility rite. she is driven from the house. salt. who recognize her when she tells them h e r story. for exam ple. parched. the many sons born (or to be born) from the fertile wom b of a woman herself sprung from a wom b prolific of m en (her seven brothers). that is. to the co n d itio n s in w hich its fu n ctio n s.31 But here there is a false fecundation: the snakes. in the girl’s stom ach (in a fertility rite reported by Westermarck. she has a child whom she calls H eb-H eb-er-R em m an "pomegranate se e d s”. And the seven snakes end up dried and salted. T h e girl m ust eat it and then be suspended by her feet with her m outh open over a pan o f water.th e significance and fu n ctio n s that agents in a d eterm in ate social form ation can (and m ust) con fer on a d eter­ m inate practice or exp erien ce. the snakes com e out and they are killed. a sheep must be slaughtered and its meat roasted. T o fecundate is to penetrate. A w ise man discovers the cause of h e r ailm ent: to cure her. given the practical tax o n o m ies w hich organize their p ercep tion . to introduce som ething which sw ells and/or causes sw elling: the ingestion of food. capable of grow ing and m ultiplying through the cycle of im m ersion in the wet follow ed by em ergence towards the dry. which in normal fecundation .b y an operation of logical recon stru ction w h ich has n oth ing to d o w ith an act of em p ath ic projection . identified with the w om b ). It m eans.ii4 G en erative schemes and p ra ctica l logic A nother exam ple occurs in a w ell-known tale. and of food w hich sw ells ( ufthyen) is hom ologous with sexual intercourse and ploughing. i. At the end of the story. or to decode (at least in an approxim ate form) its significance. T he body as geom eter: cosmogonic practice U n d erstan d in g ritual practice is not a q u estion of d eco d in g the internal logic o f a sym b o lism but of restoring its practical n ecessity b y relating it to the real co n d ition s of its g en esis.

" P a rticip a n t” anth rop ology. in order to credit them w ith alien in ten tio n s. Even w hen they are asym ptotic w ith scien tific tru th . But. It so happ en s that. which con stantly refers her back to the logic of p lou g h in g . in n o w ay exp lain s K ab yle marriage ritual. on the other hand . m y stified . T h e .T h e bo d y as geom eter: cosmogonic practice 1 15 the m ystical participation of the great initiates of the g n o stic trad ition. R ites take place b ecau se and o n ly b ecau se they find th eir raison d'etre in the co n d ition s of ex isten ce and the d isp o sitio n s o f a gen ts w h o cannot afford the luxury of logical sp ecu la tio n . m ystical effu sion s.sh e can on ly think what sh e is d oin g in th e en ch an ted. form w hich spiritualism . by a false g en erosity con d u civ e to stylistic effects. It is not sufficient to rid icu le the m ore naive form s of fu n ctio n a lism in order to have d one w ith th e q u estion o f the practical fu n ctio n s o f p ractice. that is to say. the inspired in terp retation s fostered by such a d isp osition are never m ore than the in version o f th e false objectification performed b y colonial an th rop ology. b ecau se it brackets th e agents' ow n repre­ sentation o f th e w orld and o f their practice. thirsty for eternal m ysteries. as su rely as its o p p osite. for L eviStrauss. and locks th em in the etern al essen ce of a " m en ta lity”.and in particular her language. h istorically situated problem s w h ich w ere forced on th em in a determ in ate state o f th eir in stru ­ m ents o f m aterial and sy m b o lic appropriation of th e w o rld . given the sy m b o lic eq u ip m en t available to her for th in k in g her ow n activity . fu n ction s of m oral in tegration . T h e K ab yle w om an settin g up her loom is not perform ing an act o f cosm ogon y. finds so en ch a n tin g . By cu ttin g practices off from their real conditions o f ex iste n c e. the exaltation o f lost wr om isd dispossesses th em .regards the human invariants and the u niversality o f th e m ost basic exp eriences as sufficient justification for seek in g eternal answ ers to the eternal q u estio n s of the cosm ogon ies and co sm o lo g ies in the practical answ ers w h ich the peasants of K abylia or elsew h ere have given to th e practical. T h e objectivist reduction w h ich b rings to ligh t the so-called ob jective fu n ction s 0f m yth s and rites (for D u rk h eim . fu n ction s o f logical integration) m akes it im p o ssib le to understand bow these fu n ction s are fu lfilled . or m etaph ysical anxiety. scarcely m ore u n d erstan d in g is d erived from a structural analysis w h ich ign ores the sp ecific fu n ctio n s of ritual practices and fails to inquire in to the eco n o m ic and social co n d itio n s o f the p roduction ° f the d isp o sitio n s gen eratin g both these practices and also th e co llective definition of th e practical fu n ction s in w h ose service th e y fu n ctio n . in accordance with form s approved b y the grou p .w h en it is not m erely inspired b y nostalgia for the agrarian paradises. contrary to appearances. sh e is sim p ly settin g up her loom to w eave clo th in tend ed to serve a techn ical fu n ctio n . th e prin cip le of all con servative id eo lo g ies . It is clear that a universal d efinition of the fu n ction s of m arriage as an operation intended to en su re th e b iological reproduction of the g ro u p . o f everyth in g that co n stitu tes their reason and their raison d'etre.

as w e have h ere.take th e form of m o v e m e n t s of the b o d y . that is. It is in a particular relationship b etw een a m ode of p rod uction and a m o d e of p ercep tion that th e specific contradiction of agrarian a ctivity is defined as the hazardous or even sacrilegious con fron tation of antagonistic p rin cip les. of treating m o v em en ts o f the body and practical m an ip u lation s as purely logical opera­ tio n s. w h ich entails no ex p licit statem en t of th e properties of th e term s related or th e principles of th eir relationship. co m in g ou t. tech n ical or ritual practices are d eterm in ed b y the m aterial conditions of ex isten ce (that is. by a certain relation ship between the clim atic and ecological con d ition s and th e available tech n iq u es) as treated in p ractice b y agents endowr w ith sc h e m e s of p ercep tion of a determ inate ed sort. the sw ellin g o f a pregnant w om an ’s belly. d esp ite the variations in th e clim a tic and econ om ic co n d itio n s). p u ttin g th in g s u p sid e d o w n . separatin g. to their inseparably logical and practical n ecessity . etc. serve to u n d erlin e the mistake of en clo sin g in con cep ts a logic m ade to d isp en se w ith co n cep ts. is still to u se th e intellectualist language o f represen tation . going in. turnin g to th e right or le ft. . if w e w ant to give an account of ritual p ractices w h ich w ill d o justice b oth to their reason and to their raison d'etre. togeth er w ith th e ritual apparatus w h ose fu n ctio n it is to resolve that con trad iction .32 R ites. ty in g . u n itin g. m ore than any other typ e of practice. and the principle of wfh ich is the socially con stitu ted sc h e m e s of his h abitus. n egatively at least. in order to understand and to con vey that u nd erstan ding) w h en all that is in v o lved is th e practical transference of incorporated. T h u s . quasi-postural sc h e m e s . It is th is inter­ pretation w h ich has to be con stru cted in each case. and th e germ ination of w h eat in the grou n d.n6 G en erative schemes an d practical logic K abyle peasan t d oes not react to " ob jective c o n d itio n s” but to th e practical in terp retation w hich he prod uces of th o se con d itio n s. It is through th e m ediation o f th e fu n ctio n thereby assigned to tech n ical or ritual p ractice that the relation sh ip observed b etw een the eco n o m ic system and the m ythico-ritual sy stem is estab lish ed p ractically . of overall resem b lance and u ncertain abstraction. in this particular case. T o sp eak . mimetic representation (apom im em a) estab lish es a relationship b etw een the sw ellin g of grain in th e cook in g-p ot. o f speaking of an alogies and h om o lo g ies (as on e so m etim es has to. b y th e material h co n d itio n s of existen ce (th e relative au to n o m y o f ritual b ein g a ttested by the invariant features fou n d th rou gh ou t the M agh reb. the m ost characteristic operations of its " lo g ic ” in v ertin g. etc. wr ich are th em selv es d eterm in ed . transferring.the language w h i c h an an alyst’s relation to a corpus spread ou t before him in th e form of . cu ttin g.33 R ite is in d eed in som e cases n o m ore than a practical mimesis of the natural p rocess w h ich n eed s to b e facilitated : u nlike m etaphor and ex p licit analogy.

there w ould have b een less am azem ent at the od d ities of the " p rim itive m en ta lity ” if it had b een p ossib le to con ceive that the logic of m agic an d " p articip ation ” m igh t have so m e con n ection w ith the experience o f em o tio n . w e are justified in sa y in g . b ecau se it has b een w on 3nd built up against th e exp erience it enables on e to n a m e : it is scarcely necessary to in sist that w e can no m ore id en tify th e scien tific stu d y of oxidation w ith th e exp erien ce o f fire than w e can offer th e con tin u ou s. an action oriented in relation to a sp ace objectively constituted as a stru cture o f d em and s (th in gs " to be d o n e ” and " n ot to be d on e”) b ecom es a reversib le operation carried ou t in co n tin u o u s. e a st/w e st). inside and ou tsid e. as lon g as m vthico-ritual sp a ce is seen as an opus operatum .The bo d y as geom eter: cosmogonic practice 117 docum ents q u ite n aturally forces on him . su ch as falling or rising. in th e tim e of L ev y -B ru h l. failin g by th e sam e token to in qu ire in to th e social conditions of p rod uction o f that transform ation. h o m o ­ geneous space. su ch as g oin g forw ards or backwards. of the sim ilar or dissimilar " p r o f i l e s T h e lo gicism inherent in th e ob jectivist stand point leads those w h o adopt it to forget that scien tific con stru ction cannot grasp the principles o f practical lo g ic w ith ou t ch an gin g th e nature o f th ose p r in c ip le s: when m ade exp licit for objective stu d y. Just as. and w here on ly theoretical op eration s can b e effected. so that term s like d isp lacem en t and rotation are given their practical sen ses as movements o f the b ody. i. it is never more than a theoretical sp ace. a practical su ccessio n b eco m es a represented su c c e ssio n . H avin g estab lish ed that th e internal space of the K abyle h ou se receives a sym m etrically op p osite sign ification w hen re-placed in th e total sp a ce ou tsid e.e . . can be derived from the other b y m eans of a sem i-rotation . so now adays th ere w o u ld b e le ss aston ish m en t at the '"logical” feats of th e A ustralian ab origin es if the "savage m in d ” had not been u nconsciously cred ited . that each o f th e se tw o sp aces. on ly on con d itio n that th e m athem atical language exp ressin g su ch operations is reunited w ith its b asis in practice. that is. F or exam p le. logical d isp la cem en ts and transfor­ mations w hich differ toto coelo from m ovem en ts and action s actually per­ formed. w ith the relation to the w orld that in tellectu alism attributes to ev ery " c o n scio u sn e ss” and if an th rop ologists had not rem ained silen t about th e transform ation leading from operations m astered in their practical state to th e form al opera­ tions isom orphic w ith th em . b y a sort of inverted eth n o cen trism . as w e did earlier.to express a lo g ic w h ich is acted oU directly in th e form of b odily gym n astics w ith ou t p a ssin g through the t express ap preh en sion of the " a s p e c ts” selected or rejected . or turning round. so lon g as it is not forgotten that th is language destroys the truth it m akes available to ap preh en sion. T h e scien ce o f m yth is at liberty to d escrib e the syn tax o f m yth in the language of group th eory. as a tim eless order of th in gs co e x istin g . in w hich th e on ly landm arks are provided by the term s of relations o f op p osition (u p /d o w n .

togeth er w ith all the eq u ivalen t actions . circum stances . the op eration s wr ich ob jective an alysis d iscovers in m y th ic d isco u rse. P erform ing a rite p resu p p o ses so m eth in g quite different from the co n scio u s m astery o f th e sort of catalogue o f oppositions that is draw n up b y acad em ic com m en tators striv in g for sy m b o lic mastery o f a dead or d y in g tradition (e . left and righ t. the classification o f th e possible in stru m en ts. being h linked to one an oth er on ly by w eak analogies.g .place and tim e . or a nutcracker 34 m akes it p ossib le to p rod uce ritual action s that are com patible with the en d s in view ( e . g o in g or th row in g to th e left or w ith the left hand. Perhaps there w ou ld be less tem p tation to treat the agent im p licitly or exp licitly as a logical operator if (w ith o u t en terin g into the q u estion o f chron ological priority) on e w en t back from the m y th ic logos to th e ritual praxis w h ich en acts in th e form o f real action s. th ey can n ot be redu ced to one . or right to left. the C h in ese m and arin s’ tables o f eq u iva­ len ces) and also by an th rop ologists in the first stage of their w ork.g . and its d irectio n s co n ceiv ed as substantial p rop erties. In fact. tu rn in g so m eth in g from left to right. sin ce. in stru m en ts.e . o f d isp lacem en ts and m o vem en ts ritually qualified as p rop itiou s or u n p rop itiou s. ob tain in g rain or fertility for the livestock ) and intrinsically (at least relatively) coherent. L ike th e acts of jurisp ru dence. etc. and agen ts of ritual action . above all. the g estu res and m ovem ents co n stitu tin g ritual a ctio n ). Practical m astery of p rin cip les n either m ore com p lex nor m ore n u m erou s than the prin cip les o f solid statics ap plied w h en u sin g a w heelb arrow . and agen ts an d. a lever. i. b o d y m ovem ents. m akes it clear that the co u n tless o p p o sitio n s ob served in every area o f ex isten ce can all be brought d o w n to a sm all n um ber o f cou p les wr ich appear as fundam ental. an analysis of the universe of m yth ically or ritually defined ob jects. ritual practice owes its practical coherence (w h ich m ay be recon stitu ted in th e form o f an objecti­ fied diagram of op eration s) to the fact that it is th e p rod uct of a sin g le system of conceptual schemes im m anent in practice. co m b in a tio n s o f a particular ty p e o f circu m stan ces (tim e s and p la ce s). T h e se in clu d e g o in g (or th row in g so m eth in g ) upw ards or eastw ards. and g o in g or throw ing to the right or w ith the right hand. an opus h operatum con cealin g the co n stitu tin g m om en t of " m y th o p o eic ” practice under its reified sign ification s. in stru m en ts.p u ttin g so m eth in g on the roof o f th e h ou se or th ro w in g it tow ards the kanun\ b u ryin g it on the th resh old or th ro w in g it tow ards the stable. w ith it$ d y ssym m etries. its d isco n tin u ities. clo sin g (or tyin g) and o p en in g (or u n ty in g ). W e m ay say that gym n astics or d a n cin g are geom etry so lo n g as w e d o n ot m ean to say that the gym nast and th e dancer are geom eters. east and w est. d ow n w ard s or westwr ards. that is.ii8 G en erative schemes and p ra ctica l logic h o m ogen eou s sp ace of geom etry as the practical sp ace of practice. startin g w ith th e circum ­ stan ces.and agents of ritual action) but also th e p rod u ction of p ractices (in this case. organ izing not on ly th e perception o f ob jects (and in this particular case.

36 T h e poet goes straight to th e heart of th e relation ship b etw een the space inside the h ouse and th e ou tsid e w o r ld : th e reversal of d irectio n s (sens) and m eanings (sens) in g o in g in and c o m in g ou t. to analogical practice as scheme transfer carried o u t b y the h abitus on the basis ° f acquired eq u ivalen ces facilitatin g th e in terch an geab ility of reaction s 38 and enabling th e agen t to m aster by a sort o f practical gen eralization all sim ilar Problem s lik ely to arise in newTsitu ation s. on e o f wT o m op en ed doors w ith his right h arm. or geom etrical practice (" geom etry in the tangib le w o r ld ”. A s a b elated . b y th e m ere fact o f turnin g about to " fa ce” som eon e or "turn its b a c k ” on h im . g o in g in and co m in g ou t (or filling and em p ty in g ).so m any m o vem en ts w h ich the m yth ic w orld-view charges w ith social sign ification s and w h ich rite m akes in ten siv e use of. puts its right arm in the sleev e of th e garm ent w h ich had b een ly in g on th e left. A n d alm ost all prove to b e based 0n m ovem en ts or p ostu res o f the hum an b o d y . the hum an b od y fu n ctio n s as a practical operator w h ich reaches to th e left to find the right hand it has to sh ake. as in a sen ten ce o f A lb ert th e G reat’s p ick ed up b y R ene Char. east and w est. serves as th e basis for a m etap h ysics o f nature dressed . g o in g to the left an d g o in g to the right. sittin g and standing ( e tc . or again. as Jean N ico d p uts it ). from th e f a it accom pli and dead letter of the already effected analogy (a : b : : c : d ) f w hich ob jectivist h erm en eu tics con sid ers.35 m akes so much u se o f in version is perhaps th at. i. like a m irror b rin gin g to lig h t the paradoxes o f bilateral sym m etry. can reveal th e d u ality u n d erlyin g the seem in g u n ity o f the ob ject: " In Germ any there w as a pair o f tw in s. from ob jects or acts to the p rin cip les of their production.). in w'hich the revelation of a n on -in ten tion al coh eren ce. for exam p le) and even an th rop ologists as an " u n ­ con scious fin a lity ”. I catch m y self d efin in g th e threshold A s the geom etric locu s O f arrivals and departures In th e H o u se of the F a th er . and move from ergon to energeia. it is easier for him to sw eep aside dead m etaphors and go straight to the prin cip le of m yth op oeic practice. sm all-scale producer of private m yth o lo g ies. turns " u p sid e d o w n ” things w h ich w ere " the right w ay u p ” .e . T h e reason w h y th is practical g eo m etry .”37 h If w e sim p ly fo llo w the op p o sitio n d efined b y W ilh elm von H u m b o ld t. or. often d escrib ed b y lin gu ists (Sapir and T ru b etzk o y . su ch as g o in g u p and com in g down (or g o in g forw ards and g o in g b ackw ards). or reverses right and left. that is.T h e body as geom eter: cosmogonic practice ll9 another excep t in a forced and artificial w ay. m ore p recisely. then at on ce w e break the sp ell of the panlogism en cou raged b y the exoteric version of structuralism . the other o f wr o m sh u t th em w ith h is left arm . to the m o v em en ts and gestu res w h ich .

39 In fact this p lannerless plan is n o less m ysteriou s than th e plan o f a su p rem e planner. the skv. a sp eech (e . the a p p etite). a knot. the heart (i.figuratively as w e ll as literally . h ow ever charged w ith connota­ ord tio n . an action .a practice w hich owes a n u m b er of its p rop erties to th e fact that it falls sh o rt of discou rse (which d oes not m ean it is short on lo g ic) one su b jects it to n o th in g less than a change in on tological status the m ore seriou s in its theoretical co n seq u en ces because it has every chance o f p a ssin g u n n o tic e d . T h e fallacy. to in augu rate. It fo llo w s that sim p ly by b rin gin g to th e level of discourse . m ake easy. WT s. b less.12 0 G en erative schemes an d practical logic up in the lan guage of natural scien ce. and m ore gen erally.g . op en in g o n e ’s h eart). a face. W e are th en in a p osition to question the p erfect coh eren ce w h ich ten d s to be conferred on historical system s by th o se w h o con vert th e m eth od ological p ostu late o f in tellig ib ility into an ontological th e sis. held to be th e on ly alternative to final causes as a m ean s o f exp la in in g cultural p hen om en a p resen tin g th e m selv es as totali­ ties en d ow ed w ith stru ctu re and m ea n in g . the day. a cluster of sen se s co v erin g virtually all the m ean in gs attached to sp rin g. w h ich Ziff p oin ts o u t. an egg. T h e language of th e b od y. extra-ordinary co n tex ts). b ein g broader and vaguer than the . is o n ly apparently corrected in the h y p o th esis of th e unconscious. and in any case exp licit and th erefore " fa lsifia b le”. th u s p resu p p o sin g a plan. th e sitting of an assem b ly. a sh o o t. and m akes the fu llest p ossib le u se of the p oly sem y of th e fundam ental action s. w h ich alw ays aim s to facilitate passages an d /or to authorize en co u n ters b etw een op p o sed orders. w ith a ritual form ula). is incom ­ parably m ore a m b igu ou s and m ore overdeterm in ed than th e m ost overdeter­ m ined u ses of ord in ary lan guage. a fortiori. that m ay b e given o f it. if on e w an ts to stu d y it scien tifically . w h eth er articulated in g estu res or. e t c . or to b e op en . of co n v ertin g regularity in to a rule.to op en (transitive) a d o o r or a path (in ritual. T h is is w h y ritual " r o o ts” are always broader and vaguer th an lin g u istic roots. and w h y th e g y m n a stics o f ritual. p lace u n d er good au spices (" M ay G od op en th e d o o r s”). or to op en (in tran sitive) . the heart (cf.that is to say.ap plied to a b u d . and it is understandable that th e structuralist v u lgate sh ou ld have b ecom e for so m e p eop le an intellec­ tually accep table form of T eilh ard ism . .4 0 R itual p ractice. at o n ce unilateral and arbitrary. alw ays se em s richer than th e verbal translations. in w hat p sych osom atic m ed icin e calls " th e language of the o rg a n s” . the root fth m ay m ean .as one m u st. like d ream s. lim it the range o f ch o ic es and render difficult or im p o ssib le.e . m yth ic " r o o ts” w h ose p olysem y is partially reproduced b y linguistic roots: for exam p le.applied to the " door in th e sen se of the b eg in n in g of a series. the relations w h ich th e language of the b od y su gg ests. on e acceptable in in tellectu al circles. n ever d efines b ein gs or th in g s otherwise than in and through th e relation ship it estab lish es practically b etw een them . B u t.

a p p e a r (u s e d of y o u n g sh o o ts .). u n ited h o u s e ) . go dow n. b u r s t.)43 w h ich are available in F rench to exp ress the ultim ate valu es o f taste and w h ich can b e applied equally w ell to a d ish or a sch o o l exercise. and so o n .).41 One w ould on ly have to let on eself be carried alon g by the lo g ic of associations in order th e recon stru ct th e w h ole system o f sy n o n y m s and antonyms. through th e an ton ym s.) . etc. stand u p . on the other sid e.be ru in ed ( k h l ). go toward th e lig h t. fill . re so lv e . e t c . through the antonym s. a n d th e s c h e m e : to o p e n ( tr a n s . fall. burst.42 S im ilarly. go leftw ard. or root zdy. sm a sh e d . a n d m o re g e n e ra lly . a play or a p ain tin g. s e p a ra te o r b e s e p a r a te d ( o p p o n e n ts ) .) (a p p lie d to fig s). th e n e s t is fu ll o f fled g lin g s re a d y to ta k e w in g ). a n d th u s . an accent or a garm ent. on e cou ld approach th e roots ' m r . d iss o lv e . to u n b in d . be born. th e m y th ic a l ro o t le n d s itse lf to r ic h e r a n d m o re v aried •flterplay. by o p p o sitio n . to sift a n d b e sifte d (w h e a t b e in g p re p a re d fo r grinding). ex tin gu ish . m u lt ip ly .be filled. to reco n cile. fth.) . be below . b e aw ake. to m u ltip ly (a n e s tfu l o f b ir d s : ifruri eVach. d eclin e.b e em p tied or ruin . FRKh.) .) . BOT . ifruri w a s).to b e o p e n 0iakes it p o ssib le to se t u p a s so c ia tio n s a m o n g a w h o le se t o f v e rb s a n d n o u n s that go b e y o n d sim p le m o rp h o lo g ic a l a ffin ity : it can ev o k e th e r o o ts f s u . ifru ri elhat) .) .) . lie d o w n . c u t .separate (in tra n s. m u ltip ly (in tr a n s. to proliferate. and through th e m pass to the u n ite (tran s. u ff. u n tie . separate (tran s. o ffsp rin g . starting from the mythical root "go u p ” on e w ou ld find go eastw ard or b e turned eastw ard. to fo rm ( in tr a n s .b e sharp (QD‘). g o forw ard. d a w n (d a y lig h t w h ic h " fig h ts ” w ith th e n ig h t a n d " se p a ra te s ” from it. th e s p r o u ts w h ic h a p p e a r o n th e tre e s in sp rin g . go tow ard the dark ness. to sh e ll.be ex tin g u ish e d (t f ). to b re a k .be separated ( f r q ). grow up (a bridge to th e p reviou s set °f roots). p ac ify .T h e body as geom eter: cosmogonic practice 12 1 jstic r o o t.) . be above. s m a s h . T h is practical taxonom y ow es its efficacy to th e fact that. go in to th e future. sy n o n y m s o f sy n o n y m s and an ton ym s of an ton ym s. to begin to g ro w (a p p lie d to w h e a t o r a b a b y ). tem e/b rilla n tf e t c . th e o u tc o m e o f a n y b u s in e s s ). give b ir th (h en c e asafrurakht b lo ss o m in g . or. go rightw ard. to b e b ro k e n . On one side.be in u n ity (th e h o u se " fu ll” of men and g o o d s is a n u m ero u s. a n d t h u s . increase inflate. h e n c e the name thafsuth g iv e n to s p r in g ) . sp ro u t. f r y . etc. or (intrans. on e w ou ld find e m p t y . go tow ard th e op en cou n try. to s p lit a n d b e s p lit like th e egg o r p o m e g ra n a te b ro k e n at the time of m a rria g e a n d p lo u g h in g . o r b e shelled (p ea s a n d b e a n s ). sleep .u n ite (in tran s. to e n te r th e p e rio d w h e n fre s h b e a n s ca n be picked (lah lal usafruri). a joke or a w alk. o p e n . appease. finally. and so on .to o p e n ( in tr a n s . T h e nearest eq u ivalen t to th is series of gen erative sch em es b o u n d together bv relations of practical eq u iv a len ce is the system of adjectives (lourd/leger} chaudlfroid. to b lo ss o m . a n d la fra k h . it c a n evoke th e ro o t f l q . to b e c o m e b r ig h te r (th e w e a th e r. to f o rm ( tr a n s .

the western. Each o f th e significations co llected exists in its practical state on ly in th e relationship b etw een a schem e . etc. "behind” is naturally an associated with "inside ”.122 G enerative schemes and p ra ctica l logic as is evid en ced b y the n u m erou s sen ses recorded in the d iction aries. eggs. and it would not be difficult to reconstruct the quasi-totality of Kabyle ritual practices from this one scheme. the whirlwind . etc. eclatant (dazz­ lin g) or piq u a n t (p u n g en t). for example. and of its relation ship w ith its an ton ym . the pairs o f qualifiers w h ich as a sy stem co n stitu te the eq u ipm en t of -th e ju d g m en t of taste are extrem ely " p o o r ”. e t c . toward the light. con sid ered in each of their u ses. symbolizing prosperity. in one of the rites associated with the loom these words are 4 . or any o f the cou p les that are interchangeable w ith them to w ith in a m atter of nuan ces. b ut also with frig ide or g ra v e. m ay be giv en in other fields. each use o f on e o f these pairs is on ly m ean in gfu l in relation to a universe o f practice w hich is different each tim e. must not look behind her or the sale will go badly. and wheat behind her. i. T h is p lurality of m ean ings at on ce different and m ore or less closely interrelated is a product of scien tific co llec tio n . or the produce of her husbandry. O n the oth er hand. a calcu lation or a fit of anger. These m eanings interweave with all those associated with "in front”.thim siw ray -attacks from behind the m who faces the qibla to pray). sensuel or chaleureux (cord ial). confronting (qabel ). yarn. and it w ill have as m any antonym s as it has different sen ses: chaud (h ot) or cou rse. etc. in slightly different con texts. abru \ the train of a garment. ru lin g out the p ossib ility of com p arison w ith other universes. or again w ith austere and d istan t. in another rite. but it also is associated with that which follows. d ep en d in g on w h eth er it is applied to a m an or a w o m an . a m elod y or a ton e of v o ice. but also ardent or emporte (ira scib le). It follow s th at. p la t (flat) and tem e (d u ll). uttered: "May the angels be before m and the devil behind me".e . the m ean in g w h ic h these pairs are giv en in a particular field has for h arm onics all the m ean ings w hich they th e m selv es.. This is true. their in d efin iten ess p red isp osin g th em to inspire or express the sen se of th e indefinable: on the on e h an d . front door is male. with the fem (the eastern. trailing behind on the earth. going forward. and ex trem ely rich. quasi-in determ in ate. e a child is rubbed behind the ear so that he will send evil "behind his ear”). d u r (hard) and sec (dry). behind is where ill fortune comes from (a woman on her way to m arket to sell the products of her industry.. the m ean ing o f each adjective. hidden. is sp ecified in each case in term s o f the logic of each of the fields in w hich it is a p p lie d : fro id m ay be sy n on ym ou s w ith calm e or indifferent. brillan t or expressif. an amulet. ale back door is female). of the way in which the opposition between “ in front” and " behind” functions in ritual practice: behind is where things one wants to get rid of are sent4 (e. going into the future. u su ally im p licit.g. eggs. the source of fertility. a tin t or a work of art. a blanket. with all that is private. happiness: the bride entering her new house strews fruit. and secret.. a head or a heart. and alw ays self-su fficien t. hens. going eastward.

W ithin the " f u z z y ” logic o f approxim ation which im m ed iately a ccep ts as eq u ivalen ts " fla t”.th e only w ay m w hich agents can ad eq u ately m aster th e p rod uctive apparatus w hich enables th em to gen erate correctly form ed ritual p ractices is b y m aking it operate . T h e universes of m ean in g corresp ond ing to different u n iv erses o f practice are at on ce self-con tain ed . T h is is eq u ally true o f th e sy m b o ls o f ritual. T h e ob jectified path of th ese passages is som etim es m arked o u t b y sayin gs w h ich state th e an alogies ("the m aiden is th e wall of d a rk n ess” . b ecau se he cannot recapture th e logic im m an en t in th e recorded prod ucts of th e apparatus excep t by con stru ctin g a m odel w h ich is p recisely th e su b stitu te requ ired w hen one does not have (or n o lon ger has) im m ed iate m astery of th e apparatus. there are alw ays som e w h ich fu n ctio n as " sw itc h e rs”. or "w om an is the w e s t ”.4 T h is is wr 6 hat the observer is likely to forget. in the Kabvle trad ition. A m on g the fo rm s w h ich a basic opp o sitio n m ay take. "dull*’. i. in th eir incorporated 5’2 .e . a w ord cannot alw ays appear w ith all its m eanings at once. " u n d ern ea th ” . Every su ccessfu lly socialized agen t thu s p ossesses. as V endryes p oin ted o u t. or. T h is is w h y it is n ot legitim ate to speak o f the different m ea n in g s o f a sym bol UIje s s it is borne in m ind that th e assem b lin g o f th ese m ea n in g s in sim u ltan eity (or o n th e sam e page o f a dictionary. th is is w h y th ey can only generate products that are indeed system atic but are so b y virtue o f a fu zzy sy stem a ticity and an approxim ate lo g ic wr ich cannot w ithstand the test o f rational system atization h and logical criticism . and " in sip id ”. " c lo se d ”. the generative sc h e m e s are in ter­ changeable p ractically.and objectively con sisten t w ith all the o th ers. fe r tility male prosperity b ein g lin k ed to "in fr o n t” through the in term ed iary of the bond b etw een "in fr o n t” . insofar as they are the loosely system atic prod ucts o f a system o f m ore or less com p letely integrated gen erative p rin cip les fu n ction in g in a structurally invariant w ay in the m ost d iverse fields o f practice. and ligh t. " f u ll”. favourite valu e-ju d gm en t term s o f th e F rench aesth ete or teach er. on the other hand. in the case o f w ord s) is a scientific artefact and that they n ev er exist sim u ltan eou sly in practice. p rod u cts w h ich th ey d o . th e fu tu re. the relation sh ip b etw een " b e h in d ” and " in s id e ”. " in s id e ”. concretely estab lish in g th e relation ship b etw een the u n iv erses of practice: here. fo r exam p le.sch em es w h ich th ey are. if all the m ean in gs a w ord is capable of taking w ere perfectly independent of the basic m ean in g. w ith ou t tu rn in g d iscou rse into an en d less play on w o r d s . wT ich on closer h inspection are p erfectly in com m en su rab le.45 L ack in g sym b olic m astery o f the sc h e m e s and their products .h en ce protected from logical con trol through system atization .T he body as geom eter: cosmogonic practice 123 (or th e product o f a sc h e m e . no play on w ord s w ould ever b e p o ssib le. a w ord for exam p le) and a sp ecific situ ation . O n the on e hand. or "w om an is the m o o n ”) b etw een the d ifferen t series. w hich provides the passage from " b e h in d ” to fem ale p rosp erity.

in m arriage or ploughin g. on the contrary. " H eaven and earth are separated by th e lim it. w h ich the p rim itive sp ecu lation o f the P yth agoreans set out as tw o "columns o f co n tra ries” (sustoichiai) . said an old K a b y le. th e system o f inseparably co g n itive and evaluative stru ctures w h ich organ izes the vision o f th e world in accordance w ith th e ob jective stru ctures of a determ inate state o f the social w orld : th is prin cip le is n o th in g other than the socially inform ed body.and th e eth n om eth od ological school n ow adays . " T h e w orld is based on th e lim it [thalasth] ” . as id ealism su p p oses.unite (in tran s.47 B u t the n ecessities o f practice d em and the reunion of th in g s w h ich practical logic has su nd ered . with its tastes and d ista stes. the sen se o f h u m ou r and the sen se of absurdity. T h e ey es have an en closure [zerb ]. to reconstruct the p rin cip le gen erating and u n ify in g all p ractices. com m on sen se and th e sen se of th e sacred. that is to say. for exam p le . its co m p u lsio n s an d rep u lsio n s. in a w ord.w h ich never escape th e stru ctu rin g action of social d eterm in ism s . sin ce P arm enides.attribute unjustified au ton om y and im portance) are only one asp ect.and on e fu n ctio n o f ritual is precisely to eu p h em ize. th e sen se of d irection and th e sen se of reality. and so on . the sense o f balance and the sen se o f b eau ty.but also the sen se o f necessity and the sen se o f d u ty .) . T h e m ou th has a lim it. as diakosmesis) and o f the ritual action s in tend ed to au th orize or facilitate the necessary or unavoidable breaches o f that order.” T o bring order is to brin g d istin c tio n . Union an d separation T o th e foregoin g list sh ou ld b e added w hat m igh t b e called th e sense o f limits an d o f the legitim ate transgression o f lim its.be in unity (the root z d y ) and its . all its senses.124 G en erative schemes an d practica l logic state. a system of classify^ sch em es w h ich organ izes all p ractices. It is.) . w ith . to d ivid e the u n iv erse into o p p o sin g entities. not on ly th e traditional five se n se s . E veryth in g has a lim it. b u sin ess sense and th e sense of propriety. and o f w h ich the lin g u istic schern^ (to w h ich th e n eo-K an tian tradition . and more gen erally. the in stru m en ts of an ord erin g of th e w orld . for all the sy m b o lic ob jects and action s w h ich can be generated from the sch em e unite (tran s. tactical sen se and the sen se o f resp on sib ility. m oral sense and th e sen se o f p racticality. th ese u navoid able tran sgression s of the b oun dary. T o grasp through the con stitu ted reality of m yth the constituting m o m en t of th e m yth op oeic act is n ot. N ot su rp risin gly. it proved difficult to find a p lace in the "colu m n s of contraries for an op p osition as p rod u ctive as that of th e odd and the even . and th u s to m ake licit. to seek in the co n sc io u s m ind th e universal stru ctures o f a "m y th o p o eic su b jec tiv ity ” and th e u n ity of a spiritual prin cip le gov ern in g all em pirically realized configura­ tio n s regardless of social co n d itio n s. w h ich is th e basis at o n ce o f the ordering of th e w orld (k n ow n .

T h is d ifficulty w as encountered b y E m p ed ocles.4 W hen E m p ed o cles g iv e s as sy n o n y m s of 8 diakrisis and synkrisis .) .b e closed . " th e lam p of th e in s id e ”. but it is not p ossib le to con sid er eith er of th ese states as its objective tru th . which m igh t appear as th eir ow n tw ofold " n a tu r e ” if th ey w ere con ceived outside that relation sh ip . w ith the other b ein g regarded as an im p erfect. it is the m arriage lam p that is called u p o n to bring the first ligh t.wr ords as load ed as p h th ora. laughter.) . w h o set asid e p h ilia and neikos. corru p tion . or genesis. th ereb y m anifestin g th e d u ality of th e relationship between th em . and all the roots associated w ith them from the p oint of riew of ritual m ean in g. Each th in g th u s receives different properties accord in g as it is apprehended in th e state o f u n io n or th e state ° f separation. extin gu ish . as su ch . at on ce antagonism and com p lem en tarity . kill. T h e p rinciple o f d iv isio n can n ot easily be classified among the th in g s that it m akes it p ossib le to classify. th e sacred of th e left h and. W hen the roof has b een put on a n ew h ou se. and for the secon d. like th e w ife. T h u s the h ou se. gen eration.be sharp. but in a v ery su blim ated form . he p o in ts to th e p rin cip le o f th e practical logic of rite.separate (in tran s. su ch as m arriage and p lo u gh in g seen as the union o f contraries and m urder or h arvestin g seen as the separation of contraries (p rocesses w h ich the logic of ritual mimesis. and w h ich are p roduced from a small num ber o f sch em es) and a sm all num ber o f (logical and b iological) practical operators w h ich are n oth in g other than natural p rocesses culturally constituted in and through ritual p ractice. as two ultim ate p rin cip les irreducible to th e op p o sitio n s w h ich thanks to them can be dialecticallv c o m b in e d .Union and separation I2 5 n o site separate (tran s. en clo ses its ow n light. neikos and p h ilia . wr ich has all th e n egative charac­ h teristics o f the dark. w h ich . m utilated form of that tru th . w'hen th ou gh t in accordance w ith the sch em es of magical th o u g h t . Because the u n ion of contraries d oes not d estroy th e op p o sitio n (wr hich it p resupposes).be separated (th e root f r q .) . but nowTin a quite d ifferen t w ay. th e reun ited contraries are just as m uch o p p o sed . w'hose operations are in sep arab ly logical and b iological. and is in this respect the equivalent o f th e tom b or the m aiden. the ^ a le-fem a le. harvest. as are th e natural p rocesses which it reproduces. or « cUt . rep rod u ces). fem ale w orld . ch an ges its d efinition w h en it becom es what it equally is.be ex tin g u ish ed .4 9 It is th u s p ossib le to d escrib e th e w h ole system of ritual sy m b o ls and actions by m ean s of a sm all n um ber of antagonistic sym bols (th e paradigm of which is the op p o sitio n b etw een the sex es. the place par excellen ce o f coh ab itation and of the m arriage of contraries. T h u s cu ltivated nature. in w h ich u nion and d ivision do in deed figure. for exam p le m arried w om an or . n octurnal. e t c . love and strife. close . m ixis. or m ale-d om in ated fem ale.an op p osition w h ich seem s to b elo n g to the order of logic. w h ich can also be translated as u n io n . but th is tim e in the sense of m arriage.

the w ilderness. are th e practical eq u i­ v a len ts o f filling and em p ty in g (plerosis and ken osis): to m arry is 'am m ar.th e harvested field or th e old w itch . or fast (elkhalethf the collective noun for " w om anhood ” is also em p tin ess.but also and esp ecially to natural nature. w h ich is still w ild and u ntam ed .51 T h e fu n d am en tal operators. the old w itch. plant. . Such a wom an is w ithout hurm a: "she is bad w o o d ”. a " tw iste d ” move. A n d conversely. T h ro u g h th is. she has affinities w ith the dark forces of uncontrolled nature. they can even b e redu ced to th e fundam ental o p p o sitio n s: to m oisten and to d ry . ruin). the desert. she specializes in the magic w hich uses the left hand. a magical device. honest. straightforward. " she is tw isted w o o d ”. and her husband’s fam ily. fu ll). T h e "old w om an ” is in league w ith all that is tw isted (a 'w a j. and turns from left to right). "wom an is a knot in the w o o d ” (thamttuth d iriz).52 A sterile w om an . and has no children. pray. her husband. w ith th e cu n n in g and treachery w h ich relate her to the jackal . M agic is her b usiness (thamgarth thazemnith. th e path is p eo p led . who has escaped from the authority of her parents. the void. it is th e sym b ol of fu lln e ss ( i 'mar u bridh. S h e is akin to fallow land. sterile old w om an w ho no longer has any " restraint ” brings the virtualities inherent in every wom an to their full realization. tends to the left and has to be brought back to the right (or the upright) at the cost of a " k n o t”. and turns from right to left (as opposed to m an. the cruel hand (a "left-hander’s b lo w ” is a deadly b low ). Like the young sh o o t w hich. the w itch in the tales).50 T h is opposition betw een a fem ale-fem ale and a m ale-fem ale is attested in countless ways. passive m ovem ent. m ore p recisely. A s su ch . to fem in ize and to m a scu lin ize.u n ited or se arated . to make a slip of the tongue. an d. Every wom an partakes of the diabolic nature of the fem ale w om an. to turn from right to left. the unbridled.or has returned t o th e twisted m aleficen t naturalness in to w h ich it falls o u tsid e m arriage . she is adept in the art of slyly "tw isting her g a z e ” (abran w alan) away from the person to w hom she w ishes to express her disapproval or annoyance (abran. suspect craftiness w hich also defines the smith . to turn in the wrong direction. of m ale fu lln ess. to turn on e’s back. especially during m enstruation.12 6 G en erative schemes an d p ra c tic a l logic lan d . in short. w h ich is o p p o se d o n the on e hand to th e em p tin ess of th e field and forest ( lakhla) a n d on th e other hand to fem ale fu lln ess ( la'm ara). the village or th e h o u s e . the hand used in sw earing an oath. to turn back to front. w ho uses the right hand. T h e fem ale wom an par excellen ce is the wom an w ho d oes not depend on any m an. to be fu ll. T h is is seen clearly in th e sign ifican ce assign ed to ev ery th in g sy m b o lizin g th e union o f con traries. u n itin g and sep aratin g. furtive. male a g gression ). w hen she m ust not prepare meals. is to op en . as a discreet. work in the garden. T h u s th e crossroads. i 9 o p p o sed n ot o n ly to th e m ale in gen eral . is opposed to geleb. is the p o in t o f convergence o f th e four cardinal d irectio n s and of th o se w h o co m e and g o in those d irectio n s. settuth. left to itself. the m aleficent. to tw ist) and all that is warped or warping: she is credited w ith thi'iw ji. to overturn.fallow land and th e m aid en . w h ich is op p o sed to th e fork as th e place "w h ere th e paths m e e t ” (anidha itsam yagaran ibardhan) to th e place "w here th e paths d iv id e ” (anidh a itsam faraqen ibardhan) . A sterile -woman must not plant in the garden or carry seed s. a female sid estep p in g.

th e w o m e n .5 6 T h e tem poral d istrib u tion of tasks and rites.53 T h e fearfu ln ess o f any operation reuniting contraries is particularly em p h asized in th e case of tem p erin g (asqi. w h ich breaks th e natural order of th in g s to im p ose on th em th e counter-natural order which d efin es cu ltu re. at th e m o m en t w h en the day is stru gg lin g w ith th e n ig h t. in so m e villages he is even en tru sted w ith th e inaugural p lo u g h in g . and the water in w h ich sh e has b ath ed is poured away at a crossroads regularly used bv the flocks (a p rom ise o f fe c u n d ity ). that is.to the house: sequi is to u n ite th e w et and th e d ry. h is very p resen ce at th e crossroads o f th e o p p o sin g fo rces w hich he m ust b rin g in to con tact in order to en su re th e su rvival o f th e g rou p . th e sm ith . in fact fall to th e sam e p erson s. fire and w ater.th e sm ith . w h o se an cestor. e t c . in th e action o f sp rin k lin g couscous w ith sau ce: to u nite th e hot and th e cold . u n itin g or d iv id in g . the p erson charged w ith starting the ploughing. perform ed b y a terrible b ein g. w h ich stan d s in the sam e relation to copulation as the crossroads . to glean and clear the fields. ta to o in g . is resp on sib le for all th e acts of v io le n c e by fire and iron (circu m cisio n . the last d escen d an t o f th e m an w h o fou n d a piece o f iron in the earth at th e sp ot w h ere lig h tn in g had stru ck .54 It is alm ost always th e sm ith w h o is ap p oin ted to p erform all th e sa crilegiou s. C onversely. T em pering is a terrib le act of v io len ce allied w ith cu n n in g . th e ch ron ological structure of the agrarian year or of th e cy cle o f life . W itn ess th e fact that th e acts co n sistin g o f m ix in g or cutting. and th e corn -m ea su rer . is a su prem ely d angerou s op eration . g o es to a crossroads. and m ade h is p lo u gh sh are ou t of it. and p o iso n in g ). to p our ou t b u rn in g (or b u rn t) w ater. S id i-D a o u d . cou ld h o ld red -h ot iron in his bare hands and w ou ld p u n ish tardy payers by offerin g th em on e o f his products w ith an in n ocen t air after first h eatin g it w h ite -h o t. w h eth er it be th e slau gh ter of th e sacrificial o x or circu m cision (although he d oes n ot sit in th e a ssem b ly. th e b u tch er.Union an d separation 12 7 a girl w ho can n ot find a h u sb an d . in order to avoid m akin g h im self th e m eetin g -p o in t of sky and earth and their an tagon istic forces (w h ereas. m ale fu lln ess . U n itin g and separatin g each entail th e sam e sacrilegiou s v io le n c e. p oison. leather sandals w h ich m ust not enter th e h o u se .55 T h e reason for th is is that in all su ch ca ses m an's in tervention . if certain testim o n ie s are to be believed.). is th e p rod uct at on ce .fu lln ess in em p tin ess. Just as a m an can n ot con fron t w om an u ntil assured o f the m agical p rotection g iv en b y circu m cisio n . in tem p erin g . go b arefoot in to the fields ). scarification. to bathe naked in th e w ater from th e tem p erin g vat just before ^nrise. also m eaning b roth . a full p lace p eopled ° f men. the dry and the w et. sacred acts of cu ttin g. in at least on e village. h is o p in io n is alw ays taken into account in m atters of war or v io le n c e ). and. w h o partake o f th e terrestrial p ow ers. that is. sau ce. all eq u ally feared and d esp ised . so th e p lough m an p uts on a w h ite w o o lle n sk ull-cap and arkasen .

u np redictab le toil which n o outw ard sign betrays.58 T h e con tin u in g assaults o f w in ter.59 w in ter is p resen ted as a w om an (th e nam e of the season . is d u al-n atu red : w in ter con tains b oth th e purely fem ale w o m an . with the p rogressive separation o f the grain and th e earth w hich is com p leted with the harvest. "the n ig h ts ”. sterile w o m a n . wT o is forced to renou n ce her lust for h v io len ce and sh ow m ore m oderation and clem en cy w hen defeated in her stru ggle w ith m an. finally d o m e stica ted . d isorder and d ivision . th e d ogdays. T h is period is indeed th e w inter o f w in ter. . d u rin g w h ich n oth in g h appens and all w ork is su sp en d ed . i. b ein g treated as a personified w o m a n ’s n am e). there are th e in sen sib le. T h e prim ary reason w h y ly a li.128 G en erative schemes an d practica l logic o f the diacritical intent (separation) w h ich orders by op p o sin g . lyali. in w h ich the properties of the w et season and the dry season are brought to th eir h ighest degree o f in ten sity. incarnated in the old w om an . u n tam ed . chathw a. em p ty . "the n ig h t s ”. and n igh t serve to rem ind m en o f the h idd en violen ce of th e fem ale nature. and w h ich resem b les the cooking of w'heat or beans in th e pot or the w ork accom p lish ed in w om an 's w o m b . b etw een the tw o " u p b e a ts” stru cturin g the year. T h is is a sort o f origin m yth em p h asizin g th e fact that w in ter. is that th e w inter o f w in ter and the summer o f su m m er in a sen se concentrate w ith in th em selves all the oppositions stru ctu rin g th e w orld and th e agrarian year. and m ascu lin ization of the fem ale in sp rin g. w ild forces w hich can never be said to be perfectly. and w h ich are m arked by n o major rite (ex p ect a few p rogn ostication rites ). th e order of th e w orld : fem inization o f th e male in a u tu m n . w ith p lou gh in g and so w in g and the rain-m aking rites which accom pan y th em . and d o u b tless an old w om an. there is the fundam ental o p p ositio n . and the synthetic intent (un ion) w h ich creates passages betwr een the contraries by means o f rites (of passage) w h ich attain th eir full in ten sity w hen the union or separation o f the antagon istic p rin cip les is effected b y hum an agency. is the site of a m ysteriou s. cold. alw ays m entioned bv in form an ts. ever-threatened transitions between o p p o sin g p rin cip les. is referred to by all informants. on the other hand. and the rites of p assage o f a particular kind w hich are in ten d ed to en su re that m en and th e elem en ts respect "th e order of tim e” (chronou taxis). w ith a thorn fen ce ( zerb). d u ly p rotected . u nadulterated. the fem ale p rin cip le w h ich old age reduces to its objective. like a woman.57 T h e fecu n d ated field. dry.e . the n igh t o f n ig h t. th e incarnation o f th e m aleficen t forces of death and d estru ction . and sm aim . that is. T h e period of forty days which is b elieved to represent the tim e the se ed sowT in autum n takes to emerge n is th e prim e exam p le o f the slack p eriod s. On the o n e h and. like w om an . wT hen th e boar m ates. the m om ent w h en th e natural wT orld is given over to th e fem ale forces o f fecun dity natural. and alw ays in relation to sm aim . In the "quarrel betwr een w inter and m a n ” .

. th e Beni S n o u s used to Set an upturned cook in g pot ( a sym b ol o f th e b lackness and w etn e ss o f w inter) With its bottom coated w ith lim e (blackness w h iten ed ) in the k itchen gardens (the place for fem ale cu ltivation ) at the tim e of in sla. sp iced food . th e rites of the su m m er so lstice. a plant not u sed in the a z a l b ou q u et. 0 ^ m a n fulfilled.6 T h e rites w hich mark th e '"first day of 2 sum m er”. an evil. just as w ithin the wet season lyali. in th e orchards. In all th e legen d s of th e borrow ed days (am erdil. som etim es even a jackal. in sla> w h ich occurs at the b egin n in g of sm aim . It is w ith in th is lo g ic that the famous "days of the old w o m a n ”. e tc . n o d ou b t. the carding-com b. pierce. the tim e for w heatcake and o il. a m onth regarded as u n p rop itiou s fo r any act of procreation (h en ce for m arriages ). a goat.the earth w ith its buried seed. piercing th e little g irls’ ears. as sh e d oes w h en she asks th e follow in g period to lend her a few days. T h e dry. the d ogdays. T h e w hole o f nature . but also the w om b . the em b od im en t of natural disord er .63 T h e night of sla . th e loan ). is to the dry season exactly w hat ly a li is to the w et season: th is slack p eriod. or b leed (tattooin g. Sm aim. also know n as " th e death o f the la n d ” .e . an d also th e dagger (w h ich cu ts th e throats of sacrificial anim als and m en s throats too) . p u rifyin g fires are lit in th e h ouse. i. in th e fields. and the other m om en ts o f tran sition and rupture. it is said that w o m en cannot conceive th en . Sm aim p resen ts all the . in the course o f w h ich sterile. w hich is to su m m er food as butter is to w in ter fo o d . and that ch ild ren born on that day are th em selv es con d em n ed to sterility (as are m arriages celebrated th e n ). virile and virilizin g. e tc . the harvest.the p lou gh sh are. burn. d om esticated w om an.). and th e springtim e forces of light w ith w h ich m an is in league. make use of iron and fire. sterile old w om an . p lou gh in g.6 b ut there is also th e tam ed. the work of gestation and germ ination accom p ­ lished by nature w hen fecun dated by m an. another slack p eriod.Union and separation 129 rely negative tr u th . is g iv e n over to sterility. sterile kingd om of summer is en tered in M ay. fertility. on the threshing-floor. sacrificed to w in ter. or a N eg ro (the slave H ayan ). in the m idst of the flock. usually an old w om an (like W inter h erself). w h ich are perhaps m ore than just a way o f accoun ting for the u nexpected return o f bad w eather. and in stru m en ts forged w ith fire . ch op . as a scapegoat. is op p osed to lahlal. m ust be u n d erstood . by th e h iv es. presents all the properties of the dry season . b leed in g perform ed on the m en and the anim als. T h is is perhaps the price that has to be paid for th e old w itch W inter to agree to respect the lim its assigned to her.is th e scen e of a stru ggle sim ilar to that betw een the cold and darkness of w in ter. the sickle. w h ich is op p osed to essaif. T h e tim e o f th e d ry is also the time for salt.64 A ccord ing to D esta in g . a b ein g partaking o f th e nature of winter. and even m ore. p reven tive or curative scarification w ith a stick of oleander. for roast.61 is sacrificed b y w in ter.in stru m ents u sed to cu t. or. like the dried herbs Used to m ake it.

already en cou n tered . i. But au tu m n is also the p o in t w here the cou rse o f the w orld turns round and everyth in g is turned over to enter its o p p o site . or raised w ith yeast. o f th e m axim ization o f m agical profit. eq u ip p ed w ith wooden stick s. in the cook in g-p ot. the h ou se. T h is is ob viou sly the case w ith all the au tu m n rites in ten d ed to aid th e co m in g o f rain: not only the ritual gam es. or (w h ich am ou n ts to the sam e th in g ) steam ed . m anifests the sign ifican ce con ferred on the tran sition from on e season to another. a ccom p an yin g or if need be acceleratin g the passage from th e dry to the w et in a u tu m n or from the w et to the dry in sp rin g. u n til th e return of sp rin g.e . T h e diet o f au tu m n . is in itself an in vocation of rain. the seed in to the w om b of the earth. the w om b . a sort of sacred boundary b etw een tw o sp aces. th e tim e o f iron and fire.aim to en su re the con cordan ce of the m yth ical calendar. w h ich insofar as it ritually m im es the fearful union of contraries. the m id d le of a z a l (thalm asth uzal)> is to th e cycle of th e day. w hich requires rain to co m e a t the right moment. Thresholds an d rites o f passage T h e transitional p eriods have all th e properties of the threshold. w ithou t spices. w here the an tagon istic prin cip les con fron t one another and the w orld is reversed. dry v egetab les. is m ade up of dry fo o d s (cereals. east and w est. th e ku ra. m ore so than au tu m n . the sacrifice of an ox (ch osen for the rain-cloud colour (a zeg za w ) o f its coat and evok in g th u n d er b y its low in g) and th e inauguration o f the p lo u g h in g (a w d jeb ). T h e rites of these m om en ts also ob ey the p rin cip le. violence and death (th e tim e of th e sw ord -ed ge. and the clim atic calendar. smaim. m ore exactly. but also thimechret. in to the o p p o sin g ca m p ). in terw oven w ith the ritual . the desert ( lakh la) of the h arvested fields. m om entarily abandoned to the su prem acy o f the fem ale p rin cip le. and b y th e lo g ic o f fecu n d ation . en d eavou rin g at the sam e tim e to con serve for as lo n g as p ossib le th e ad vantages of the d eclin in g season . It is also true o f the com position and preparation of the food con su m ed on ordinary and extraordinary occa­ sio n s. semm) is the m ale tim e par excellen ce. and th e darkness of n ig h t . with its w h im s and vagaries. w h ich w ill set back on its feet a w orld turned u p sid e d ow n. w h ich . th e m ale in to the fem ale. gen erated in accordance w ith the sch em e of soaking th e dry. w h ich are p layed in every season w h en rain is n eed ed . w ith ou t adm ixture or attenuationit is to the year w hat a z a l (th e h ottest tim e o f the day) or. w om an . practically treated as a ritual o f p a rticipation . T hey . L ike a z a l. p lou gh in g tim e.130 G en erative schemes an d practical logic features of su m m er in their pure state. ligh t (w ith th e lam p) into darkness.6 5 In d eed . try to push a ball. b y facilitatin g the p assages. such as kura (a ball gam e in w h ich tw o team s. dried m eat) w h ich are boiled in w a ter. men and b easts in to the h ou se. w h ich is d om in ated b y the sharp break that p lo u gh in g m arks.

b etw een the w et and the dry. tim es for the rites of progn ostication and inaugural p ractices. that are green and ten der. a stru ggle b etw een tw o p rin cip les w ith u n ceasin g reversals and ch an ges in fortu n e. like husum and natah. it falls to w om an to play th e part of a m id w ife and to offer nature a sort of ritual and tech n ical assistance (h o e in g . a m on g other sig n s. T h e am bigu ity is in sp rin g it s e lf : sp rin gtim e m eans grow th and ch ild h o o d . the virtual cessation o f activity reflects his lim ited con trol over the processes of germ ination and gestation . can only be that of an xious on lookers: h en ce perhaps. A s w ell as h oein g. har­ dened p ro d u ce .and also th e u ncertain ty ab out the future w h ich cau ses th ese inaugural p eriods (esp ecially husum or th e first day o f sp rin g ) to b e . y ello w (iw ragh en ). con tain th e hope of the b est and. and m an can n ot in tervene w ith o u t danger. and m aking b u tter.6 6 T h is tim e o f rupture and separation has the sam e role in the cycle of the grain as that played in the cycle of life b y th e rites in ten d ed to en su re the progressive virilization o f the g row in g boy (initially a fem ale b e in g ). it is the w o m e n ’s d u ty to w atch over th e grow th of the y o u n g h um ans and anim als. the threat of the w orst. even at their b est. m ilk ing *t. w h ere th e order of th in g s turns u p sid e . con stantly suspended and threaten ed .are to fu ll-grow n .am b igu ou s p eriods w h ich . like m orning. b u t it also m eans the vu lnerab ility and fragility o f all b eg in n in g s. or nisan. or. w hen the fate of the seed lin g s d ep en d s on a fem ale. a fem ale p rod uct w h ich is op p o sed to oil as th e inside and the w et to th e ou tsid e and th e dry. b eg in n in g im m ediatelv after lyali. b etter. look in g after the co w . for exam ple) in its lab o u r . T h e precise locu s of the th resh old . the m ultitude o f calendar term s alm ost all d escrib in g the state of th e w eather or the crops. w hich resembles th e battle fou gh t ou t every m orn in g b etw een darkness and light. to be celebrated w ith jo y .Thresholds and rites o f passage work of m oisten in g th e dry. and green p rod u ce. w h ich th ou gh regarded as b en ignan t is not exem p t from threats .6 T h e w om en are logically charged w ith all th e tasks in v o lv in g 8 the protection o f th in g s that grow and sh o o t. S p rin g is to su m m er as green and raw ( a ze g za w ) and ten der ( th alaqaqth ) th in g s . ripe. dry. am b igu ou s nature.6 A ll the 7 characteristic features of this d ifficult transition are in a sense concentrated in the series of critical moments. In th is tim e of w aitin g. even at their w orst. tim es of crisis w h en all the evil p ow ers o f w in ter seem to revive and to endanger g row th and life one last tim e. the m orn in g of life. T h e role of m ankind in this stru g g le. E veryth in g takes place as if each of th em bore w ith in it th e conflict w h ich o v ersh ad ow s the w hole season . sp rin g is an in term in able tran sition. like the inaugural day o f the sea so n . the eatin g of w h ich is seen as u n tim ely destruction ( a d h a m ) .th e u n rip e corn or the baby. th e w o m en ’s w ork in clu d es gathering herbs and vegetab les in the garden. b eg in n in g at birth and alw ays in volvin g fire or in stru m en ts m ade w ith fire .

I 32

G en erative schemes and practica l logic

d ow n ( aqlab), "lik e a w heatcake in the p a n ”, is ex p licitly m arked by the "return of a z a ll ” ( tharurith w a z a l) , th e p oin t of d iv isio n b etw een th e w et season and the dry season , w here th e year tip s over: th e rh ythm o f th e w orking dav - d efined b y th e m om en t w hen the flock g o e s ou t - ch a n g es, and w ith it the group's w h o le ex isten ce. T h e fire is brought out and the kanun is set up in the cou rtyard. T h e flock w ith its sh ep h erd , the h o u sew ife b u sy w ith the tasks o f m ilk in g and treatin g th e m ilk , b rin g in to th e rites n ew elem en ts partaking m ore o f the dry than of th e w et. T h e flock ceases to b e fed on ten d er green p lants from th e cu ltivated fields and g o es and grazes instead on w ild , dry p lants. T h e h erb s, flow ers, and branches that th e sh ep h erd b rin gs back with h im on h is first return at th e hour o f a z a l, w h ich g o to m ake u p th e bouquet, called a z a l, that is ritually placed ab ove th e th resh old (fern , cv tisis, bramble, th y m e, len tisk , m ale fig-tree b ran ch es, asparagus, elm , thap sia, myrtle, tam arind, heather, broom - in sh ort, " everyth in g the w in d shakes in the co u n trysid e ”) are th e w ild p ro d u cts of fallow land ( and not th e p rod u ct, even parasiticallv, o f cu ltivated lan d, like th e p lan ts gathered by th e w om en while h o ein g ). T h e ch an ge in food is even clearer: th e sp ecial d ish es o f tharurith w a z a l give a p rom in en t place to m ilk , as in th e p rev io u s p eriod, b ut it is now eaten in cook ed or boiled form .

Reunion o f contraries an d denial T h e tim es o f separation , w h en the o p p o sin g p rin cip les m ay be said to exist in th eir p ure state, as in su m m er, or to threaten , in th e case o f w in ter, to return to it, and th e tim e s of reu n ion , w hen the dry returns to th e w et, as in au tu m n , or th e w et returns to th e d ry, as in sp rin g , are m o m en ts opposed to on e an oth er; b ut they are also op p osed in a d ifferen t w ay, as m o m en ts in w h ich reunion and separation are a ccom p lish ed w ith o u t any m ore than sy m b o lic participation on th e part of m an, to th e tim es w hen reun ion and separation take on a critical form b ecau se it falls to m an h im self to b rin g them ab ou t. It is p recisely here that th e stru cture o f ritual practice is articulated w ith th e structure of farm ing a c tiv ity : th e o p p o sitio n b etw een th e propitiator)' rites o f th e transitional p eriod s and th e san ctio n in g rites w hich are obligatory for th e w h o le grou p and ab ove all for th e m en , d uring the periods o f hum an in terven tion in nature, harvestin g and p lo u g h in g , appears in fact as the retranslation in to th e sp ecific logic o f ritual o f the o p p o sitio n - structuring th e agrarian year - b etw een the tim e of w ork and the m u ch lon ger tim e of p ro d u ction , d u rin g w h ich th e grain - like th e pottery set ou t to dry u n d ergoes a p urely natural p rocess of tran sform ation . T h e h igh m o m en ts in th e agrarian year, th ose w h ich M arx d esign ates w orkin g perio d s, are m arked b y rites con trastin g in their gravity, so le m n ity , and im perative character w ith

Reunion o f contraries an d denial


t^e rites o f th e production periods, w h o se so le fu n ctio n is to lend m agical assistance to nature in its labour (see fig.

3).6 9

T h e rites w h ich accom pan y p lo u g h in g or m arriage have the fu n ctio n o f disguising and th ereb y san ctio n in g th e in evitab le co llisio n o f tw o contrary principles that th e peasant b rin gs ab out in forcin g nature, d o in g it v io len ce and violation, as he m u st, w ith p lou gh sh are and k nife, sickle and loom instrum ents fearful in th e m selv es, b ein g the w ork o f th e sm ith , th e m aster of fire. T h e aim is to transform in to in ten tion ally perform ed, and hen ce judiciously eu p h em ized , ritual acts the ob jectively sacrileg io u s acts o f separat­ ing, cu ttin g, and d iv id in g th in g s w h ich nature (i.e . th e ta x o n o m y ) has u n ited (when reaping, cu ttin g th e yarn after w ea v in g , or cu ttin g the throat of the sacrificial ox );70 or to reu n ite - in tem p erin g, m arriage, or p lo u g h in g - th in g s which nature (i.e . th e taxon om y) has p ut asu nd er. W hen o b jectiv ely sacri­ legious acts can n ot b e d elegated to an inferior b ein g , a sacrificer and scap e­ goat w hose role is to "take aw ay ill fo r tu n e ”71 (lik e th e slau ghter o f th e ox in the collective sacrifices, w h ich is en tru sted to th e sm ith or a N eg ro , and tem p er­ ing, the task of th e sm ith , a m an b oth feared and resp ected ) b u t m ust be shouldered by th o se w h o undertake and b en efit from th e m (lik e th e defloration of the bride, tu rn in g th e first furrow , c u ttin g th e last thread in w ea v in g , harvesting the last sh ea f), th ey are transfigured by a co llectiv e mise en scene intended to im p o se on th em a co llectiv ely proclaim ed sy m b o lic value w hich is the exact o p p osite o f their socially recogn ized , and hen ce no less ob jectiv e, truth. T h e w hole truth o f m agic and collectiv e b elief is con tain ed in th is gam e of tw ofold ob jective tru th , a d o u b le gam e played w ith tru th , through w hich the grou p , the sou rce o f all ob jectiv ity , in a sen se lies to itself, p ro d u cin g a truth w hose so le m ean in g and fu n ctio n are to d en y a truth know n and recognized by all, a lie w h ich w ould d eceiv e no o n e, w ere not everyon e d eterm ined to d eceiv e himself. In the case o f th e h arvest, th e social tru th to be co llectiv ely d en ied is an u nam biguous o n e: th e harvest (tham egra) is a m urder (tham gert, th e throat, violent death, reven ge; am gar, sic k le ), in w h ich the earth, fecu n d ated by p lou gh in g, is strip p ed of th e p rod uce it has b rou gh t to m aturity.
T he ritual of the last sheaf, of w hich w e have countless descriptions - no doubt because attention was drawn to it by Frazer’s analyses72 - and hence alm ost as many Variants, always consists essentially in sym bolically denying the inevitable murder of the field, or of the source of its fecu n d ity, the ‘'spirit of the co rn ” of "spirit of the field ”, by transforming it into a sacrifice conducive to resurrection. From the names given to the last sheaf, it seem s that the " spirit of the field ” w hose perpetuation is to be affirmed is practically identified, depending on the variant, either with an animal (inform ants speak of "the mane of the field ” and " th e tail of the field ”) or w ith a bride, thislith, destined to die after having borne her fruit (inform ants speak of ‘'the curl of the field' and ‘the plait of the fie ld ”). T o these different representations


i.' Id

h — X w fm O

* ca -s. S


iJ 4

Fig. 3. The fanning

year and the mythical year

Reunion o f contraries and denial


correspond d iffe re n t ritu a ls: in so m e v illa g e s it is h e ld to be a sin to re a p th e last sh eaf,
^ h ich is le ft sta n d in g in th e m id d le o f th e field fo r th e p o o r, th e o x e n , o r th e b ir d s ; jn oth er v illa g e s , it is m o w n (o r u p ro o te d b y h a n d to a v o id c o n ta c t w ith th e s ic k le ), but alw ays in a c c o r d a n c e w ith a sp e c ia l ritu a l. T h e ritu a l m u rd e r o f th e field m a y be enacted in th e sa c rifice o f an a n im a l w h ic h is b o th its e m b o d im e n t a n d its s u b s titu te .73 It m ay also h e p e rfo rm e d on th e la st sh e a f its e lf, trea te d lik e a s a c rific ia l a n im a l: in one tra d itio n (o b s e rv e d in c e n tra l K a b y lia b y Jean S e r v ie r ) , th e m a ste r o f th e field turns to fa c e th e e a st, la y s th e la st sh e a f on th e g r o u n d w ith its " h e a d ” to w a rd s th e east, as if it w e re an o x , a n d sim u la te s c u ttin g its th ro a t, le ttin g a h a n d fu l o f so il trick le from h is le ft h a n d in th e m id d le o f th e w o u n d to re p re sen t b le e d in g . F in a lly , in th e S ou m m am reg i ° n » th e la st sh e a f m a y b e trea te d as if it w e re a d e a d m a n a n d be b u rie d in an e a s tw a rd -fa c in g g r a v e to th e a c c o m p a n im e n t o f p ra y e rs ( chahada ) an d ch a n ts an n ou n cin g its re s u rre c tio n ( e .g . " D i e , d ie , O fie ld , o u r m a ster c a n b r in g y o u back to life! ” ). E v e n w h e n w h a t se e m s to b e th e o rig in a l fo rm o f th e ritu a l h as d isa p p e a re d (as it has in G r e a t K a b y lia ) , it is still th e m a ster o f th e field w h o re a p s th e last sh e a f and b rin g s it b a c k to th e h o u se , w h e re it is h u n g fro m th e m a in b e a m . R e su rre c tio n can co m e o n ly th r o u g h re p e titio n o f th e p rim a l m a rria g e o f sk y a n d e a r t h : a n d fo r this reason th e h a rv e st rites r e a p p ly th e lo g ic o f th e ra in -m a k in g rite s a t a tim e w h en rain is n o t re q u ire d fo r its sp e c ific a lly te c h n ica l fu n c tio n (w h ic h is n e v e r a u to n o m iz e d ) and can o n ly se r v e th e p u rp o se o f r e v iv ify in g th e sa cre d stre n g th o f th e c o rn or th e field. T h u s th e w h o le a p p a ra tu s o f th e ra in -m a k in g rite s re a p p e a rs , w it h th e ch a ra cte rs (A n za r an d h is w ife G h o n ja , h e re p re s e n tin g rain an d th e s k y , a n d sh e th e y o u n g v irg in soil, th e b r id e , e tc .) an d th e o b je c ts (d o lls , b a n n e rs) wrh ic h fig u r e in it. S o m e tim e s one e ven fin d s th e m a rria g e b y a b d u c tio n o f th e h o e in g g a m e s.

T h e p lou gh in g cerem on y, another ritual in ten d ed to sa n ctio n th e u nion o f contraries, can n ot be fully und erstood u n less on e know s that th e period follow ing th e harvest, w ith its rites to en su re the perp etu ation o f th e fecu n d at­ ing principle, is a time o f separation, d evoted to the m anly v irtu es, the point of honour and co m b a ts .7 L a k h rif, an extra-ordinary period o f p len ty and rest, 4 which cannot be defined eith er as a labour period, lik e p lo u g h in g and harvesting, or as a p roduction p eriod, like w inter and sp rin g , is th e male tim e par ex cellen ce, w h en the group op en s up to the ou tsid e w orld and m ust confront outsiders, in feasts and in w ar, so as to knit alliances w h ich , like extra-ordinary m arriages, are far from exclu d in g ch allenge. L ik e th e grain set aside as seed corn, w hich w ill be kept in a state of separation , the y o u n g boy is sym bolically torn from the fem ale wr orld b y circu m cision , a cerem on y from w hich w om en are rigorously exclu d ed , the fu n ction o f w h ich is to co-op t the boy into the w orld o f m en by m eans o f an operation regarded as a second birth, a purely m ale ev en t th is tim e , on e w h ich , as th e sa y in g g o es, "m akes *nen ”. In on e variant of the ritual, th e new ly circu m cised b o y s are surrounded by tw o or three con centric circles o f m en seated on plough sh ares w ith their rifles in their h a n d s .75 T h e land itself is d ivested o f every trace of life as the trees are strip p ed , th e last fruit p ick ed , and any rem aining veg eta tio n uprooted from th e fields and gard en s. T h e state o f separation en d s, for the natural w orld, w ith aw djeb , the solem n inauguration o f the p lo u g h in g , w hich ce le­


G en erative schemes an d p ra ctica l logic

brates the m arriage of the sky and the earth, the p lough sh are and the furrow b y the collectiv e en actm en t o f a w h ole range o f m im etic practices, including hum an m arriage. T h e return to the ordinary order is also m arked b y the reassertion of the prim acy of th e stren gth en in g of kin-group u n ity over the p ursuit of distant alliances, w ith thimechret, th e sacrifice o f an ox at th e door of the year; its throat is cu t, its b lood is sprinkled on the grou n d , callin g dow n rain, and the consecrated m eat is shared ou t am ong all m em b ers o f th e co m m u n ity . This sacrifice, in ten d ed to sanction th e im p osition o f the hum an order on fecund but w ild nature (sym b o lized b y the jackal, " w h o has n o h o u s e ” and feeds on raw flesh - a z e g z a w - and b lo o d ), is a m eal o f alliance. In solem nly reaffirm ing th e b on d s of real or official b lood k inship w h ich u n ite all living m em bers of th e adhrum ( thaym ats) in and through th e original com m unity (th a d ja d ith ), that is, the relation to com m on ancestors, the source of all fecu n d ity, th is act of sacred com m en sality p roclaim s th e specifically human (i.e . m ale) order o f the oath of loyalty, against nostalgia for the struggle of all against all, again em b od ied in the jackal (or w om an , the source of division) and his sacrilegiou s cu n n in g (th ah raym ith ). L ike th e natural w orld , within w h o se d om esticated fertility lie the o n ly half-tam ed forces of a w ild nature (th ose em b od ied and exp loited b y th e old w itc h ), the social order sp ru ng from the oath w h ich tears the assem b ly o f m en from the disorder of individual interests rem ains haunted b y con scio u sly repressed nostalgia for the state of nature.
T h i s p h ilo s o p h y o f h is to ry , im p lic it in th e w h o le ritu a l c a le n d a r, is ex p resse d in a ta le : " T h e a n im a ls o n c e m e t to g e th e r in an assembly a n d swore n ot to p re y on one a n o th er a n y lo n g e r , a n d to liv e on e arth in p e a c e . T h e y c h o se the lio n to be th eir k i n g . . . d e v is e d la w s, a n d d e fin e d s a n c t io n s . . . T h e a n im a ls liv e d in p e a c e . . . L ife w o u ld h a v e b e e n fin e if J a c k a l, th e lio n ’s c o u n s e llo r, had n ot ru in ed e v e r y th in g . He w a s an o ld h a n d at e v e ry s o rt o f treachery . . . a n d h e re g re tte d th e fo rm e r state o f affairs; th e sm ell o f fresh meat and warm blood , w h ic h w e re n o w fo rb id d e n , u se d to se n d him in to a f r e n z y . . . H e d e c id e d to re s o rt to guile ( thahraymith ) and s e c re tly to in cite the c o u rtie rs to d is o b e y , on e a fte r a n o th e r - th e w o rk o f a d e m o n .”76 In th e sam e tale, th e jackal eats th e a n im a ls h e is s u p p o s e d to b u r y . H e h a s th e ta sk of fe tc h in g w ater. A n o th e r fe a tu re h e sh a re s w ith w o m a n is th a t he is twisted: " t h e y p u t a ja c k a l’s tail d o w n a rifle b a rr e l fo r fo r t y d a y s , a n d w h e n th e y to o k it o u t a g a in , it w a s ju s t as b e fo r e . ’ M o re o v e r, lik e w o m a n , he divides, a n d d o e s so b y h is c u n n in g .

Rite m u st resolve b y m ean s o f an op eration socially approved and collec­ tively assu m ed - that is, in accordance w ith the lo g ic o f the taxonom y that g iv es rise to it - the specific con trad iction w h ich the prim al d ich otom y makes inevitable in con stitu tin g as separate and an tagon istic p rin cip les that m u st be reunited in order to en su re the reprodu ction o f the grou p . By a practical d enial, not an in d ivid u al, asocial on e like that d escrib ed by F reud , but a co llectiv e,

that of fecu n d ity ) that are associated w ith them so long as th ey rem ain in th e odd-num bered. to m isfire) depends on fem ale pow ers w hich the act o f fecu n d atio n has had to force. sacrilege is sym b olically d en ied in th e very act in which it is p erform ed. is in itself dry and sterile. natural nature of w om an or the earth. w ith h is p lough sh are b o m of a thunderbolt. it is the m om en t w h en . th e m an to whom it falls to op en th e p lou gh in g. P lou ghin g and so w in g mark the cu lm in ation of the m ov em en t of the o u tsid e in to the m side. in accordance w ith the arbitrarily pre­ scribed rules of a ritual. an in stru m en t wr 0 hich is forged in another reunion o f contraries.can free them from th e negative properties (n egative on ly in the respect in q u e stio n . M arriage rites and p lou gh in g rites ow e their n um erous sim ilarities to the fact that their objective intention is to san ction the u n io n of contraries w hich is th e co n d itio n of the resurrection of th e grain and th e reproduction of the . w h ich . and also as a scapegoat d esignated to con fron t the cu rse of the earth.Reunion o f contraries and denial '37 ublic denial (as in all b elief). like the seed it introduces in to th e earth: it is a source o f fertility on ly through th e v io len ce it inflicts. rite neutralizes the dangerou s forces con tained jn the w ild . u n tam ed . are in a sen se separated o n ly so as to be reu n ited .in p lou gh in g or m arriage . the fecu n d atin g male in to the fertile fem ale. left to itself it returns to sterilitv or the w ild fecundity of fallow land. like the h o u se. from zgel. thagursa. "th e m an of the w e d d in g ”78 as he is som etim es k now n. and also raised and straightened. m ay fail to b rin g forth . solem n ly reprodu ces. th ro u g h th e in ter­ mediary o f an authorized d elegate. the year o p en s up to the m ale principle w h ich fecu n d ates and fills it. b ein g an everlasting b eg in n in g a n e w ). th e dry in to th e w et. w et and dry. imperfect state of sep a raten ess . tw isted and m align ant like th e m aid en . A s for the earth.tham azgults. like the ew e. th e m arriage o f sky and earth. sin ce only their u n ion .8 T h e ploughshare. and has th e sam e nam e as the th u n d erb olt. T h e door of th e y e a r ” is not the m o m en t w hen th e year b eg in s (it has no b egin ning. cannot produce all its b en efits u nless it is forced and violated .81 b u t the future o f the grain (for the earth. the em p ty in to th e full. the tempering of iron. A ctin g as a delegated representative of the grou p . th e archetypal fecun dation w hich is the con d ition of the su ccess of all hum an acts o f fecu n d a tio n . collectiv ely and p u b licly . T h e rites of p lou g h in g ow e th eir com p lex ity to th e fact that th ey m ust not only sanction the u nion of op p osites but also facilitate that state o f th e u n ion of contraries in w h ich suprem acy tem porarily p asses to the fem ale p rin cip le: the seed tem porarily con d em ned to d ryn ess and sterility returns to life only through im m ersion in fem ale w e tn e s s . as w ell as those that may be u n leash ed b y violation of its haram . w hich m ust rem ain op en to the fecu n d atin g ligh t of th e su n . tran sgression o f th e sacred lim it -77 E nacted in this w ay. su n lig h t in to earthly shadow s.79 M ale and female.

" Granary upon granary. is served in the cou scous offered to the dead at th e start th e p lou gh in g (and also on the eve of feast d ays. resurrection. or berkukes. the refuge of th e sou l wr aitin g for resurrection. so ft. n a ils). m ilk ). that is. the m ost effective objects and actions b ein g th ose wr hich com p oun d the various properties. m ore n um erous. everyth ing that is sw eet. the sym b ol par excellen ce of that w hich is full and pregnant w ith life. " S o m eth in g livin g ou t o f som eth in g d e a d ” .G en erative schemes and practical logic grou p .82 A s acts o f procreation.a ch ick ). every­ th in g that is fu ll (eg g s. to cite and also to resurrect) the grou p m em bersh ip that is affirmed by gathering together in com m en sality im p lies the p ow er to recall ascendants . and on the other hand everything that sw ells and rises (pancakes. ev eryth in g that is open (u n tied hair and g ird les. particularly that of cook in g: thu s the broad bean. of re-creation. A s is show n by th e status of the ou tsider. dry seed par ex cellen ce. the corn in sid e is red . it is predisposed to carry the sym b olism of death and resurrection as a d esiccated seed w h ich . is called for by every asp ect o f sy m b o lism . T h e sacrifice and co llective eatin g of the ox is a m im etic representation of th e cycle of the grain. th e man w h o cannot " c ite ” any ascendant and w ill not be " c ite d ” b y any descendant ( asker. and of w hich on e riddle says. akin to the b on es.I alm ost d ied ). and wrh ose resurrection is sym b olized by the solem n m eal b rin gin g together the w h o le com m un ity in a recalling of the dead. pom egranate seed s. "and it d id n ’t com e u p ” . especially th e eve o f A chu ra ) . T h e return of the dead. w h ose food it is (" I saw the dead n ib b lin g b e a n s” . trailing garm en ts). w'hich is at on ce fu ll. the m ale. fritters.a dead m a n ). or th e pom egranate. and w hite (sugar. in sp rin g (w h en it is the first sign o f plant life to appear ). alm ond s. co u scou s. everyth in g that is m u ltip le and tigh tly packed (grains o f seksu. • • • • 83 S u ch are the egg. fig s). that is. sw o llen .an egg. runs a ridd le. and its ch ild ren are more .and the certainty o f b ein g recalled b y d escen d an ts. T h is d ialectic of death and resurrection is exp ressed in the saying (often u sed now adays in another sen se w h en sp eak ing o f gen eration conflicts): " F rom life they draw death. seed s w hich sw ell w h ile cooking ufthyen). and another: " N o bigger than a p ou n d in g-ston e. and m ultip le. it is u sed in the b oiled d ish es alw ays served on such occasions: an alm ost transparent sym b ol of the dead (" I put a bean in the g r o u n d ”. h o n ey . it is on e o f the articles thrown into the first furrow'. from death th ey draw lif e ” (a sch em e which reappears in th e riddle: " S o m eth in g dead ou t of so m eth in g liv in g ” . fig se ed s). dates. after ritual burial in the dam p w om b of nature. n uts. coarse cou scou s. and it is logical that ritual en a ctm en t should m ob ilize on the one hand everyth in g that op en s (keys. m arriage and p lou gh in g are b oth con ceived of as m ale acts o f op en in g and so w in g d estin ed to produce a fem ale action o f sw ellin g . w hich m ust d ie so as to feed the w hole com m u n ity . sw ells and com es up again. p om egranates.

always contains pancakes. Similarly. T h e bride m ust not wear a girdle for seven days. Endless exam ples could be given of features com m on to the tw o rituals: the bride (and her procession) are sprinkled with milk and she herself often sprinkles water and milk as she enters her new house. dates.85 T he bride’s life continues in this way under the sign of fertility: on the seventh day. Th e girl is w elcom ed on the threshold by the "old w om an ” who holds the “ sieve of the traditions”. before drawing water sh e throws into the spring the grains of corn and the beans which had been placed under her bed. nuts. and distributes the rest among those present. the woman w ho carries the seed corn always lets her hair hang loose. the oil and the flame of w hich it is com posed sym bolizing the constituent parts of the human being . subde soul. sp lit. dried beans. wipes her hands on its mane. stone-throwing. his w ife) at various tim es (in the morning. and a pomegranate. when she com es out of the house to go to the fountain for the first tim e. the first work she does is to sift the wheat. T h e bride breaks the eggs on the head of the mule that bears her. w hich the ploughm an throws into the furrows over the oxen and the plough. with the clay. containing fritters. and the seed corn set out for the fields and the m om ent of the bride’s arrival in her new house are marked by the same rites. etc. the noble task Par excellence. the seat of the "bad in stin cts” . T he first tim e the yoke of oxen.thinefsith) and the dry. such as th e s e : the ploughm an breaks tw o pomegram ates. wheat. all of w hich frequently figure in the rain-making rites as sym bols o f male sprinkling w hich have the power of untying that which is tied .” A nd a w h ole aspect of the m ulti-fu n ctional action perform ed in p lough in g and marriage is su m m ed up in th e plough m an 's gestu re of breaking (felleq . depending on the local traditions. a lamp is taken to the fields and kept alight until the first delim ited plot of land (thamtirth) has been sow n. the plough. dried figs. and which the children scram ble for (with countless variants. the woman w ho carries the seed corn must avoid tyin g her girdle too tight and she m ust also wear a long dress which trails behind in a lucky train ( abrur). vegetative soul. fem ale. wheat. and target-shooting. T h e bridal procession is preceded by a woman bearing a lamp ( mesbah) which represents sexual union. may be carried by various persons (the ploughm an. and som e fritters on the ploughshare. pomegranates. the “ ploughing siev e ” w hich. just as the mistress of the house sprinkles the plough with water or milk as it leaves for the fields. a few wheatcakes. T h e bride’s hair must remain untied for the first seven days. A lso com m on to both rituals are: rifle shots (in even num bers). . T he bride is presented with a key with which she strikes the lintel of the door (elsewhere a key is put under her clothes as she is being d ressed ). d eflow er) a pom egranate or an egg on his ploughshare. a key is put in the bag of seed corn and som etim es thrown into the furrow. or on his arrival in the fields. male.the body. or at the tim e of the m idday m eal). to b urst.Reunion o f contraries an d denial *39 than a h u n d r ed . when he yokes the oxen. ruh (a euphem ism for the penis) . beans. the offerings are buried in the first furrow'). and on the seventh day her girdle m ust be tied by the m other of many sons. and throws the sieve behind her. the dam p. nefs (a word som etim es used as a euphemism for the genitals.M and on the first day of ploughing. when the ploughm an leaves the house. and the children who have follow ed her scram ble (num ber = abundance) to pick up the titbits it contained. eggs.

w hich . . T h en there is a sh ap e. In the p resen ce of rain. and harvest rites a b ein g w'hich is unclassifiab le from th e p oint of view of the very system o f classification o f w h ich its p rop erties are the p rod uct. as the im m ersion of the dry in the wet. celestial seed in th e fertile earth. w hile on the other hand it partakes of w et. b y en cou ragin g the " fe m a le ” reading. w hen one con sid ers th e ritual of the last sheaf. takes advantage of th e m . terrestrial fem in in ity . orien ts th e ritual action s. p lou gh in g or m arriage. First. an am b igu ou s on e for the taxonom y itself. and w h ich . d estined to return for a w hile to d ryn ess and sterility before inaugurating a new cy cle of life by p ouring dowr in rain on to th e parched earth. w h ich are p erform ed in identical form in sp rin g) can be co m b in ed q u ite logically w ith the action s in ten d ed to favour th e act of fecu n d ation . th e betrothed (or thlonja. T h e m eticu lou sn ess and rigour o f h is in ven tory provide u s w ith the m eans of graspin g the p rop erties w h ich m ake of th e " doll ” o f the rain-m aking rites.8 is called d ow n . T h e sam e is true o f tears. sin ce b ein g m ale it sprinkles and b ein g fem ale it is sp rin kled . althou gh at first sigh t the acts ten d in g to favour the w o rld ’s return to w etn ess (and in particular the rites sp ecifically in tend ed to provoke rain. w hich g iv e s n ew life to w om an as rain d oes to the earth. w'hich through its h eaven ly origin partakes of solar m alen ess. In som e places the last sh eaf is "treated practically as a female personification of the field (" th e strength o f the ea r th ”. and of w h ich it m ay be said indifferently either that it sw ells or that it m akes sw ell.8 H e n c e the h esitation s o f m agical practice. or as a h ollow . w h ich m ay w ell be no m ore than a eu p h em ism to d en o te a phallic sy m b ol. u rin e. a d oll m ade o u t o f a ladle dressed like a b rid e. on w hom m ale rain. dry w ater. for exam p le. m uch u sed in the hom oeopathic strategies of the rain-m aking rites. far from being 8 troubled b y th ese am b igu ities. and b lood . th e lad le). in others it is 7 a m ale (p h allic) sym bol o f " th e spirit o f the c o r n ”. " th e bride ”). like beans or w heat in the cooking p o t . w hich is taken round in a p rocession w hile rain is called d o w n . and also sem en . there is a nam e. the sy stem of classification hesitates.8 A fter system atically 9 catalogu in g the m u ltip le variants o f th e rain-m aking rites. T h e sam e am bigu ities reappear n in th e p lou gh in g ritual.140 G en erative schemes an d practica l logic M akin g use o f indeterm inacy T h e propitiatory mise-en-scene through w h ich ritual action aim s at creating the co n d itio n s favourable to the su ccess o f th e m iracle of the resurrection of the grain by reprodu cing it sym b olically presen ts a certain n um ber of am b igu ities w h ich appear. h oein g rites (it is " M a ta ” w h ose ab du ction is sim u la ted ). liq u id -filled ob ject w h ich sprinkles. sin ce the ladle can be treated as a h ollow . som etim es personified as A n zar . L aou st (th e only an th rop ologist to have seen th e con trad iction clearly) infers th e fem ale nature o f thislith. thislith.

or em bers (times. with objects w hose properties are a challenge to the system o f classification. which also partakes of the male through its colour (w hite) and its name ( thamellalts. (1) On her w edding day the bride plunges the ladle into the pot: she w ill bear as many sons as she brings up pieces of m eat. under the ashes. The uncertainty of usage duplicates the uncertainty of significance: because the ritual use that can be made of an object depends on the m eanings it is given by the taxonom y. T h is sort of taxonom ic hesitation is not u n co m m o n : it can be found in relation to m oonlight ( tiziri). as they do here. is thus endowed w ith the plu rality o f aspects (different or even contradictory ones) w hich the objects of the world possess until the cultural system of classifications frees them from it through the arbitrary selection w hich it effects. the uncertainties of the interpretation sim ply reflect the uncertainties o f the use that the agents th em ­ selves may make of a sym bol so overdeterm ined as to be indeterm inate even from the point of viewr of the schem es which determ ine it (the error in this case lying in wanting to im pose decision on the undecidable. there is a fu n ctio n . 1mellalen. they should put them to uses quite incom patible with som e o f the m eanings that they could have outside that relationship (especially in situations like drought. that o f the ladle itself. because the fundam ental schem es are roughly congruent. it is bound to rain on his w edding day. it is not surprising that when agents are dealing. And because the m eaning of a sym bol is only ever fully determ ined in and through the actions it effects or undergoes (the raven. treacherous fire which suggests female sexuality (as opposed to the flame. if it dips tow ards the wheatcake. which functions r . w hich were collected in the hope of rem oving the am biguity of the ladle but only serve to confirm it. the w hite (fem inine plural). plural ihimellalin. the child’s testicles). the w hite (m asculine plural). into contradiction. being less om inous when it flies from w est to east).if one eats with the ladle one is liable to be cheated. the hoped-for event w ill occur.” (3) T h e ladle is hung on a piece of string so that it balances evenly. in front of a piece of wheatcake. w hen the urgency of practical necessity requires agents to relax the dem ands of logic even further and to make use of anything that will serve). T h e cultural artefact. or even in relation to clearly attributed objects like the egg. ihimellalin.” (5) Y ou must never hit anyone w ith a ladle: either the im plem ent w ould break (there is only one in the house) or the person struck w ould break. the divergences never run. fecundating or fecundable).M ak in g use o f indeterm inacy 14 1 em pty object asking to be sprinkled. a word which is taboo in the presence of men and is replaced by eu p h em ism s). But. (4) Of a man who cannot do anything w ith his hands: " H e’s like the ladle. the unlooked-for light. ahajuju. like passion ( thinefsith. (2) A proverb: “ W hatever there is in the cooking-pot. as the w om en d o ) : the consequence would be storm s and rain w hen he marries. the ladle will bring it u p . a crafty. thisliih thought and fashioned for the specifically cultural needs of rite. (8) T o som eone using a tool clum sily: “ W ould you have eaten with the ladle ? ” . egg. as they are here. F in ally. a fem ale fire which consum es and is consum ed. for exam ple. the testicles of the adult. (6) A man must never eat out of the ladle (to taste the soup. Here is a series of scattered. contradictory observations. w hich purifies and sets alight). With this example we draw near the principle of practical logic. in decreeing male or female a sym bol wr hich different practices treat indifferently as dry or w et. an im p lem en t m ade to sprinkle or to serve from the (fem ale) cooking-pot. eggs. the sym bol par excellence of fem ale fertility. (7) If a man scrapes the bottom of the pot with the ladle. a dim inutive of nefs which we have already encountered).

in the case o f the agrarian year. the relations betw een fem ale/m ale and inside/outside or left/right. the cold and the hot. it can be seen that the precondition of doing so w ould be the know ledge that logical logic. tw isted/straight. in the case of the cycle of life. etc. a sim ple specification of d ry/w et). but along paths o f varying length (w hich may or may not be reversible). If being able to write out the algebra of practical logics is not a p rio n unthinkable.g . which only ever speaks of them negatively in the very operations through which it constitutes itself by denying them . w aking/sleeping ~ outside/inside ~ standing u p /lyin g down ~ east/w est ~ light/darkness ~ hot/cold ^ sp iced/bland). no more than one particular sector of the system of schem es is m obilized at any one tim e (w ithout all the connections with the other oppositions ever being entirely severed) and that the . em p ty/fu ll. tw o form s o f the cooked). whereas hot/cold is connected with inside/outside only through the intermediary of light/darkness.to see that these different series spring from different schem es: the oppositions betw een the wr and the dry. is not prepared to describe them w ithout destroying them .142 G en erative schemes an d practica l logic practically only by taking all sorts of liberties w ith the m ost elem entary principles of logical logic: thus the sam e sym bol can relate to realities that are opposed even frorri the standpoint of the axiom atics of the system . the day . on the other hand. the w om en ’s work. betw een the fem ale and the male.or rather. betw een the dark and the light. them selves interconnected). T h en one w ould only have to add other structured universes.g . and central oppositions (such as m ale/fem ale or dry/w et) strongly interconnected w ith all the others by logically very diverse relations w hich constitute arbitrary cultural necessity (e . in the latter case. east and w est. M ore precisely. cooking. a practical “ d efin ition ” of the situation and of the functions of the action . et and the full and the em pty. w ithout acceding to discourse and the logical verifiablity which it makes possible.g . w e m ust include in that axiom atics the fact that the system does not exclude contradiction. m oreover. in each case produces. to see other principles at w'ork: above and below. T h ese different schem es are at once partially independent and more or less closely interconnected: thus the opposition dry/w et (or drying/soaking) can be used to generate practices or sym bols that cannot be produced directly from the opposition inside/outside or darkness/light. in accordance w ith a combina­ tive logic at once com plex and inexhaustible. the tender (green) and the hard (dry). i. at the end of a series of equivalences which progressively em pty the relationship of its content (e . It would sim ply be a question of constructing the m odel of this pa rtia lly integrated system of generative schem es w hich. one only has to compare the diagrams corresponding to the different dom ains of practice . p a rtia lly mobilized to deal with each particular situation. in the case of cooking. or above/below is even longer.the agrarian year. such as the space inside the house or the parts of body.alm ost always m ultiple and overlapping . it is possible to distinguish secondary oppositions w hich specify the principal oppositions in a particular respect and have a low yield on account of this (yellow /green. and vice versa. each opposition can be linked with several others in different respects by relations of differing intensity and m eaning (e. In other w ords. through the intermediary. generates the appropriate actions to fulfil these functions given the m eans available. G iven that. the cold and the hot. the inside (or the closed) and the outside in the case of the day. It follow s that all the opposi­ tions do not have the same role in the system . each of the oppositions constituting the system can be linked with all the others. betw een the w et and the dry (in the form of the boiled and the roast. there is a direct passage from hot/cold to dry/w et. spiced/bland can be directly related to m ale/fem ale and less directly to strong/w eak or em p ty/fu ll.e. in practice. and the path to oppositions like standing up/lying dow n. the bland and the spiced. of m ale/fem ale and dry/w et. below /ab ove).and.

through the interm ediary o f w hat is there subordinate to th e " resu rrectio n ” fu n ction . and is accom pan ied b y roast m eat. the series of m om en ts in th e day or th e cycle of life. a sort o f pancake w h ich as it cook s form s b u b b les w h ich burst at once) and on the occasion of circu m cision . it is natural that all the products of the application of th e s e schem es. T h u s . w ith the cerem o n ies of marriage. or burial. to exp lain the essen tial features of the series o f ordinary and extraordinary d ish es wr ich .) . len tils. of breaking w ith th e fem ale wr orld. T h e partial co in cid en ce o f th e sign ification s w hich the practical taxon om ies con fer on th ese ev en ts is m atched b y the partial coincidence o f the ritual acts and sy m b o ls. A pp lication of the sam e sch em es in fields as different as the " ca len d a rs” of co ok in g or of the w o m e n ’s tasks. g iv e s a pro­ m inent place to target-sh ootin g. p lo u g h in g . dried vegetab les (beans.91 are associated w ith the different p eriods of th e agrarian year (see fig. p ra c tic a lly . in w hich " in te n tio n s” of virilization (o p en in g ) and fertilization (sw ellin g ) are com b ined. e t c . or m arriage can n ot and n eed not be exp lain ed in any other w ay. in doors. in the cooking-pot. a m ixture of w heat and b ean s w h ich sw ells w h en b o iled . unspiced. should be partially congruent and should appear as roughly. or (w h ich am ou n ts to the sam e th in g ) . is th e prin cip le u n d erly in g the h o m o lo g ies w h ich analysis discovers in practices and w orks. that is. peas. ch ick peas. that is to say. dried m eat) w h ich are boiled in w a ter. and v io len ce. w hich as a rite o f purification and virilization. An agent d oes not need sy m b o lic m astery o f the co n cep ts of sw elling (or durable sw elling) and resurrection to associate the d ish called ufthyen. is seen syncretically as associated w ith the dry. on a ccou n t o f th e h participation-rite fu n ctio n conferred on eatin g .9 0 T h e habitus an d homologies T he presence of sym b olically identical ob jects or acts in the rituals associated with such d ifferen t ev en ts in the existen ce of m an and th e land as funerals. fire. equivalent to anyone possessing practical m astery of the system of sc h e m e s . or to rule out eatin g th is dish ("because the gu m w ou ld stay s w o lle n ”) w hen teeth are b ein g cu t (in favour of thibujajin.T he habitus an d homologies d iffe r e n t *43 schem es m obilized in different situations are partially autonom ous and rtially linked w ith all the others. w h ose p o ly sem y is perfectly appropriate to the requ irem en ts o f essen tially " m u lti-fu n ctio n a l” p ractices. ploughing. 4) on e on ly has to g o to th e op position b etw een tw o classes of food and tw o classes o f operations: on one side there are the dry food s (cereals (w heat and b arley). h arvestin g. both individual rites and series of ritual actions such as the rites 0f p a s s a g e . B ut th is does not p revent the d ish b ein g associated w ith targ et-sh o o tin g in at least one variant o f the ritual of a m u lti-fu n ction al cerem on y like m arriage. circu m cision .

*44 .

w hen evervthing that has d ev elo p ed in w ard ly. thapsia. and m ust eat their fill. than the food of autum n and winter as a w hole. with num erous variants. which causes sw elling. and on th e other sid e there are th e raw. or fresh fo o d s (three m eanings of th e w ord a z e g z a w . e tc . raw. funerals. But it is no doubt on the eve of th is day (som etim es called the "old w o m e n ” of ennayer) that the schem e generating w inter food. sym bols of "easiness”). dates. which m ust be eaten to satiety).. The couscous (berkukes) eaten on the first day of ennayer contains poultry. they must not eat m eat ("so as not to break the b o n e s”) or dates (" so as not to expose the sto n e s”). or raised w ith leaven (fritters). honey. figs. associated w ith sp rin g and u nripe corn) w hich are eaten r a w (as ten d s to b e th e case in sp rin g) an d /or boiled or grilled (on the griddle. bufrah) and h ea v ily sp iced (as in su m m er ). " d rier”. w hereas the second is associated w ith sp rin g. W heatcake. T h e meal eaten on the first day of ennayer (A chura) is very similar to that of the first day of ploughing: it is always substantial (being an inaugural rite) and consists of abisar or berkukes and fitte r s .92 A nd th e variations 0bServed are fu lly accoun ted for w hen on e has n oted that the first com b in ation is characteristic of late au tu m n and w in ter. a tran sitional season. and su m m er. which is boiled or steam ed. like th e food eaten at the tim e of w eddings or burials. the food o f the dead and of resurrection (these dish es are always associated w ith m anv-seeded fruit. n u ts. From the first day of spring. like grains of w heat and beans (ufthyen) m u st op en out and ripen in th e ligh t o f d a y . an interm inable one. dry grains (som etim es with fritters). as always. the meal eaten outside in the fields is.). the period w h en the dry is m oistened and the fertilized earth and w om an are ex p ected to s w e ll. e tc .o f the feast-day dishes w hich in a sense concentrate the characteristic properties o f the cooking associated w ith the various periods. people must eat nothing but boiled. op eration s w hich all m ake th e food ##//. it is nonetheless possible briefly to indicate their pertinent features. shows through m ost clearly: on that day. or abisar. which figure in the meals of p loughing tim e. green . as well as the traditional elem ents of fertility-giving food (couscous cooked in the steam o f adhris. but also broad beans. bearing in mind that the dishes differ not so m uch in their ingredients as in the processes applied to them . or a coarse-grained. green produce (beans and other . a sort of thick bean puree. that of m oistening the dry. of course. the period of d esiccation o f th e w et and separation from the fem ale.e. or sw eet foods. which strictly define cooking (so that certain " polysem ous ” item s reappear at different times of the year and in very different rites: for exam ple w heat. ow ing to the innum erable variants . the dry. the diet includes grilled cereals (w hich the children eat outdoors). On ploughing days. the oxen would before long be injured in the neck. pomegranates. made from grains of wheat and beans cooked in wr ater or steam . grapes. i. it is even said that if roast meat were eaten (the meat of the thimechretox is eaten b oiled ). harvest tim e. typically female (am ong other reasons because the fowl are the w om en ’s personal property). but the meal taken in the evening after the first day’s ploughing always consists of boiled cereals.9 3 Without entering into a description . m ust not be cooked during the first three days of p lo u g h in g . m ore m ale. male food par excellence. a dish explicidy excluded from the m eal of the first day of spring (" because the ants would multiply like the grains of sem o lin a ”) or ufthyen. hard-boiled eg g s.strictly speaking. the first day of January.T he habitus a n d homologies r45 gteam ed. or boiled cereal. unspiced couscous.

to en gen d er). T h e sam e structure reappears in the " calendar ” of the w o m en ’s w ork. w hose tw o u prights and tw o beam s . it cannot be baked. by the m aster o f the field. T h e action h o m ologou s w ith m arriage and p lo u g h in g . m arried w o m en m ay. w h ich is sheared at the en d of the cold period. partakes of the life of the field . the clay is collected in autumn. dry pancakes dipped in hot milk. in the open air (dry-dry).9 Like p lou gh in g. more ordinary m eals consist of wheatcake dipped in oi7 (a dry.called the "sky b ea m ” and th e "earth b e a m ”. 5) . male food contrasting w ith wet. and w e have no b la n k e ts”): passers-by are offered figs. as is d on e to th e dead. fritters) is e a te n . th e triangular m otif w ith w h ich w eaving starts. T h e w ool. and th e cloth 4 is the product o f a birth: thanslith. is a sym b ol o f fecu n d ity (from th e root n sl. and fire is no longer liable to dry up the ears (the drv-dry period) that baking can be carried out. so it falls to the m istress of the house to unfasten the w o v en clo th . S o long as the earth bears the ears. w hich co m p lem en ts th e farm ing "calendar ” to w h ich it is directly subordinated (see fig. or th e east beam an d w est beam . male food of sum m er. but it is never worked in that season. so that the flocks o f w ool w ill sw ell like the ears of corn in the n . w ithou t th e u se o f iron and after sprinkling it w ith w ater. in M ay. f0r indoor meals. a " s o u l” for a " s o u l”. sw ellin g food ( tighrifin. when the earth is pregnant. th e so u l . w eavin g is a m arriage of sky and earth. grilled fresh vegetables. T h e unfired (azegzaw ) pottery dries slowly in the sun (w et-dry) w hile the ears o f corn are ripening (the wet-dry p eriod).9 W eaving is th e w in te r 5 a ctivity. is capable of ex a ctin g th e death o f a hum an b ein g as the price o f the birth of the c lo th .d elim it the weaving just as the furrow d elim its the field. unm arried girls m u st not sit astride th e thread.9 6 W h en th e cloth has been rem oved . the law' o f th e eq u ivalen ce o f lives. Just as the last sh eaf is often cut b y hand. but in spring. being derived from the earth. the loom is d ism antled and p ut awr for ay the d uration of "the death o f the fie ld ”. and sem olina with butter. when the earth is bare and no longer producing. The com bination characterizing the feast-day m eals of the dry season is wheatcake and grilled meat with or w ithout couscous (depending mainly on whether it is eaten in the fields or in the h o u se ). and a m eal of m o ist. nor in w inter. W ith the return of a za l. and alm on d s. natural products.146 G en erative schemes an d practical logic vegetables) and milk (warmed or cooked). d a tes. Care is taken not to perform this d angerou s operation in the presence of a m an: every birth b ein g a rebirth. th e assem bly of th e loom . have much the same cycle. takes place in autum n (" th e figs and blackberries are ripe. Pottery. at the m om en t w h en everyth in g is o p en in g and sw ellin g ( thafsuth) and b oiled in a pot into w hich so m e w heat and beans ( ufthyen) have b een throwr . w'hich en d s w ith the w et season. fem ale butter) and dried figs and also. the cro ssin g o f the thread is called ruh. it is only after the harvest. announce the dry. W ool and potter)'. is w ashed w ith soap and w ater. to b egin .

5 .^ p o rtin g [. The cycle of the w o m e n ’s a c tiv itie s 1 4 7 .


G en erative schemes an d practical logic

fields. It dries at th e sam e tim e as the p ottery, in the w et-d ry period. It is carded w ith in stru m ents as typically " sh a r p ” and m ale as the carding-com b, the sym b ol of separation and m ale rou gh n ess, a p rod uct o f the w ork of the sm ith w h ich is u sed in the virilization rites and in the p rophylactic rites in tend ed to ward off the diseases associated w ith ev en in g and the w e t .9 7 T h e structure of the day (w hich integrates the five M oslem prayers very naturally) con stitu tes another, particularly leg ib le, product o f the applica­ tion o f the sam e stru cturin g p rin cip les. T h e w et-season day is nocturnal even in its diurnal p a rt: b ecau se the flock goes out and returns on ly on ce in the course of th is day, it appears as an in com p lete form o f the dry-season dav (see fig.

6).9 O n the day called "the return of a z a l ”, the threshold o f the 8

dry season , w hen the m istress of the house brings the fire out into the courtyard and ligh ts the kanun in thim etbakth, there is an abrupt changeover to a m ore com p lex rh ythm , defined by the d ou b le departure and return of the f l o c k s t h e y g o out for the first tim e at daw n and com e back as soon as the heat b ecom es b u rd en som e, that is, around eddoha\ the seco n d departure co in cid es w ith the m idday prayer, eddohor, and they return at nightfall. Just as the year runs from au tu m n tow ards su m m er, m o v in g from w est to east, so th e day (as) runs from th e ev en in g tow ards m idd ay: although the w hole system is organized in accordance wT the perfect cycle of an eternal ith recurrence - even in g and au tu m n , old age and d eath, b ein g also the locu s of procreation and sow in g - tim e is n on eth eless orien ted tow ards the culm inating p oint represented b y m idd ay, su m m er, or m ature age (see fig.

7). N ig h t, in

its darkest part, the " s h a d o w s” of " th e m id d le o f the n ig h t”, w hich brings m en , w o m en , and children togeth er in the m ost secret part o f the h ou se, close to the anim als, in the closed , d am p, cold place o f sexual relations, a place associated w ith death and the grave, is op p o sed to the d ay, and more precisely to its su m m it, a z a l, the m om ent w hen the ligh t and heat o f the sun at its zen ith are at their stron gest. T h e link b etw een n ight and d eath, which is underscored b y nocturnal so u n d s like the h ow lin g of d ogs and the grating o f the sleep ers’ teeth , sim ilar to that of the d yin g , is m arked in all th e taboos o f the even in g: the p ractices forb id d en - b ath ing, or even w and erin g round stretches of w ater, especially stagnant, black, m u d d y , stin k in g wr ater, looking in m irrors, an ointin g th e hair, to u ch in g ashes - w ould have the effect of in a sen se d ou b lin g the m alignancy o f th e nocturnal darkness through contact w ith su b stan ces wT hich are all en d ow ed wT the sam e properties (and are in ith som e cases interchangeable - the hair, m irrors, black wr aters). T h e m orn in g is a m om en t o f transition and rupture, a threshold. Dawr is n a stru ggle b etw een day and n igh t: it is d uring the hours b efore daybreak, as the reign o f night com es to an en d , that the rites of e x p u lsio n and purification

Dry s e a s o n
5 a.m . el fjar
flo c k g o e s o u t m en go o u t (to fie ld s a n d m a r k e t)


a .m .

7 a.m. 8 a.m .

9 a.m.
eddoha i o a.m.
- flo c k r e t u r n s i s t t i m e lm e k li (m e a l) ^ azal re st *•’ ( le m q il) •* flo c k g o e s o u t m e n go o u t ( to f ie ld s a n d m a r k e t)

thanalth (snack)

1 p .m . flo c k g o e s o u t 2 n d t i m e . cddohor A


pm .
P-m .

d e c lin e o f a za l t h a n a l t h (s n a c k )


4 p .m .

flo c k


el ‘aser

tim e spent resting outdoors I 1 tim e spent working (outdoors)

Fig. 6. Daily rhythms in summer and winter

1 5 0

ansaf ass (middle ot the day)

F ig . 7. S tru c tu re

of the dry-scason


T h e habitus an d homologies perform ed, and the break is m ade w ith darkness, ev il, and d eath, so that 0ne m ay "be in the m orn in g ”, i.e . op en to th e lig h t, the g o o d , and th e luck that are associated w ith it (th is is, for exam p le, the m o m en t w h en the semolina left overnight near the head o f a jealous baby, or on e afflicted by transferred ev il - aqlab - is p ou red over h im ). E very m orn in g is a birth. jylorning is the tim e for g o in g o u t, th e opening o f the day and an o p en in g up to light (fa ta h , to o p en , b lo sso m , is sy n o n y m o u s w ith sebah} to be in the m orning). It is an o p en in g first in the sen se that th is is the m o m en t w h en the day is born ( thallalith w a ss, the birth o f th e d a y ), w h en " th e ey e of the light ” {th it antafath) o p en s an d th e h o u se and th e village, w h ich had clo sed in upon th em selv es for th e n ig h t, pour out their m en and their flocks into the fields. A n o p en in g too in the sen se of " b e g in n in g ” : m o rn in g is an inaugural m om en t w h ich m en w orth y of the nam e feel it right to b e present at and take part in ( esbah, to be p resen t, to b e alive in th e m o rn in g ). " M orn in g”, it is said, " m ean s fa c ility .” T o get u p early is to place on iself under favourable au spices ( leftah, o p en in g , good a u gu ry). T h e early riser is safe from the en cou n ters w h ich b rin g m isfortu n e; w hereas the m an w h o is last to set ou t on the road can have n o other com p an ion than th e on e-eyed man (associated, like th e b lin d , w ith n igh t) w h o w aits for broad d ayligh t before setting o u t, or th e lam e m an w h o lags b eh in d . T o rise at cockcrow is to put one’s days in the p rotection o f th e an gels of th e m o rn in g and to d o them honour; it is, so to speak, to put on eself in a state o f grace, to act in such a way that " th e an gels d ecid e in o n e ’s s te a d ”. In fact the m orn in g, an inaugural tim e b lessed by th e return of ligh t and life, is the best m o m en t for making d ecisio n s and u n d ertak in g action : the inauguration rites w h ich mark the days o f transition are p erform ed at daybreak, w h eth er it be the w aking of the cattle at the w in ter so ls tic e , the renew al rites on the first day o f the year (ennayer), th e sh ep h e rd s’ departure to gather p lants on the first day of spring, the flock ’s g o in g ou t on the return o f a z a l, etc. T h e m orn ing, like the h o m o lo g o u s period in th e agrarian year or hum an life, sp rin g or ch ild h o o d , w o u ld be en tirely favourable - sin ce it m arks th e victory of ligh t, life, and th e future over n ig h t, d eath, and the past - d id not its p osition confer on it th e fearful pow er to d eterm in e th e future to w h ich it b elon gs and w h ich it g overn s as th e inaugural term of the s e r ie s :100 thou gh intrinsically b en eficent, it is frau ght w ith th e danger o f m isfortu n e, inasm uch as it can d ecid e, for good or for ill, th e fate of the day. W e m ust take a closer look at th is lo g ic , that of m agic, w h ich has perhaps never b een fully und erstood , b ecau se it is all too easily half u nd ersto o d on th e basis o f the quasi-m agical exp erien ce o f th e wr orld w h ich , u nd er th e effect o f em o tio n , for exam p le, im p o ses itself even on th ose w h ose m aterial co n d itio n s of ex isten ce,


G en erative schemes an d practica l logic

and an in stitu tion al en viron m en t ten d in g to discourage it, best p rotect thein against th is " regression W hen th e w orld is seen as " a fatal system

”101 whose

startin g-p oin t is its cau se, w hat h app en s in the w orld and w hat people do govern w hat w ill happen and w hat w ill be d o n e. T h e future is already inscribed in the p resen t in th e form of o m e n s .102 M en m ust d eciph er these w arnings, not in order to su b m it to th em as a d estin y (like the em otion which accepts th e future an n ou n ced in th e p resen t) but in order to be able, if n ecessary, to ch an ge th em : this is on ly an apparent con trad iction , since it is in the nam e o f th e h yp o th esis o f the fatal system that a m an w ill try to remake the future an n ou n ced in the p resen t by m aking a n ew present. M agic is fought w ith m agic: th e m agical p oten cy o f the om en -p resen t is fought w ith conduct aim ing to ch an ge th e startin g-p oin t, in th e nam e of the b elief, w hich was the w h ole stren gth o f th e o m en , that th e sy ste m ’s starting-point is its cause.
M orning is the time w hen everything becom es a sign announcing good or ill to come. A man who m eets som eone carrying milk sees a good om en in the encounter; a man who hears the shouts of a quarrel w hile he is still in bed draws a bad om en from them. Men anxiously watch for the signs (esbuh, the first encounter of the morning, portending good or ill) through w hich evil forces may announce their im m inence, and an effort is made to exorcize their effect: a man w ho m eets at dawn a blacksmith, a lame man, a one-eyed m an, a wom an w ith an em pty goatskin bottle, or a black cat must "remake his m orn in g”, return to the night by crossing the threshold in the opposite direction, sleep again, and remake his "going o u t”. T h e w hole day (and som etim es the wT hole year or a m a n s w hole life, w hen it is the m orning of an inaugural day) hangs on his know ing how to defeat the malignant tricks of chance. T h e magical potency of words and things works w ith particular intensity here, and it is more than ever necessary to use the euphem ism s which replace baleful words: of all the words tabooed, the most dreadful are those expressing term inal acts or operations shutting, extinguishing, leaving, spreading - w hich m ight invoke an interruption, an untim ely destruction, em ptiness (e.g . "T here are no dried figs left in the sto re”, or the mere word "n o th in g ”) or sterility.103

A zaly and in particular thalmasth u z a l, the m id d le of a z a l, the m o m en t when the su n is at its zen ith , n oon , th e m om en t w h en "azal is at its h o tte s t” (ihma uzal), broad d ayligh t, is op p osed b oth to n ight and to m orning, first light, the n octurnal part o f the d a y .104H om o lo g o u s w ith th e h ottest, driest, brightest tim e o f th e year, it is th e day o f the d aytim e, th e dry of the dry, in a sen se bringing the characteristic properties o f th e dry season to th eir fu llest exp ression . It is the m ale tim e par excellen ce, th e m om en t w hen the m ark ets, paths, an d /or fields are full (o f m e n ), w h en the m en are outdoors at th eir m en s tasks .105 E ven the sleep of a z a l ( lam qil) is the ideal lim it of m ale rest, just as the fields are the lim it o f the habitual places for sleep , such as th e threshing floor, the driest and m ost m ascu lin e sp ot in the space close to th e h o u se, where the m en often sleep ; one can see w hy a z a l, w h ich in itself partakes o f the

as w e have seen. the "first v en tu r es” (in to th e courtyard. a purificatory ritual o ften associated w ith the first visit to th e m arket. and fortieth d ays. circu m cision . tow ards the se ttin g sun (ghereb. all th e rites of "the breaking of the link w ith the m o n th ”. n ight. which ruled out on the last day of the year. T h e cycle of th e rites of passage is in fact subordinated to th e agrarian calendar w h ich .T he habitus an d homologies *53 dry a n d the sterile. T h e d eclin e of th e sun ( agh aluy itij). This is primarily because in a number of cases the rites of passage are m or less ore ex p lic itly associated with particular moments in the year. Pursuing the analysis o f the different fields o f application of the system of generative sch em es. and burial. to "break the association w ith the month ” . the first haircut. k notted ” (igan). on th e third. is to go tow ards darkness. his su n has fallen) or physical decay (yegh li Iwerq-is): to g o w estw ard .e bound. like a h ouse w h ose w estw ard -facin g door can o n ly receive sh adow s. a z a l en d s and thameddith (or thadugwalh) b e g in s : n ow " the m arkets have em p tied ” an d n ow too the taboos of the ev en in g take effect. fourteenth. on the fortieth day (w ith . the first tim e th e m oth er and ch ild co m e out of th e h ou se. to go tow ards the risin g su n ). autum n and spring (after eVazla) are the right tim es for marriage. early afternoon is the best time for circum cision. th irtieth . The springtim e rites (and in particular those of the first day of spring and the return ° f azal) set to work a sym bolism which applies as m uch to the unripe corn. in the m ean tim e. thus. by virtue of the homology betw een them a n d the moment in question. eVasar. sh ou ld be stron gly associated w ith the d esert (lakhla) of the harvested field. away from the fam ily). as op p o sed to cherraq. in particular old age and all kind s of political d ecad en ce ( yeghli itij-is. for example. as to the lim bs of the baby w hich cannot yet walk ( aqnan lfadnis) and remains in a sense attached to the earth . Eddohor. and eVazla gennayer is the propitious m om ent for the first haircut. at husum and nisan. ill omened if it comes at husum or in sla (or th e afternoon betw een eVasar and el maghreb). the en d o f th e fiercest heat (a zg h a l). m arriage. d eath. w h ich " slop es to the w e s t ”. W ith the third prayer. and in May and June. s till. sev en th . roughly coin cid es w ith the en d of the a z a l rest: this is the start of " th e d eclin e o f a z a l” . a birth is auspicious *f it c o m e s at lahlal (or in the morning).to drive ou t evil and also to separate the ch ild p rogressively from the fem ale w’o rld ). th e secon d prayer. is in a sen se the paradigm of all form s o f d eclin e. but not w inter. thuksa an-tsucherka w a y u r . w e could b uild up a sort of sy n o p tic diagram of the cycle o f life as stru ctured by the rites of passage: birth (w ith the practices associated w ith th e cu ttin g o f th e um b ilical cord b y the qabla and th e rites intended to p rotect the ch ild against evil s p e lls ) .106 T h o se rites of passage that are not linked to a particular period of the year always ow e som e of their properties 6 BO T . fettered. n am e-g iv in g on the third or seven th day. is itself n o th in g other than a su ccession o f rites o f passage. when for th e seco n d tim e the flocks set out for the fields and th e m en go 0ff to w ork.

A lth o u g h d escrib ed as an untim ely d estru ction (a n a d a m ). th e pregnant w om an . i. th e w est. Sim ilarly. fritters. w h ich faces the w e st.1 54 G en erative schemes and practica l logic to the ritual characteristics of the period in w hich they are perform ed. the harvest is not a death w ith o u t issue ( m a'dum. th e " n ig h ts ” ( l y a l i ) : the taboos of p regnancy (o f fecu n d ity) are th e taboos o f ev e n in g and death (look in g in a m irror at n igh tfall. inaugural p eriods o f uncertainty and exp ectation . Sim ilarly. a m on g other th in g s. T h e cycle en d s in death. is id en tified w ith cook in g in th e p o t: after ch ild b irth the w om an is served th e b oiled food of w in ter. only for the ou tsid er (aghrib). like germ in ation . a fact which explains the essential features o f the variants observed. e tc . B u t. C hildb irth is associated w ith the " o p en in g ” o f th e en d of w in ter. like the earth sw ollen in spring. also appears as a supplem entary elem ent in the rites of passage w hich happen to take place at that tim e. e tc . gesta tio n corresponds to th e u nd ergrou nd life of th e grain. the abundance of p rogn ostication rites w h ich are practised th en .). H is grave is o ften u s e d . is at the sam e tim e turned tow ards the east of resurrection in a new b irth. fo ld in g th e arms.). For exam ple. and the d am p . of the dead . and of ploughing. the h om ologu e of n igh t and w in ter). pancakes.in th e rites for the expulsion of evil: in a u niverse in w h ich a m an ’s social ex isten ce requires that he be linked to h is ancestors through h is ascen dan ts and b e " c ite d ” and "resur­ re c te d ” (asker) b y h is d escen d an ts. autumn. m an ifests itself in . w h ich allow s the profits of contradictory action s to be co m p ou n d ed w ith ou t co n trad iction . is organized in a m anner hom ologous to that o f th e agrarian year and the other great tem poral " series Thus procreation (a k h la q y creation) is very clearly associated w ith ev e n in g .a s an exem plary realization of u tter o b liv io n and annihilation . that is. is expected to bring ab out resurrection in and through a n ew act of fecu n d a tio n . n ight and d eath. w earing b racelets or rin g s). and all th e taboos on clo sin g that are observed at that tim e reappear here (crossin g th e legs. ch ild h o o d . it is the w h ole o f hum an ex isten ce that. and m agic. the beneficent water of ntsan. coarse-grained co u sco u s b oiled in water ( a b a zin ). the dark direction par ex cellen ce. w h ich d en o tes the belly o f th e pregnant w om an . the ears o f the last sheaf in sum m er. is n ever eaten b y w o m en . at a d eep er level. in particular abisar (th e food of the dead and o f fun erals) w h ich .107 . partakes o f the w orld o f the d ead (ju f. and m orn ing. clasping th e hands togeth er. excep t on th is occasion . a necessary com ponent in the rites specific to that period (like the first milk in spring.e . nocturnal part of the h ouse. old age. b ein g the p rod u ct o f th e sam e system of sch e m e s. also m eans north. the m an of the w est (elgharh) and o f exile (elghorba). hence w ith o u t issu e (anger). the death o f th e o u tsid er is the only absolute form of d ea th . G estation. the settin g su n . w h o d ies ch ild le ss). and eg g s. the bachelor. T h e hom ology betw een sp rin g.

b eh in d the fun dam en tal h o m ologies (b rou gh t together in fig. for the duration of the life of the fecundated field B . diametrically 0osed for successive generations. is "raised from the dead” by ploughing and sow ing.e .O ' A ’s b irth Fig. and dentical for alternate generations. difficulties b eg in to m u ltip ly system atically.T he habitus an d homologies I 55 q'he different generations occupy different positions in th is cycle. by a b u sin g the p ow ers o f th e d iscou rse w h ich g iv e s v o ice to the silen ces of 6-2 . tran sitive. ’ vV . that of tw o-year rotation: just as the cycle o f generation is closed by A ’s death and resurrection. fatherhood B’s bi rth s . 8. leads the father w henever possible to ^ve his first-born son the name o f his own father (asker: to name and to resurrect). 8). i. those of grandfather and grandson (see fig. " c o n n e c te d ” relation ship s w h ich R ussell g iv es the word in his Introduction to M ath em atical Philosophy) :108 w h en one tries to push 9).e . And the fields go through a perfectly analogous cycle. w hich has lain fallow . Such 1 the logic w hich. and enters old age w hen the other is in ch ild h ood ). w hen field B is laid fallow. the su p erim p osition of the various series b eyon d a certain d egree o f refine­ m ent. i. making of birth a rebirth. awaiting its r e s u r r e c t i o n . The cycle of reproduction It is n o accid en t that the d ifficulties o f the G reek and C hinese ex eg etes b eg in when th ey try to con stru ct and su p erim p ose series (in the sen se of asym m etrical. d em on stratin g that true rigour does not lie in an analysis w h ich tries to p u sh th e sy stem b eyon d its lim its. those of father and son (since one conceives when 0ther is conceived. w hen B conceives q so the cycle of the field is closed w hen field A.

e tc . b eco m es metaphor or analogy that it is p ossib le. in relations wr ich m anifest th em selves at th e level of the letter (h o m op h on v. or the (H eg elia n ) tradition of etym ology seen as a m ean s of reappropriating th e treasures accum ulated b y th e historical w ork of rea so n . schem e-tran sfer effected on the h ith er sid e of d iscou rse. not least the error from which W estern p h ilosop h y originated (and w hich an thropological scien ce endlessly reprodu ces ). to w ond er like Plato w hether "it was the earth that im itated w om an in b ecom in g pregnant and b rin gin g a being in to the w orld . for exam p le. p aronym y. Ign oran ce o f the objective truth of practice as learned ignorance is the source o f in nu m erab le theoretical errors. A nd th is is no less true o f its m ost sp ecific m od es of thou ght: th e pre-S ocratic thinkers w ou ld not h old su ch fascination for certain p h ilo ­ sop hers (w h o practically never p ossess the m eans o f really u nd erstan ding th em ) w ere it not that they su p p ly its m ost accom plished m od els to the tradi­ tion (m ost " e m in e n tly ” represented b y H eidegger) o f th e play on w ords of com m on origin w hich estab lish es a doubly determ ined relationship b etw een the lin g u istic root and the m yth ic root.111 M yth ten ds to cease to have any fun ction oth er than the one it receives in the relations o f co m p etition betw een the literate scholars w h o question and interpret its letter by reference to the q u estion s and readings of past and contem porary interpreters: on ly then does it becom e ex p licitly w hat it alw ays w as. i. or w om an that im itated the e a r th ” (. 238a).113 It is in d eed the essen ce of learned reflection that it situates the p rinciple o f relations con fu sed ly sensed in the order o f m ean in g (sens). receive from learned reflection a fu n ctio n w hich is not their owr b ut that w hich th ey have for n scholars. etym ological kinsh ip .109 It is only w hen practical m etaphor.). from analogy as a practical schem e o f ritual action to an alogy as an ob ject o f reflection and a rational m eth o d o f thou ght.e .156 G enerative schemes and practica l logic practice and b y ex p loitin g th e m agic o f the w ritin g w hich tears practice and discou rse o u t o f the flow' o f tim e . T h e in anity o f m eta- . a sy stem o f solu tio n s to cosm ological or anthropological prob lem s w hich scholarly reflection thinks it finds in them b u t w hich it in fact creates ex nihilo by a mistaken reading that is im p lied in any reading ignorant o f its objective truth as a literary read in g . as Cornford and the C am bridge school p ut it.Menexenus. T h e slow evolu tion "from religion to p h ilo so p h y ”. h h om ograph y.e .110 R ites and m yth s w h ich w ere " acted o u t ” in th e m ode of belief and fulfilled a practical fu n ction as collective in stru m ents of sy m b o lic action on the natural w orld and above all on th e grou p .112 T h e p rob lem s w hich n ascent p hilosop h y thin ks it raises in fact arise of their ow n accord from its unanalysed relation ship to an object w h ich never raised th em as su c h . b ut on ly im p licitly or practically so. i. is correlative w ith a transform ation o f the fu n ction w hich the grou p s concerned confer on m yth and rite in their p ractice .

s m ith . m a g i c * 1’ oT^ r (from right to ic^ O D D -N L M B E R E D n a k e d n e ss. g ru el.CT ^ ^ O P E N IN G F U L L (sw ellin g ) E N T E R IN G C L O S E D (d ifficu lt. asse m b ly . w h e a t. b o ar Fig. s p ic c d . 9. sc cre t. p o m e g ra n a te . p lo u g h in g I N S I D E (h o u se . uttinex h a rv e s t ( m j r d e r ) c u tt i n g w o v en c lo th old age DRY A B O V E (m a s te r b eam ) ft? /5: * *? r o > c c* . h u rm a *V^i ~ sta b le .^ JO b irth g e sta tio n c° tl A o^ T H . % z \ O U T S I D E (fields. c a rd in g c o m b . h en th a m g h a rth . su n . p a ra lle l c o u sin . raw co w .0 ri> /t ^ ^ reU^ . . g a rd e n . fo u n ta in . n e fs (liv e r).n ig h t .¥-s »<" . e a rth OjTfj to m b . red ^ k a n u n .v o f ™ e '% <&*■ . m o o n ^ . sek su . W ET c h ild h o o d o ■9 w o m b . p a rtrid g e . w h eatcak e. salt k nife. b u t te r u n rip e corn ^ G * s p r in g O P E N IN G O U T k G O IN G O U T E T N TH RESH OLD S I ^ / ' ’s Ns \vall o f w eav in g lo o m between WET . tre a c h e ry .'57 ^ G H T (fro m left . g o ld ^ Q jl * eag le. jac k a l (d iv isio n ). egg. « » « ' 5AC#ED _0^' « ft . rip e . b la n d <J b lo o d . n if. oil w h* i n g re e n . m ain b e a m ) ox . s ta g n a n t w a te r o g ress. m a id e n . sky r a h (h e a rt). Synoptic diagram of pertinent oppositions l . p u blic) . b o ile d m e a t. rifle. w o o d ) b e a n . m ark e t) d e a th = fec u n d a tio n vail o f d o o r w all o f d a rk n e s s w E S TH RESH OLD N - q £ rfi S’ . lig h t. O ^ . sick le. ' % m aturity *2^ fire. g u ile N e g ro . snake s ta r t o f w eaving B E L O W (ly in g d o w n . grass m ilk. d a rk n e s s . b lac k co o k in g -p o t.^ £ 0 ( u n o f f ic i a l. p lo u g h sh a re . roast. sw e e t. sle e p (d e a th ). w itch . e n c lo su re) ia m p .

has th e capacity to su rvive every reductio a d absurdum.114 Plato’s remark m u st b e taken literally: " T h e p h ilosop h er is a m y th o lo g ist. it can n ot b rin g out the in coh eren t coh eren ce of a d iscou rse w h ich . as Carnap th in k s.” L ogiCaj criticism in evitab ly m isses its ta r g e t: b ecau se it can o n ly ch allen ge th e rela* tio n sh ip s con scio u sly estab lish ed b etw een w ord s.*58 G en erative schemes an d practica l logic p h y sics w ou ld escap e n o on e if. . sp rin g in g from u n d erly in g mythic or id eological sch em es. its " pseu do-propositions ” w ere on ly "an in adequ ate m ean s of exp ressin g the feelin g of lif e ” .

is abruptly altered b y the ad option o f a new rh yth m : th e m o v em en ts o f the flock. prayers. or cold rule out work in the fields and th e earth is too w et to be trod d en on w ith ou t jeopardizing th e future crop or the p lo u g h in g to com e. d ig g in g drains. b u t also the m e n ’s w ork and the d o m estic activities of the wom en. power: basis for a theory of symbolic power D o rn .) . all the m en are in the village . orthodoxy. the place w here th e cook in g is d on e. tran sporting flagstones. as so o n as the m en have taken off their m occasin s and w ork -cloth es and have had a short rest. d iggin g u p tree-stu m p s. and m eetin gs o u tsid e the village. gathering w o o d .return at thaqachachth '-e n d o f O ctob er). the tim es and th e itinerary o f th e w o m e n ’s m o v em en ts and ou td oor w ork. By [ 159] . heterodoxy There is. n o b etter w ay of m aking f e ltth e real fu n ctio n o f classificatory sy stem s than to evok e as con cretely as p ossib le th e abrupt and total transfor­ mation of d aily life w h ich occurs on " th e return of a z a l” . the rest p eriods. not a m an is m issin g from the village (to w h ich the in hab itants of the a zib . e t c . the food eaten.) . in the m orn in g. In d eed . o f cou rse. sn o w . either to work on th e m ajor seasonal tasks su ch as p lo u g h in g or d ig g in g or to sp en d their tim e on the m in or a ctivities w h ich o ccu p y th e slack periods o f the agrarian year or day (co llectin g grass or d iss.ham let .4 Structures. the w o m e n . habitus. th e m e n ’s im perative d uty to be outside b rin gs th em all to the com m u n al h ouse (even across clan an d /o r league d iv isio n s). at that tim e of the year. th is is the tim e o f day for m eetin g s o f the clan assem b ly and all th e con ciliation co m m ittees (b efore a d ivorce. E verything. e t c . and the ch ild ren . T h e ev en in g m eal (im ensi) is served very early. d ig g in g or clearing d itch es. of th e cerem on ies. m arkets. repairing roads. In the w et season . and w hen the state of the roads and th e fear of b ein g w eather-bou n d far from the h ouse su sp en d traditional relation s w ith the ou tsid e w orld . the rhythm of th e m e n ’s assem b ly m eetin gs. without ex cep tio n . perhaps. or to p revent a d ivorce. before eddoha. W h en rain. before d ivision of an estate or to avoid d iv isio n ). in th e a ctivities of the m en . w ith the ex cep tion o f th e m eetin g som etim es held on a F riday after collective prayer. A b ou t the tim e o f eddoha th e sh ep herd sets o u t w ith h is flock and the m en go off to th e fields and gardens. this is also th e tim e w hen an nou ncem en ts con cern in g all th e m en are m ade from the top o f the m inaret (sum m onin g th em to participate in collectiv e w ork.

w ith th e tales and legen d s in the lon g ev en in g s in the room reserved for the m en . taking care not to attract a tten tio n . in the afternoon. g ettin g the b u n ch o f o n io n s and th e other vegetables required for imensx out o f th arichth and p u ttin g th e keys to all the stores back on their g ird les. the w ife cannot g o to the fountain all m orning. under a tree. and also the alibi of a perm anently available activity. at least on certain occasion s: there are first. m aking good the m en ’s n eg lig en ce the stray p iece o f w ood . In less than half an h our. b eh ind w h ich they can w ithdraw . if there is no little girl available. m aking the preparations for the m eal over by the w all o f darkness. even w h en b usy. the w o m en . strive to recon stitu te a separate u niverse. th e branch left b eh in d under a tree . and also in to its ow n past. the w om en w ere kept in the h ou se b y th eir d om estic tasks and above all b y the im propriety there w ou ld be in taking their m idday rest ou tsid e. on ce a z a l returns it awakes w ith a great deal o f noise and b u s tle : the tread of m ules as m en m ake their w ay to m arket is follow ed by the unin terrup ted tread o f th e o u tg o in g flocks. the sh ep herd brings back his flock and som e o f th e men return to th e village for th eir m idday rest. d uring the aftern oon. the village is th is tim e alm ost com p letely em p tied : in the m o rn in g. b y in sp ectin g the gardens. w h ile the m en are aw ay. after " givin g th eir o rd ers” to the daughters-in-law w h ose turn it is to prepare d inn er. or be fou n d d oin g n o th in g : the lo o m . w here th e last prayer ( eVicha) is generally brought forward so as to be said at the sam e tim e as maghreb.and in th e ev en in g b rin gin g back. all b ut a few o f th e w om en accom pan y the m en . b y contrast. T h e m u ezzin ’s call to eddohor is th e sign al for the secon d g o in g out of th e day. habitus . go and m ake th eir con trib ution to the w ork and assert their au th ority in their ow n w ay. like th e m en. keeps ch ickens and anim als aw ay from the m attin g on w h ich the olives or grain are spread o u t b efore b ein g taken to the press or the m ill. its traditions .1 W hereas d uring the w et season the village aw oke every m orn in g w ith o u t much ado. excep t th ose w h o w ant to offer ev en in g prayer in th e m osq u e. especially sin ce th e risk o f a fall requires special precautions. o f course.i6 o Structures . affords th em a sort of veil. w hich is a w om a n ’s proper place at a m om ent reserved for in tim a c y . or in h urryin g to get h om e. ou sted from their ow n sp ace. A bout the tim e of eddhoha. and then by the clatterin g hooves o f the asses ridden or led b y the m en goin g off to th e fields or the fo rest. taking the m easure of flour from th e akufi. B ecause the m en eat all their m eals in doors (excep t th e afternoon snack). po w er nightfall. th e "old w o m e n ” w h o. T h e grou p ’s w ithdraw al into itself. everyon e is at h om e. w h ich is up throu gh ou t th e w et season . on to p of the .is follow ed by the o p en in g on to th e ou tsid e w orld in the dry sea so n . so the " old w o m a n ” is th e on e w h o goes and g ets the w ater in the m orning and. the handful o f fodder dropped on the w ay. T h e sam e strategies appear in the use made of the village sp ace: if th e m en are presen t.

N o on e can say w heth er th e p u b lic space of the village b elon gs to m an or to w om an . others w atch in g over th e fig-drying shed (in this season every fam ily’s fear is that in an em ergen cy it w ould not be able to assem b le its m en ). to leave b eh in d ). travelling on d eserted roads. thighuladthy stonethrowing at targets.3 " T h e m an w h o d oes not settle h is b u sin ess early in the m orn ing w ill never settle i t ” . w andering round the streets of th e village while the others are asleep or at the m arket . m u st get up early . T h u s . T h u s the d ou b le g o in g ou t d elim its a z a l. heterodoxy 161 jar o f w ater from the sp rin g in the gard en . to transgress) and th ere is often a play on w ords to the effect that am kh alef is also th e m an w h o arrives late (from khellef. eq u ally unoccupied. a kicking con test. M ost of th e m en are scattered far from the village. and this is fun dam en tally a q uestion of resp ectin g rh ythm s. T h e few m en w h o have not stayed in the field s to sleep under a tree take their siesta in any sp ot that is to hand. F urtive shadows slip across the street from on e house to another: th e w o m e n . S o each of th em takes care not to occupy it: there is so m eth in g su sp iciou s about an yon e w h o v en tu res in to the streets at that hour. to stand o u t. k eep in g p ace. each a few p a ces b ehind her h usb and . not falling out of lin e .these are all su sp icio u s form s of b ehaviour. conscious o f h is resp on sib ilities. in the courtyards o f their h ou ses. especially at the tim e of the fig-harvest. on th e flagstones o r indoors. for the d om estic anim als. O n ly th e sh ep h erd s 2 w h o have returned to the village w ith their flocks bring life to th e outer crossroads and th e m inor m eeting-places w ith their gam es . others aw ay from h om e for lon g p eriods looking after th e garden and the pair of oxen that are b ein g fatted . the opposite of w h ich is the desire to stand apart from others. D o in g o n e’s d u ty as a m an m eans con form in g to the social order. in front o f the m osq u e. stayin g in th e house w hile the others are w ork in g in the fields. follow their h u sb an d s around the orchard. or in sid e room s if th e y have o n e. and g o h om e in th e even in g ." D o n ’t w e all eat the sam e w heatcake (or th e sam e b arley) ? ” " D o n ’t we all get up at the sam e tim e? ” T h ese various w ays of reasserting solidarity contain an im plicit d efinition of the fundam ental virtue of co n fo rm ity . thim rith.D o x a t orthodoxy . T h e eccentric w h o d oes everyth in g d ifferently from other people is called am kh alef (from khalef. a w o rth y m an. a sort o f d rau ghts. so m e living in the a zib . v in e-lea v es. a bun ch o f herbs. still. and austere. T h ere are also the yo u n g w iv es w ho.thigar. a sort of " d e a d ” tim e w hich everyone feels he m ust respect: all is silen t. as w e have seen . bad luck for late sleep ers! ” and again " T h e . in th e shade of a porch or a h ed ge. picking up the fruit the m en have b eaten d o w n . alone or accom panied b y the "old w o m a n ”. so rtin g it and setting it ou t on trays. or fliaize. " I t’s th e m orning that giv es the hunters th eir g a m e . are taking advantage of the lim ited presence of the m en to m eet together or visit on e another. W orking w hile the others are resting. th e streets are " d esertlik e” . etc.

a shallow . su ch as p lou gh in g and so w in g . fall to those w h o are capable o f treating th e land w ith th e respect it deserves. Stay and be rebuked.4 But g ettin g up early is not a virtue in itself: if they are ill-u sed . as in their m om en t. sh e started to broadcast the grain. unw orthy of a m an of honour. to be present in th e m orn ing. the first hours are no m ore than "tim e taken from th e night *\ an offence against the p rin cip le that "there is a tim e for e v e r th in g ”.5 T h e tasks o f farm ing. w ho w orks so hastily that h e is likely to "m altreat the ea r th ”. seasonable wr orks. the year. horia erga. It is not for you to concern y o u rse lf.162 Structures . D a ily bread com es from G o d . or human life. E ve brought him som e w heatcake. as th e G reeks called th em .n either excessive haste nor slu ggish n ess. What is the u se o f a man's g ettin g up at th e m u ezzin ’s call if he is not g o in g to say the m orning prayer? T h ere is on ly m ockery for the m an w ho. habitus . forgettin g th e teachin gs o f w isd om : " It is u seless to pursue the w orld. frivolous way to behave. T h e sacred tasks. w ithou t in vok in g the nam e o f G od .” T h e over-eager peasant m oves ahead o f the collectiv e rhythm s w h ich assign each act its particular m om en t in the space o f the d ay. W hen the crop cam e u p . R espect for co llective rhythm s im plies resp ects for the rhythm that is appropriate to each action . w ho runs to catch up with som eon e else. S he sawr him sow in g grain b y grain. A m an m ust walk w ith a "m easured p a c e ” ( ikthal uqudmis) neither laggin g b eh ind nor ru n nin g like a " d a n cer”. d esp ite gettin g up "u nd er th e sta r s” or w hen "daw n has not taken sh a p e ” ('alam ) has achieved little. po w er suq is the m o r n i n g " T h e m an w ho sleep s u n til the m idd le of a z a l w ill find the m arket e m p ty 0 (sebah. of approaching it (qabel) w ith the m easured pace o f a m an m eetin g a partner w hom h e w ants to w elcom e and honour. S o there is m ockery too for th e m an w h o h urries w ithou t thin king. A dam found . T h is is u nd erlin ed b y the m yth of the origin of w heat and barley. S h e accused him o f wasting his time. and in voking G od each tim e. A dam w as so w in g wT heat. his race w ith tim e threatens to drag the w hole group in to the escalation o f d iabolic am bition . It is sim p ly a q u estion of b ein g in the proper place . thahraym ith.” " Y ou w ho rush along. w hich d eterm in es their duration. w asted . " coverin g each seed w ith earth ” . also m eans to be fittin g. W hile her husband w as b u sy eating. and that "everyth in g sh ou ld be d on e in its t im e ” (k u l w aqth salw aqth-is "everything in its t im e ”). are defined as m uch in their rh ythm . sim p le reproduction into in definite accu m u la tio n .at the proper tim e. b eco m in g ). N o on e w ill ever overtake it . and th u s to turn circular tim e in to linear tim e.

is that m u ch m ore associated w ith spatial grou p ing the m ore there is collectively at stake: rites thus range in im portance from the great solem n rites (e . or both at o n c e . in the case o f rites or tasks. a function of integration in and through d ivision . butcher ). through the rites perform ed at the sam e tim e but by each fam ily separately (th e sacrifice o f a sh eep at the A id ). O n e of the effects o f the ritualization o f practices js precisely that of assign in g them a tim e . m isrecogn izable form o f th e real d iv ision s of the social order.g . in the fact that the organization of the existen ce of the m en and the women in accordance w ith different tim es and different places co n stitu tes tw o interchangeable w ays of secu rin g separation and hierarchization o f th e m ale and fem ale w orld s.7A ll the d iv isio n s of the group are projected at every m om en t in to the spatio-tem poral organization w hich assigns each category its place and tim e: it is here that the fu zzy logic of practice wT orks w ond ers in en ab lin g th e group to ach ieve as m uch social and logical integration as is com p atib le w ith th e d iversity im p osed by the d ivision of labour b etw een the sexes. aw djeb) enacted by everyone at the sam e tim e. a tem p o . Social tim e as fo rm .D o x a o rth o d o xy h eterodoxy . w hich orders itself in accordance w ith th is representation: th is m ay be clearly seen .e . like w om an . as su ccessio n organized b y the application to p assin g tim e o f the principle w h ich organizes all d im en sio n s °f practice. through those w h ich m ay be practised at any tim e ( e . T h e reason w h y su b m ission to the collective rh yth m s is so rigorously dem anded is that the tem poral form s or the spatial structures structure not only the g rou p ’s representation o f the w orld b ut the grou p itself. and the " o c cu p a tio n s” (sm ith .g . and finally to th ose w hich m u st only take place in secret and at u nusual hours (the rites of love m agic). a m o m en t. that is. in the sen se in w hich for H e g el tradition is "realized m o ra lity ” . Practical taxonom ies. through hierarchiza­ tion. w h ich are a transform ed. in the m usical sen se. the organization of tim e and the g rou p in accor­ dance w ith m ythical structures leads collective p ractice to appear as " realized my t h ”. or econ om y. even m ore effectively than th e d ivision o f sp ace. con trib ute to th e reproduction o f that order by p rod ucing ob jectively orchestrated p ractices adjusted to th ose d iv isio n s.i. for exam ple. H e called this plant (barley) ech'ir" w ea k ”. the ages. d elicate and b rittle. i6 3 his field full of strange ears.6 T h e social calendar ten ds to secure in tegration by co m p ou n d in g the synchronization of identical p ractices w ith the orchestration of different but structurally h o m o lo ­ gous practices (su ch as p lou gh in g and w eavin g ). thereby conferring on th em th e sort of arbitrary n ecessity w h ich sp ecifically d efines cultural arbitrariness.w hich is relatively in d ep en d en t o f external n ecessities. the rite to cure stie s). But m ore p rofou n d ly. tech n iq u e. th e w om en g o in g to th e foun tain at an hour w h en the m en are not in the streets. . or b y a special path. th ose of climate. tends to fulfil. and a duration .8 S yn ch ron ization .

S ch em es o f th ou gh t and p ercep tion can produce the o b jectivity that th ey d o produce on ly by p rod u cin g m isrecogn ition o f the limits o f th e cogn ition that they m ake p ossib le.e .164 Structures. in their ow n specific lo g ic. As w e have seen in the case o f the d o m estic con flicts to which T m arriages often give rise. su ch as w om en and th e y o u n g . the objective cla sses. so as to d istingu ish it from an orthodox or heterodox belief im p ly in g aw areness and recogn ition o f th e p ossib ility of different or an tagon istic b eliefs. T h is experience w e shall call doxa. the recon ciliation o f su b jective dem and and objective (i e co llectiv e) n ecessity w hich grou n d s the belief of a w hole group in what the group b elie v es. of w hich they are th e p rod uct and of w h ich they reproduce the structures in a transformed form . out of w hich arises the sense o f lim its. in th e group: a reflexive return to the prin cip les of the op eration s o f ob jectification . cannot but recogn ize the legitimacy o f th e d om in ant classification in th e very fact that th eir only ch an ce of . in the d oxic m od e. is p revented by the very rein forcem en t w hich these p rod u ction s co n tin u o u sly draw from a w orld o f ob jectification s p roduced in accordance w ith the sam e subjective p rin cip les. co m m o n ly called the sense o f re a lity . m ake th eir sp ecific con trib u tion to the reproduction of the pow er relations o f w h ich they are th e p rod u ct. p o w e r (S ittlic h k e it). i. i. i. O f all the n m ech an ism s ten d in g to p rod u ce this effect. in wT hich the prevailing classificatory system en cou n ters n o rival or antagonistic p rin cip le. w hen there is a q uasi-p erfect corresp ond en ce b etw een the ob jective order and th e su b jective p rin cip les o f organization (as in ancient so cieties) th e natural and social w orld appears as self-ev id en t. to the wr orld o f tradition exp erienced as a "natural w o r ld ” and taken for granted. age. T h e in stru m ents o f k now ledge o f the social w orld are in this case (ob jectively) political in stru m en ts w hich co n trib u te to the reprodu ction o f the social w orld by p rod u cin g immediate ad heren ce to th e w orld. T h e political fu n ctio n o f classifications is never m ore lik ely to pass u n n o ticed than in the case o f relatively undifferentiated social form ation s.e . S y stem s of classification w hich reprodu ce. social structures and m en tal stru ctures. habitus. social categories disadvantaged by the symbolic ord er. and h en ce the recogn ition . practices or d iscou rses. seen as self-evid en t and u n d isp u ted . th e corresp ond en ce b etw een the ob jective classes and the in tern alized classes. thereby fo u n d in g immediate a d h eren ce. by secu rin g the m isrecogn ition . the d iv isio n s b y sex. E very estab lish ed order ten d s to p rod uce (to very different d egrees and with very d ifferen t m eans) the naturalization of its owT arbitrariness.e . the m ost im portant and the best con cealed is u n d ou b ted ly the dialectic o f the ob jective ch an ces and the agents’ aspirations. of th e arbitrariness on w hich they are b a se d : in th e extrem e case. or p osition in the relation s o f production. w hich is the basis o f the m ost ineradicable adherence to th e estab lish ed order. that is to say.

as D u rk h eim p ut it. and o f th e properties attached by definition to them . and em b lem s.is a major d im en sion o f political p ow er.D o x a . which are th e exact in version o f th e rites of p assage). th e m en o f m ature a g e .e . helping to reproduce at on ce th e u nion and th e d ivision o f th ose classes by means o f tem poral d iv isio n s ten d in g to produce both co n tin u ity and rupture. in their ow n logic. T h e taxon om ies o f the m ythico-ritual system at o n ce d ivid e and u nify. legitim ating u n ity in d ivision .9 T h er e is no need to insist on the fun ction of legitim ation of the d iv isio n of labour and power between the sexes that is fulfilled by a m yth ico-ritu al sy stem entirely d o m ­ inated by m ale values. hierarchy .10 W e see yet again howr erron eou s it w ou ld b e to con sid er o n ly the cogn itive or. orthodoxy .in particular. Social representations of the different ages o f life. th e pow er relations b etw een th ea g e-cla sses. orn am en ts. the stabler the ob jective structures and the m ore fully they reproduce th em selves in the a g e n ts’ d isp o sitio n s. heterodoxy neutralizing th ose of its effects m ost contrary to th eir ow n in terests lies in subm itting to them in order to m ake use o f them (in accordance w ith the logic 0f the eminence grise). " sp e cu la tiv e” . d ecorations. and also those w h ich are ruled ou t b ecau se th ey w ou ld have th e effect o f d isru ptin g the system o f o p p osition s b etw een the gen erations (su ch as rejuvenation rites. T h ey thereby rank am on g the in stitu tion alized in stru m en ts for m aintenance of the sym b olic order. fu n ction s of m yth ico-ritu al represen­ tations: th ese m ental stru ctures. i. the tokens w hich exp ress and u nd erlin e the represen tation s o f the u ses o f the body that are legitim ately associated w ith each socially defined age. con trib ute at least as efficaciously as th e provisions o f cu stom towards d efining and m aintaining th e d elim itation o f p ow ers b etw een the sexes and gen erations. a transfigured reproduction o f the structures con stitutin g a m ode of p rod uction and a m ode o f biological and social reproduction. the b oundaries w h ich d efine age-group s. social reality . It is perhaps less ob viou s that the social structuring of tem porality w h ich organizes representations and practices. In a determ in ate social form ation. exp ress. the . and m arked by the sym bolism o f co sm etics and cloth in g. T h e theory o f know ledge a d im en sion o f political theory b ecau se the sp ecifically sy m b o lic pow er to ■nipose the p rin cip les o f the con stru ction o f reality . that is to say. but also the lim itations im posed at different ages. m ost solem n ly reaffirmed in the rites of passage. su ch as the sense of honour or respect for elders and an cestors. and h en ce am ong the m ech an ism s of the reproduction of the social order w h ose very fu n ction in g serves the interests o f those occupying a d om in an t p osition in th e social stru cture. fulfils a political fu n ctio n by sym bolically m anipulating age lim its. T h e m yth ico-ritu al categories cut up the age con tin u u m into d iscon tin u ou s segm en ts. through the ethical d isp o sitio n s th e y p rod uce. co n stitu ted not b io lo g i­ cally (like the p hysical sig n s of ageing) but so cia lly .

When som eone was ill. that’s what everyone w ho died died o f. m en and w om en. T h ey w ent to bed and they died. m y side recalled the place where the crucifix used to be. with a nightlight on the Siena marble m antelpiece.. . le poum on\t intestines. Vestomac].e . stomach [listuma. and when you marked the desire.*’12 "From the position of the bed. It is not easy to evoke the subjective experience associated with this world o f the realized ought-to-be. the relatives were given tim e to assem ble and to prepare the burial. but all over the * arch. com e for n e w s . w hen you w ent to bed not because you w anted to but because it was time. not just in the village. i. T h ey w ould give alm s to make the dying easier: they would give the com m unity a tree. habitus . generally a fig-tree planted beside the road. w ithout any of the immoral m edicines that allow you to get up and imagine you can lead the . and the other by Marcel Proust. as on e p ossib le order am on g o thers. not as there used to be. Its fruit would not be picked. but left for passing travellers and the poor [chajra usufagh. but it w ouldn’t com e. p o w e r greater the ex ten t of the field of d oxa. death came slow ly. T hose w ho were dying used to suffer a lot. It’s only nowadays that w e’re learning words like liver. and I d on ’t know what! People only used to know [pain in] the belly [th'abut]. N ow everyone’s sick. . it’s true. the old rem edies kept you for several days on end. Besides. . and w here. D eath 'always struck them through their sp eech ’: first they became dum b. W h en . in the days w hen there were still bedroom s and parents. the new s soon spread everyw here. o f that w hich is taken for granted. All that’s forgotten nowadays.i66 Structures . And once a week there was 'the sick m an’s m arket’ umutin]: they would send som eone to buy him meat or fruit. th e estab lish ed cosm ological and political order is perceived not as arbitrary. In the old days sick people used to call for death. where you closed the blue rep curtains with their raised-velvet bands. one by an old K abyle w om an. there aren’t any sick people now . Fr. the acceptance and the whole cerem ony of sleeping by going up two steps to the big bed. even the youngest. lung [albumun. w hen you were ill. but as a self-ev id en t and natural order w h ich g oes w ith ou t sayin g and therefore goes u n q u estio n ed . . a sick m an’s house is never empty: in the daytim e all his relatives. it could take a night and a day or two nights and a day. folk d id n ’t know what illness was. the agents 5 aspirations have the sam e lim its as the ob jective co n d itio n s o f w hich th e y are th e product.11 And so it is in all seriousness that I juxtapose two particularly striking evocations of this experience.W h o’s ill nowadays? W ho’s well? Everyone com plains but no one stays in b ed . unless it was fever [thatcla] . they all run to the doctor. the alms tr e e ]. in which things that could scarcely be otherwise nonetheless are w hat they are only because they are what they ought to be. all th e women relatives. the tree of the outgoing. Everyone had time to see them one last time. ow in g to the q uasi-p erfect fit b etw een th e ob jective stru ctures and the in tern alized structures w hich results from the logic o f sim p le reproduction.A t nightfall. describing the subjective effects of the ritualization of practices: " In the old days. everyone’s complaining o f som ething. a tim e for each thing. in w hich an agent can have at one and the same tim e the feeling that there is nothing to do except what he is doing and also that he is only doing what he o u g h t. Fr. . Everyone knows w hat’s wrong w ith him now. chajra n ’esadhaqa. the breath of the recess in the bedroom in my grandparents’ house. with its attendant rights and duties. would be taken to his bedside. when you loved your parents not because you found them intelligent but because they were your parents. underlining the fact that to be ill and dying was a social status.

B etw een the ch ild and th e w orld the w hole group in terven es. a reflection o f all the others. which for two thousand years have contained the flowers of the meadows and the w isdom of old w om en . su ch as language.14 b u t w ith a w hole u niverse of ritual practices and also of discourses. sayings. as it w ere. the play o f th e m yth ico-ritu al h om ologies con stitutes a p erfectly closed w orld . T h e self-evid en ce of the w orld is reduplicated by the in stitu ted d iscou rses about the w orld in w hich the w h o le g ro u p ’s adherence to that self-evid en ce is affirm ed. through th e acts and sy m b o ls that are in tend ed to con trib ute to the reproduction o f nature and o f the group by the analogical reproduction o f natural p rocesses. for exam p le. as on e of th e different and eq u ally legitim ate answers w h ich can be given to an exp licit question about the established . each asp ect of w h ich is. what is essential goes w ithou t saying because it comes w ithou t saying: the tradition is silent. n ot least about itself as a tradition. to make the w orld conform to the m yth . and art. Because the su b jective n ecessity and self-evid en ce of the com m on sen se world are validated by th e ob jective con sen su s on th e se n se of th e w orld. m im etic representation helps to produce in the agents tem porary reactions (such a s. w hen the con d ition s of existen ce of w h ich the m em bers o f a group are the product are very little d ifferentiated. orthodoxy .is never encountered in su ch a u niverse.e . i. the collective ex citem en t associated w ith lakhrif) or even lasting dispositions (such as the generative sch em es incorporated in the b ody sch em a) attuned to the objective processes exp ected from th e ritual action . m yth . th e d isp o sitio n s w h ich each of them exercises in his p ractice are confirm ed and h en ce reinforced b oth by the practice of the other m em bers of th e group (on e fu n ctio n o f sym b olic exchanges su ch as feasts and cerem on ies b ein g to favour the circular rein­ forcem ent w hich is th e foundation of collective belief) an d also by in stitu ­ tions w hich con stitu te collectiv e th ou gh t as m uch as they express it. sweating under the blankets thanks to perfectly harmless infusions.a cultural fact w h ich is th e historical product of a long labour o f " d ise n c h a n tm e n t” (E ntzauberung) . T h e sp ecific p oten cy of th e exp licit statem ent that brings su bjective exp erien ces in to the reassuring u n an im ity of a socially approved and collectively attested sen se im p oses itself w ith the authority and necessity of a collective p osition adopted on data in trin sically am enable to m any other structurations.”13 M oreover.D o x a . proverbs. heterodoxy 167 life of a healthy man when you are ill. custom ary law is co n ten t to enum erate sp ecific ap plications of principles w hich rem ain im plicit and u n ­ form ulated. Furtherm ore. not just w ith the w arnings that in cu lcate a fear o f su pern a­ tural d an gers . " N a tu r e” as scien ce und erstan ds it .h elp s. a w orld w h ich has no place for opinion as liberal G eo lo g y u nd erstan ds it. b ecause u n q u estion ed . all structured in con cordan ce w ith the prin ci­ ples of the corresp ond ing habitus. in other w ord s.

under the guise o f religious or philosoph ical op p osition s. the deliberate. T h e adherence expressed in the doxic relation to the social w orld is the absolute form o f recogn ition o f legitim acy through m isrecognition of arbitrariness. It is by reference to the universe of op inion that the com p lem en tary class is d efined. doxa. the unform ulated in to form ulation. even from th e eyes of th ose en gaged in it. and h en ce from conflict between groups claim in g to p ossess it. p o w e r political order. habitus . the aggregate o f the " c h o ic e s ” whose su bject is everyon e and n o on e b ecause th e q u estio n s they answ er cannot be ex p licitly asked. and n oth in g is further from th e correlative n otion of the m ajority than th e unanim ity of doxa.15 T h e critiq ue w'hich brings the u n d iscu ssed in to d iscu ssio n . in breaking the im m ediate fit b etw een the su bjective structures . which arises from com p etition for legitim acy. m ethod ical su sp en sion of naive adherence to the w o rld . w hen they com e to be su sp en d ed practically. w h ich . w h ich appear as su ch only retrosp ectively. the su m total o f th e th eses tacitly p osited on the hither sid e of all in qu iry. th e locu s of the confrontation of co m p etin g d iscou rses . sin ce it is unaw are of the very q u estion of legitim acy.w h ose political truth m ay be overtly declared or may rem ain h id d en . universe of the undiscussed (o r a r g u m e n t) T h e truth of doxa is only ever fu lly revealed w hen negatively constituted b y the con stitu tion of a field o f opinion.i6 8 Structures . the class o f that w hich is taken for granted. T h e practical q u estio n in g o f the theses im plied in a particular w ay o f livin g that is brought about b y "culture contact ” or by th e political and econ om ic crises correlative wr class division ith is not the p urely in tellectual operation w hich p hen o m en o lo g y design ates by the term epoche. has as the con d itio n of its p ossib ility objective crisis.

m ore radical c e n so r sh ip : the overt op p osition b etw een " r ig h t” op inion and " le f t ” or " w r o n g ” o p in ion . b y reference to th e ch oice . con ceals another.D o x a . w hich d elim its the universe o f possible discourse. orthodoxy . of estab lish in g in its p lace th e necessarily im perfect su b stitu te. in w hich the definition of th e social w orld is at stake in overt or latent class stru ggle.e . heresy . and the field o f doxa . It is on ly w hen the d om in ated have th e m aterial and sym b olic m eans of rejecting th e d efinition of the real that is im posed on them through logical structures reprodu cing the social structures (i. and hence th o u g h t. the dom inant classes have an interest in d efen d in g the integrity o f d oxa or. that the arbitrary p rin cip les of the prevailing classification can appear as su ch and it therefore b ecom es necessary to undertake the wr ork of co n sciou s system atization and express rationalization w hich marks the passage from doxa to orth odoxy. straight. T h e d om inated classes have an interest in p u sh in g back the lim its of doxa and exp osin g the arbitrariness o f th e taken for g ra n ted . be it legitim ate or illegitim ate. eu p h em istic or b lasph em ou s. of that w hich is b eyon d question and w hich each agent tacitly accords b y th e m ere fact of actin g in accord wr ith social con ven tion.17 But the m anifest cen sorsh ip im p osed b y orth odox d iscou rse. w ithou t ever en tirely su cceed in g . m asks in its turn the fundam ental op p osition b etw een the universe o f th in gs that can be stated. i. exists on ly in th e ob jective relation ship w h ich o p p oses it to h eterod oxy. the state o f the power relations) and to lift the (in stitu tion alized or internalized) censorsh ip s w hich it im p lies. o f acceptable w ays o f th in k in g and sp eak ing the natural and social w orld . and . O rth odoxy. In class societies. heterodoxy 169 and the objective structures.m ade p ossib le by the existence o f competing possibles and to the exp licit critiq ue of the su m total of the alternatives not chosen that the estab lish ed order im p lies. short of this. at restoring the prim al state of in n o cen ce of d oxa. o f that w hich is exp licitly q uestioned. that is. is itself a fundam ental ob jective at stake in that form o f class struggle w h ich is the struggle for the im p osition o f the d om in ant sy stem s of classification. w h ich aim s. the official way of speaking and th in k in g the w orld.16 It follow s that th e w ou ld -b e m ost radical critiq ue alw ays has the lim its that are assigned to it by th e ob jective con d ition s.hairesis. the drawing o f the lin e b etw een the field o f op in io n . d estroys self-evid en ce practically. It is w hen the social w orld loses its character as a natural p henom en on that the q u estion of the natural or con ven tional character (phusei or nomo) of social facts can be raised. w hich rejects heretical rem arks as b la sp h em ies . o p in ion . orthodoxy.e . or rather straightened. It is defined as a sy stem o f eu p h em ism s. C risis is a necessary condition for a q u estio n in g of doxa b ut is not in itself a sufficient con d ition for the p rod uction o f a critical d iscou rse. w hen social classifications b ecom e th e object and in strum ent of class stru ggle.

through w h ich the exp ressly censored u nn am eable n on eth eless finds its w ay into th e universe o f d iscou rse. it can be seen that the boundary betw een the universe o f (orthod ox or h eterodox) discou rse and the universe of doxa. in vested w ith the authority o f a grou p . practical c o n sc io u sn e ss” . conspired in their very antagonism to occu lt the " aphasia ” o f th ose w ho are d en ied access to th e in stru m en ts of the stru ggle for th e d efinition o f reality. and h en ce to the d elim itation of the u niverse o f the unthinkable. T h e universe of discourse in th e classic d efinition given b y A . habitus . " w h en they find a nam e for w hat had up to then b een lived n am elessly. says Sartre. u nn am ed. If on e accepts th e eq u ation m ade by Marx in T he G erm an Ideology. the things it d esign ates are not sim p ly exp ressed b ut also authorized and legitim ated . objective epoche has provoked or m ade p o s s ib le . T h is is true not o n ly o f estab lish m en t language b ut also of the heretical discourses w h ich draw their legitim acy and authority from th e very groups over w hich they exert their pow er and w h ich they literally produce b y ex p ressin g them : they d erive their p ow er from their capacity to objectify unform ulated ex­ . the con trib ution it m akes to the d elim itation o f the u niverse o f d iscou rse. everyth in g takes place as if the struggle for the power to im pose th e legitim ate m od e o f th ou ght and exp ression that is unceasingly w aged in th e field of the p rod uction o f sym b olic go o d s tended to conceal. that "language is real. so to speak.170 Structures . adm itted w ith ou t argum ent or scrutiny T h u s in class societies. not least from th e eyes of those involved in it. in the tw o fo ld sense o f w hat goes w ithou t saying and w hat cannot be said for lack o f an available d iscou rse. T h e relation ship b etw een language and exp erience never appears more clearly than in crisis situ ation s in w hich the everyday order (Alltaglichkeit) is ch allen ged . as if eu p h em ism and b lasp h em y. that is to say. represents the d ivid in g-lin e betw een the m ost radical form of m isrecogn ition and the aw akening of political con­ scio u sn ess. the universe of the thinkable. and w ith it the language o f order.18 is practically defined in relation to th e necessarily u nn oticed com p lem en tary class that is con stituted by the universe of that w h ich is u n d iscu ssed . p o w e r the universe of that w hich is taken for granted. "a range o f ideas w h ich is either exp ressed or understood as con taining the w hole matter under d isc u ssio n ”. de M organ in his Form al L o g ic. situ ation s w hich call for an extraordinary discou rse (the Ausseralltaglichkeit w hich W eber p resen ts as the decisive characteristic o f charism a) capable of g iv in g system atic expression to the gam u t o f extra-ordinary exp erien ces that th is." Private ” exp eriences u ndergo nothing less than a change o f state w hen they recogn ize th em selv es in the public objectivity o f an already con stitu ted d iscou rse. ”19 B ecause any language that can com m and attention is an "authorized la n g u a g e”. th e objective sig n o f recognition of their right to be spoken and to be spoken p u b licly : "W ords w reck havoc ”.

A rational contract w ould telescop e in to an instant a transaction w h ich gift exchange d isgu ises b y stretch in g it ou t in tim e.a step on the road to officialization and legitimation .e. th en it is clear that in redu cing the p o ly th etic to the nionothetic. n eig h b o u rh o o d . like gift ex ch a n ge. as Lukacs puts it. the strength o f th e p rop het or political leader w h o m ob ilizes the group b y an n ou n cin g to th em w hat they want to hear. perhaps. to m anifest and rein force their concordance. m arriages . the strength of the sorcerer w h o wrields a liberating p otency . gift exchange is. and inevitably interested relations im posed by k inship. Sym bolic capital T he theoretical con stru ction w hich retrosp ectively projects the cou n ter-gift into the project of th e gift has th e effect o f transform ing in to m echanical sequences o f ob ligatory acts the at on ce risky and necessary im provisation of the everyday strategies w hich ow e their infinite com p lex ity to th e fact that the g iv er’s undeclared calculation m ust reckon w ith the receiver’s undeclared calculation. authorizing language and the grou p w hich au th orizes it and acts on its authority. w ithout calculation. tend or pretend to p ut the law o f self-in terest in to abeyance. in societies wr ich .and. if not the only m ode of com m od ity circulation p ractised. into elective relations of reciprocity: in the wr ork o f reproducing estab lish ed relations . In the sam e operation. at least the only m ode to be fu lly recogn ized . and hence satisfy his exp ectation s w ith ou t appearing to know^w'hat they are. exchan ges of gifts. o f all the sym b olic labour in ten d ed to trans­ m ute. ob jectivism destroys the sp ecificity o f all practices w h ich . w ith ou t any past or future.through feasts. rests on the dialectical relation ship b etw een au th orized . visits or courtesies.21 If it is true th a t th e lapse of tim e in terp osed is w hat en ab les the gift or cou n ter-gift to b e seen and experienced as an inaugural act o f g en erosity.that o f all logotherap ies . the labour required to conceal the fun ction o f the exchan ges is as im portant an elem en t as the labour need ed to carry ou t the fu n ctio n .in offering the m ea n s o f ex ­ pressing exp eriences usually repressed. cerem on ies. i. or work. the in ev ita b le. and because o f th is. b y the sincere fiction of a d isin terested exchan ge.Sym bolic capital periences. above all. b ecau se they deny h the true soil o f their lif e ”. to m ake th em p u b lic . it rem oves the co n d itio n s m aking p ossib le the institutionally organ ized and guaranteed misrecognition20 w hich is th e basis of gift exchange and. H eretical p ow er. w hen th e occasion arises.w hich is no less vital to the ex isten ce o f the group than th e reproduction o f the eco n o m ic bases of its ex isten ce. E verything takes place as if the essen ce of th e " a rch a ic” econom y lay in the fact that econ om ic activity cannot exp licitly acknow ledge the eco n o m ic en d s in relation to w hich it is objectively orien ted: th e "idolatry . and. have an ec o n o m y in itself and not for itself.

and thu s in th e detailed term s of th e agreem ent. com p etitio n . rights and in terests. In redu cing the econ om y to its objective reality. co stly and elaborate gift eco n o m y . T h u s .e . as a system governed by the law s of interested calcu lation. o w in g to their duality. economical) co n cep ts of the und isgu ised self-in terest econ om y reveal the cost o f op eratin g an eco n o m y w h ich . habitus . to prevent the econom y from b ein g grasped as an eco n o m y . p o ssib ly follow ing the N orthern and W estern S em ites. to see hum an activity as labour.e . w rites M au ss.1 7 2 Structures . also brings to light the in stitu tional m ech an ism s. and w hich is regarded a s the w orst form of u sury w hen it leads to d isp o ssessio n . By a g en u in e. above all. trade and p rod uction . economic (i. b y its refusal to ack n ow led ge and co n fess itself as su ch . o b jective truth of econ om ic activity. w h ich have the fun ction of lim itin g and d isg u isin g the play of eco n o m ic interest and calculation (eco n o m ic in the . econ om ism an nih ilates the sp ecificity located precisely in the socially m aintained d iscrep ancy between the m isrecogn ized or. co n seq u en tly. separated purchases from gifts and exchan ges. It is no accid en t that the vocabulary of the archaic eco n o m y sh ou ld be entirely com p osed of d ou b le-sid ed n otion s that are con d em n ed to disintegrate in the course o f the history of the eco n o m y . on e m igh t say. together w ith the system atic em p hasis on th e sym bolic asp ect of the activities and relations of p rod u ction . w h ich . is forced to d evote as m uch tim e to con cealin g the reality o f econ om ic acts as it ex p en d s in carrying them o u t: the generalization o f m onetary exch an ge. to take an extrem e exam ple. and. i. w hich w as en cu m bered wr ith personal con sid erations. rahnia.”23 T h e historical situ ation s in w hich th e u nstable. or exp loitation . as m a n s struggle against nature. even w hen it con tin u es to be used b y its ow ner. in a w ord. a contract by w'hich the borrow er grants the lender the u sufru ct of som e of his land for the duration of the loan. in com patib le w ith the d evelop m en t o f the m arket. " w h o. socially repressed. w h ich exp o ses the objective w ork in gs of th e econ om y. d rew the d istinction b etw een personal rights and real rights. ten d s. po w er of n a tu re” w hich m akes it im p ossib le to think o f nature as a raw material or. artificially m aintained structures o f th e good -faith econ om y break u p and make w ay for the clear. great and venerable revolu tion they passed b eyon d the excessiv ely hazardous.e . and. u n e co n o m ic . sin ce. i. from the aid granted to a relative in difficulties so as to save him from having to sell a piece o f land. and the social representation o f p rod uction and exchange. proper to the archaic eco n o m y . differs o n ly in the nature of the social relation b etw een the tw o parties. co n ceiv ed of the difference b etw een ritual. d isso ­ ciated moral ob ligations from contracts. con stitu tes a sort o f secu rity on the lo a n .22 " It was precisely th e R om ans and G r ee k s” . the social relations they design ate represent u nstable structures w hich are con d em n ed to sp lit in tw o as soon as there is any w eakening o f the social m echan ism s aim ed at m aintain in g th em .

A s an act of exchan ge se ttin g the seal on alliances (" I set the w heatcake and the salt b etw een u s ”). as one moves out from the relationship betw een brothers to that betw een virtual strangers (people from tw o different villages) or even com plete strangers.e. He practises no exchanges involving money and all his relations are based on total confidence. w h o had learnt his trade in F ran ce. inviting only the " n o ta b le s” of each grou p . technical intelligence). he has recourse to none of the guarantees (w itnesses. and also as the solem nity of the guarantees increases. by g o in g h om e w hen his work was finished w ith ou t eatin g th e m eal traditionally g iv en in th e m a so n ’s honour w h en a house is b u ilt.g . i.a departure from prin cip les w hich at least paid lip -service to their legitim acy . T h is explains w hy recourse to formal guarantees becom es more and more exceptional as the social distance betw een the parties decreases. from a'ggun. contrasted with thahraymith. the easier it is to make agreements. and then d em an d in g. Conversely. because the authorities responsible for authen­ ticating and enforcing them are more remote and/or more venerated. so a transaction is less likely to occur at all.e . around 1955. cheese.Sym bolic capital *73 narrow sen se of the w o r d ). For exam p le. written docum ents. unlike the shady dealer. (First there is .to another peasant.e. an allow ance of tw o hundred francs in lieu o f the m e a l: his dem and for the cash eq u ivalen t o f the meal was a sacrilegious reversal o f th e form ula used by sy m b o lic alchem y to transm ute the price o f labour into an u n solicited g ift. T h e general law o f exchanges means that the closer the individuals or groups are in the genealogy. butter. closer to its econom ic reality. and the more com pletely they are entrusted to good faith. calculating. and the interested calcula­ tion w hich is never absent even from the most generous exchange (in which both parties account . and it th u s exp osed the device m ost com m on ly em p loyed to keep up appearances by m eans of a collectively concerted m ake-b elieve. but it can becom e and increasingly does becom e purely econom ic ” in character.them selves satisfied) can be more and more openly revealed.24W hereas th e greatest in d u lgen ce was accorded to th e su b terfu g es used by som e to m in im ize the cost o f the m eals at th e end of th e th iw izi (e . etc. T h e man of good faith would not think of selling certain fresh food products . a w ell-know n m a so n . fruit .t h e reaction cou ld on ly be scandal and shock w h en a m an took it upon him self to declare that the m eal had a cash eq u ivalen t.) with which comm ercial transactions are surrounded. vegetables. or on e m an from each fam ily) . and breaking the law of silen ce w hich guarantees the com p licity of co llectiv e bad faith in the good -faith econ om y. as the relationship becom es more im personal. the more frequent they are. caused a scandal. th u s betraying the best-kept and w orst-kept secret (on e that everyon e m ust k eep ). the child still unable to speak. i. but always distributes them am ong friends or neighbours. T he good-faith economy calls forth the strange incarnation of homo economicus known as the bu niya (or bab niya). in addition to th e price of his d ay’s work (on e thou sand old fran cs). th e final m eal at the tim e o f th e th iw izi o f harvest or h o u se-b u ild in g naturally becam e a closing rite in ten d ed to transm ute an interested transaction retrosp ectively in to a generous exchan ge (like the g ifts w hich mark the su ccessfu l co n clu sion o f a deal ).i.milk. the man of good faith (niya or thi'ugganth. count .

in exchanges betw een strangers. Marriage itself is no exception: quite apart from parallel-cousin marriage. for straightforward goods such as land. underwriting th e specific new agree­ m ent. to the exchange of honour which can dispense w ith conditions and depend entirely on the good faith of the " contracting p arties”. . and at least an effort is m ade to substitute a personalized relationship ( “ on behalf o f . oxen made to look fatter b y rubbing them with a plant w hich makes them sw ell (adhris). and still more so betw een relatives. then the Cadi’s written docum ent. ”) for a com pletely im personal. with costs to be shared in the case of loss and profits shared in the case o f sale. and purchasers who band together to force prices dow n. that is to say. who cannot dem and or obtain guarantees because he cannot guarantee the quality of his product or find guarantors. especially m ules. a regular contract. . Every intermediate stage can be found. such as beasts of burden. th e in dignan t co m m en ts provoked by the heretical b eh aviour of peasants w h o have d eparted from traditional w ays draw a tten tio n to the m echan ism s w h ich form erly in clin ed the peasant to m aintain a m agical relationship w ith the land and m ade it im p ossib le for him to see h is toil as . T here are countless tales of m ules w hich run off as soon as the purchaser has got them hom e. But in m ost transactions the notions o f buyer and seller tend to be dissolved in the network of m iddlem en and guarantors designed to transform the purely econom ic relationship betw een supply and dem and into a genealogically based and genealogically guaranteed relationship. T h e incarnation of econom ic war is the shady dealer. governed the arrangement by which the K abyles handed over their oxen to the southern X om ads to be looked after for one. T h e "goods or beasts of the fellah” are traditionally contrasted w ith the ‘’goods or beasts of the m arket”: old inform ants will talk endlessly o f the tricks and frauds w hich are com m on practice in the 'big m arkets”.> 74 Structures . or even w itnesses. then there is a sim ple paper drawn up by som eone not specialized in th e production of lega] docum ents. providing a religious but not a legal guarantee. or three w orking years (from autum n to autum n) in exchange for twenty-two double decalitres of barley per ox per year. it is the choice o f the thing to be purchased w h ich determ ines the buyer’s decision. p o w e r the word of w itnesses. Men avoid buying animals from h im . w hich is less solem n w hen drawn up by the village taleb than bv a w ell-known taleb. tw o. from transactions based on com plete distrust. it alm ost always occurs b etw een fam ilies already linked by a whole network of previous exchanges.) It w ould be insulting to presum e to authenticate a transaction based on trust betw een trustworthy people. the share of th e loss w hich partners agree to accept w hen there is an accident to an animal m ay be entirely different depending on th e assessm ent of their responsibilities w hich th ey com e to in accordance w ith the relationship between them : a man w ho has lent an animal to a close relative feels he m ust m inim ize his partner’s responsibility. for problem atic good s. a adi. the man w ho fears neither G od nor m an. it is the choice of seller w hich decides. habitus . S im ilarly. before a lawyer. signed before th e Cadi or before w itnesses. the fam ilies bring in prestigious kinsmen or affines as "guarantors”. By contrast. which is enhanced if they are distant and influential. Private arrangements betw een kin and affines are to market transactions what ritual war is to total war. such as that betw een th e peasant and the shady dealer. and finally the contract signed in front of a law yer. anonym ous one. Sim ilarly. the sym bolic capital thus displayed serving both to strengthen their hand in the negotiations and to guarantee the deal once it has been concluded. just as they avoid buying from any com plete stranger: as one informant said. It is significant that in the first phase of the highly com plex negotiations leading up to the marriage agreem ent. then the contract signed before a taleb.

” T h e self-resp ectin g man should alw ays b e b usy d o in g so m eth in g . he would n ot think o f d elegatin g th e task of leadin g th e team . the peasant d oes not w o r k .” T o take u p H e sio d ’s o p p o sitio n betw een ponos and ergon. I ’m sure th e y ’ll en d up p lo u g h in g in la k h r ifii they are in a hurry and if th ey m ean to sp en d lahlal [th e licit period for p lo u g h in g ] d o in g so m e­ thing e lse. or in rbi' [spring] if th ey Ve b een too lazy in lahlal. th ey turn ev eryth in g upside d o w n . and take reven ge for th e bad treatm ent it receives from a clu m sy or over-hasty farm er.e . T h e y o u n g m en w ere left o u t of it: it w ould have been an in su lt to th e land t o ' p r e s e n t’ it [qabel] w ith m en one w o u ld not dare to p resent to oth er m e n . in asm u ch as it is regarded as appropriate to th e fu n ction o f th e p erson d o in g it . " w h o m u st con fron t th e la n d . th ey have d o n e away w ith fear [elhiba]. nature b esto w s its bounty o n ly on th ose w h o b rin g it their care as a trib u te. " G iv e to the earth and the earth w ill g ive to y ou ”. and the o n ly task he leaves for h is " c lie n ts ” ( ichikran) is that o f breaking up the so il b eh ind the p lo u g h . if he can n o t find an yth ing to do. It’s all th e sam e to th e m . you had to be the m aster o f th e land.” " It is the m an w h o con fron ts [receives] other m en ”. T h is can be taken to m ean th at in o b ed ien ce to th e logic o f gift ex c h a n g e. A nd the heretical behaviour o f th ose w h o leave to th e y o u n g the task o f " o p en in g th e earth and ploughing in to it th e w ealth of the n ew y ea r” p rovok es th e old er peasants to express th e p rin cip le o f the relation ship b etw een m en and the land. W e op en ly m ock th e earth and it is o n ly right that it sh ou ld pay us back w ith lie s . th ey have profaned the la n d . says a p roverb . D u r in g the p lo u g h in g . A ctivity is as m u ch a d uty of com m un al life as an eco n o m ic n ece ssity . th ey say. T h e d istin ction b etw een p rod u ctive and u np ro d u ctiv e w ork or b etw een profitable and u n p rofitable w ork is u n k n o w n : the ancient eco n o m y know s o n ly th e op p osition b etw een the idler w h o fails in h is social d u ty and . at least h e can carve h is s p o o n ”. regardless of its strictly econ om ic fu n ctio n . face to face). but alw ays as th e ob ject o f respect m ixed w ith fear (elhiba): it w ill " settle its sc o r e s”. w hich could rem ain u nform ulated as lo n g as it w as taken for gran ted : " T h e earth no lon ger g ives b ecau se w e give it n oth in g . " T h e old m en used to say that to p lo u g h p rop erly.” E veryth in g in th e p easan t’s practice actu alizes. T h e a ccom plished peasant " p resen ts h im s e lf” to h is land w ith the stan ce appropriate w hen one man m ee ts an oth er ( i. T h e land is n ever treated as a raw material to be ex p lo ited . and w ith the attitu de of tru sting fam iliarity he w ou ld sh o w a resp ected kinsm an. WT hat is valu ed is activity for its ow n sake. the o b jectiv e in ten tion revealed b y ritual. N o th in g in tim id ates th em or stop s th e m .25 O n ly the application of categories alien to peasant exp erien ce (th o se im p o sed b y eco n o m ic d om in ation and the gen eralization of m onetary exch an ges) b rin g s up the d istin ction betw een th e tech n ical aspect and the ritual or sy m b o lic aspect o f agricultural activity. in a different m o d e.S ym bolic capital *75 labour: " I t ’s sacrilege. he takes pains. says a p roverb .

b argaining in th e m arket. the IndoE uropean languages had no n a m e). su ch as th e fu n ctio n s carried o u t b y th e head of the fam ily as leader and representative o f the grou p . p o w e r the w orker w h o perform s h is socially defined proper fu n ctio n . no one wr u ld dream of try in g to evaluate the profitability o o f all the activities w hich th e application o f alien categories w ou ld lead one to regard as u n p rod u ctive. as it wr ere. habitus . i. as sym bolic. T h u s th e d istin ction w h ich M arx m akes b etw een the w orking period proper . h is b est and in d eed on ly course is to sp en d his tim e w ith ou t cou n tin g it. not to m en tion p ractices gen erally regarded as rites.and the production p erio d . or " v is itin g ” ( asafqadh) and look in g after th e fields. starkly d esign ates.28 In sh ort.co-ord in atin g the w ork.176 Structures . th e d isen ch antm en t o f a natural w orld henceforw ard reduced to its eco n o m ic d im en sio n alone. sp eak ing in th e m en ’s a ssem b ly.. E verything con sp ires to con ceal the relation ship b etw een wr ork and its p rod uct. the m ost sacred a ctiv ities find th em selv es co n stitu ted n egatively. h e n c e f o r w a r d th e m easure of all th in g s. the peasan t’s v ersion .is d isgu ised in practice b y th e apparent con tin u ity conferred on agricultural a ctivity by the countless m inor tasks in ten d ed to assist nature in its labour. activity can be directed tow ards an exclu siv ely eco n o m ic en d . " I f th e peasant c o u n te d ”. " h e would n ot s o w . p ru n in g the trees. such as action s in ten d ed to exp el or transfer evil (asifedh) or celebrate the com ing o f sp rin g. p ro tectin g the n ew sh oots from th e anim als. o r . S im ilarly. d uring which tim e there is hardly any p rod u ctive w ork to be d o n e . and th e peasan t’s " p a in s” are to labour w hat the g ift is to com m erce (an activity for w h ich . runs a p roverb. N o on e w ou ld have th o u g h t of assessin g th e tech n ical efficiency or eco n o m ic u sefu ln ess o f these in d issolu b ly techn ical an d ritual acts. and reading in the m o sq u e. b u t socially repressed. of art for art’s sake. in order to preserve th e m ean in gfu ln ess o f h is w ork.e .e . the reality of p rod u ction is no less repressed than th e reality of circulation .that in a w orld in w h ich tim e is so p len tifu l and g o o d s are so scarce. T h e d iscovery o f labour p resu p p oses the co n stitu tion of th e com m on grou n d o f p rod u ction . that the pro­ d u ctivity o f labour is so low that the peasant m u st refrain from co u n tin g his tim e.a n d this is o n ly an apparent con trad iction . as E m ile B en ven iste p o in ts o u t. the en d wrh ich m o n ey .the tim e d evoted to p lou gh in g and harvest . ceasin g to b e th e tribute paid to a necessary order. w hatever the product of h is effort. to sq uan der the on e th in g w h ich exists in ab u n d an ce . i.” Perhaps w e sh ou ld say that th e relation ship b etw een w ork and its product is in reality not u n k n ow n .th e n in e m on th s or so b etw een so w in g and h arvestin g. in a sense . su ch as fen cin g the fields. T h is m eans the en d of th e primal u n d ifferen tiated n ess w hich m ade p ossib le the play o f in dividu al and collective m isr e c o g n itio n : m easured b y th e yardstick of m onetary profit.

for the strictly sy m b o lic interest w hich is occasion ally recogn ized (w h en too ob v io u sly en terin g in to conflict with " in te r e st” in the narrow sen se. as lackin g con crete or m aterial effect. as in certain form s o f nationalism or regionalism ) on ly to be redu ced to the irrationality of feelin g or p a ssio n . T h e on ly way to escap e from the eth n o cen tric n aiveties o f ec o n o m ism . T h e com m on root of this eth n ocen trism is the u n con sciou s acceptance of a restricted definition of economic interest. T h u s it can find no place in its analyses. d isin terested but also u sele ss. in a u niverse ch aracterized by the m ore or less p erfect in tercon vertib ility of eco n o m ic capital (in the narrow sen se) and sym b olic capital. as econ om ically irrational. b y b ein g sym bolically nullified as in terests. still less in its calcu lation s. d isin terested in terest.Sym bolic capital 17 7 the w ord so m etim es receives. on "callou s cash p a y m e n t” .e . i.e . i. have played an im portant part and in th e cou rse o f w h ich sy m b o lic in terests becom e au ton om ou s b y b ein g op p osed to m aterial in terests. T h o se w h o ap ply th e categories and m eth od s o f eco n o m ics to archaic econom ies w ith o u t taking in to accoun t the o n tological tran sm u tation they im pose on their object are certainly not alone now ad ays in treating th is type of eco n o m y "as th e F athers o f th e C hurch treated the religions w hich preceded C h ristia n ity ” : M arx’s phrase cou ld also b e ap plied to th o se M arxists w ho tend to lim it research on th e form ations th e y call " p re-ca p ita list” to scholastic d iscu ssion ab out the typ ology o f m o d es o f p rod u ctio n . gratuitous. E con om ism k now s no other in terest than that w hich cap italism has p rod uced . i. is the paradoxical p rod u ct of the ideological labour in w h ich w riters and artists. practice n ever ceases to con form to econ om ic calcu lation even w h en it g ives every appearance of d isin terested ­ ness b y d ep artin g from the lo g ic of in terested calculation (in the narrow sense) and p layin g for stakes that are non-m aterial and not easily quantified.e . strictly " c u ltu ra l” or " aes­ th e tic ” in terest. th ose m ost d irectly in terested . through a sort of con crete application of abstraction. w h ich . as M arx says. In sh ort. the economic calculation d irectin g the a g en ts’ strategies takes in d isso cia b ly in to accoun t profits and losses w h ich the narrow d efin ition o f eco n o m y u n co n scio u sly rejects as unthinkable and unnameable. T h u s the theory o f strictly econ om ic practice is sim p ly a particular case ° f a general theory of the ec o n o m ic s o f practice. w ith ou t fallin g in to p o p u list . is the historical p rod uct of capitalism : th e con stitu tio n o f relatively au ton om ou s areas o f practice is accom panied by a process through w h ich sy m b o lic in terests (o ften describ ed as " sp iritu a l” or " c u ltu ra l”) com e to b e set up in o p p o sitio n to strictly econom ic in terests as defined in the field o f eco n o m ic tran saction s b y the fundam ental tau tology " b u sin ess is b u s in e s s ” . by esta b lish in g a u n iverse o f relation s b etw een m an and m an based. In fact. contrary to n aively id y llic represen tation s of " p re-ca p ita list” so cieties (or of the "cultural ” sp here of capitalist so c ie tie s). in sh ort. in its exp licit form .

the archaic econom y is n on eth eless fam iliar w ith th e op p o sitio n b etw een ordinary and extraordinary o cca sion s. is to carry out in fu ll w hat econ om ism d oes on ly partially. a ccom p an yin g the d ev elo p m en t of a relatively au ton om ou s artistic field. political con flict. c o m p lim en ts or attention . of relation ship s. or sim p ly urgent . any partial or total objectification o f the an cient econ o m y that d o es not include a theory of th e theorization effect and o f th e social co n d itio n s of objective a p p reh en sion .the d istin ctio n between e co n o m ic and sym b olic capital . handshakes or shrugs. gossip or scien tific inform ation. and to overcom e crises by p rod u cin g them sy m b olically or ritualizing th em as soon as th e y appear. th e patrim ony o f a fam ily or lineage in clu d es not only th eir land and in stru m en ts o f p rod uction but also th eir kin and their clien tele. For all its pow er to regulate th e rou tine o f the ordinary cou rse of ev e n ts through ritual stereotyp in g. ch allenges or in su lts. w ith ou t d istin ctio n . m ore broadly. b etw een the regular n eed s w h ich th e h ou seh old can satisfy and th e excep tion al n eed s for m aterial and sy m b o lic go o d s and services (in u nusual circum stances of econ om ic crisis. E con om ic calculation has h ith erto m anaged to appropriate the territory o b jectively surrendered to th e rem orseless logic o f w hat Marx calls " naked se lf-in te r e st” only b y se ttin g aside a " sa cre d ” island m iraculously spared by th e " icy w ater of egoistical ca lcu la tio n ” and left as a sanctuary for the p riceless or w orth less th in g s it cannot assess. If the con stitu tion o f art qua art. and to exten d eco n o m ic calculation t o a ll the good s. leads o n e to con ceive o f certain p rim itive or popular practices as aesth etic. p o w e r exaltation of th e gen erou s naivety of earlier form s of so ciety .1 7 8 Structures .w h ich m ay b e "fair w o r d s” or sm iles. powers o r p leasures. one in evitab ly falls in to th e eth n ocen tric errors unavoidable w hen on e forgets that th o se practices cannot b e con ceived as su ch from w ith in . habitus . In its fu ll d efin ition . a capital o f rights and d u ties built up in the cou rse of su ccessiv e gen erations and p rovid in g an additional source of strength w hich can b e called upon w h en extra-ordinary situ ation s break in upon the daily rou tin e. as th e p rod uct o f a principle o f differentia­ tio n alien to the u niverse to w hich it is ap plied . honour or h onou rs. that present th e m se lv e s as rare and w orthy of b ein g sou gh t after in a particular social form ation . e tc . together w ith a th eory of that econ o m y 's relation to its objective reality (a relation of m isrecogn ition ). th e netw ork o f alliances. But an accountancy of sym bolic ex ch an ges w ou ld itself lead to a d istorted representation o f the archaic ec o n om y if it w ere forgotten that. su ccu m b s to the su b tlest and m ost irreproachable form o f eth n ocen trism . represen tin g a heritage o f co m m itm en ts and d eb ts of h on ou r. nesba. d istin ction or distinctions. or. sim ilarly. m aterial and sym b olic. to be kept u p and regularly m aintain ed .the on ly w ay in w hich su ch accoun tancy can ap preh en d th e u nd ifferen tiatedn ess of eco n o m ic and sy m b o lic capital is in the form of their perfect in tercon vertib ility.

the form er b y th e redu ction of the g ro u p to the m inim al unit. w ith conflicts w h ich m ay start w ith a ch an ce in cid en t and escalate in to tribal war through th e interplay of the " le a g u e s” . are repaid eith er in th e fo rm of labour. in co n se­ quence. or w ith other services su ch as p ro tectio n . ambiguous co n d u ct. w ith the op p osition b etw een th e labour period. S h ou ld on e se e in it a d isgu ised form of purchase o f labour pow er. and that. b ut also in the ec o n o m ic sp here. b etw een th e " n a tiv e ” ec on om y and th e " n a tiv e ” representation of that eco n om y.h aving to b e d on e in a very short sp ace o f tim e ) and th e lim ited technical resources (harvesting is d on e w ith the sickle) d em and collective labour. p rovided at precise m om en ts and lim ited of p eriod s o f in tense activity. su ch as harvest tim e. th e loan of animals.27 T h e strategy o f a ccu m u ­ lating a capital of h onou r and p restige. w h ich in the form o f the p restige and renown attached to a fam ily and a nam e is readily co n v ertib le back into econom ic capital. w hich in traditional cereal cu ltivation is particularly sh ort. is perhaps the most valuable form o f accum ulation in a so ciety in w h ich the severity of the clim ate (th e m ajor w ork . etc. and th e latter through hire con tracts. it is b ecause. leads into self-m y stify in g d em y stific a tio n s :28 th e com p lete reality of th is appropriation of services lies in the fact that it can only take Place in the d isgu ise o f the th iw iz i. at other tim es of the year. su ch as th e charka o f an ox. contrary to w hat M ax W eber su g g ests w h en he draw s a crude contrast b etw een th e traditionalist typ e and th e charism atic type. to use . the double rea lity of instrinsically equivocal. and to reproduce con su m p tion to a m in im u m d uring the u navoidably lon g p rod uction p eriod.an op p o sitio n g iv in g rise to one o f th e basic con trad iction s o f that social form ation an d also. the ancient econ om y has its d isco n tin u ities.Sym bolic capital 179 farm work) requ iring th e unpaid assistan ce o f a m ore ex ten d ed grou p . th e voluntary assistan ce w hich is also a corvee and is th u s a voluntary corvee and forced assistan ce. If this is so. not o n ly in the p olitical sp here. b y w hich the ow n er lend s h is anim al in exch an ge for n o th in g m ore than com p en sation in cash or in kind for " d ep reciation of th e ca p ita l” . T h u s w e see that sym b olic capital.p lo u g h in g and harvesting . T h is is the pitfall aw aiting all th ose w h o m a naively d u alistic representation of th e relation ship b etw een practice and ideology. or a covert exaction o f corvees? B y all m eans. the fam ily. to the strategies d esign ed to overcom e it . provides the op tim al solu tion to th e p rob lem the group would face if it had to maintain continuously (th rou gh ou t th e p rod uction period as w ell) th e w h ole (hum an and anim al) w orkforce it n eed s d u rin g the labour period: it allow s th e great fam ilies to m ake use of th e m a x im u m w orkforce during the labour p eriod. Both hum an and anim al consum ption are cu t. and the production p e r io d . w h ich p rod uces th e clien ts as m uch as they produce it. as lon g as the analysis h olds together w hat h olds together in practice. T h ese services.

e . offence. and it w as n o d ou b t rare for the assem b ly to have to step in and order som eon e " n ot to get any ric h e r ” .29 It is clear that in su ch con d ition s sy m b o lic capital can only be accum ulated at the exp en se of th e accum u lation of eco n o m ic cap ital. th e b rid e’s escort.i8 o Structures . econ om ic g u aran tee: it is easy to see w h y the great fam ilies n ever m iss a chance (and this is on e reason for th eir p red ilection for distant m arriages and vast processions) to organize ex h ib ition s of sy m b o lic capital (in w h ich c o n s p i c u o u s con su m p tion is on ly the m ost visib le asp ect). p o w e r a geom etrical m etaph or. no doubt help s to m ake of gen erosity a sacrifice d esign ed to w in in return the blessing o f prosperity: "E at.30 It is a fact that co llectiv e pressure . im p lies considerable labour d evoted to m aking and m aintaining relations. and also substantial m aterial and sym b olic investm ents. the strength of w h ich u ltim ately reflects their capacity to m o b ilize th e group for or against in dividu als or grou p s . legitim ate fofrm of accum ulation. " T h e generous m a n ”. it is said. A s w ell as m aterial w ealth . especially in tim es o f scarcity. assessed in term s o f the n um ber o f " r ifles” and the in ten sity o f the salutes fired in the c o u p le ’s honour. or eco n o m ic aid. at tim es. the lod gin g of strangers. g iv en on the . " L o rd . A bove all.” B ut th e tw o form s o f capital are so in extricab ly linked that the m ere exh ib ition o f th e m aterial and sy m b o lic strength r e p r e s e n t e d b y p restigious affines is likely to be in itself a sou rce o f m aterial profit in a good -faith ec on om y in w h ich good repute is th e b est. political pow er. w ealth im p lies d u ties. giving or squandering time b ein g on e o f the m ost precious of g ifts . f0r the value o f sym b olic labour cannot be defined w ithou t reference to the time devoted to it. w ith p rocession s o f relatives and friends to so lem n ize the p ilgrim ’s departure or return. in clu d in g sh eep . C om bin­ in g w ith th e ob jective ob stacles stem m in g from the in efficiency o f the means of p rod uction . and in su lt. was sufficient to restrain and even p roh ibit the accum u lation o f material capital. and the organization of festivals. which in spires a n um ber o f practices (such as collectiv e oath-sw earing). habitus .requires th e rich not o n ly to pay the largest share of th e cost of cerem onial exch an ges ( taw sa ) but also to m ake the biggest con trib ution s to th e m aintenance o f the poor. " is the friend o f G o d . a con version of m aterial capital in to sy m b o lic capital itself reconvertible in to m aterial capital. even an inherited o n e. it im p lies a d oub le half-rotation returning to the startin g-p oin t. w h ich can be very co stly . if not the only.with w hich th e w ealth y m em bers o f th e grou p have to reckon.” B elief in im m anent ju stice. time m ust be in vested . you w h o are u sed to feed in g o th e r s” . p restigiou s gifts. T h e acq u isition o f a clien tele. give unto m e that I m ay g iv e . because they draw from it not only their au th ority but also. i. th e action of th e social m echan ism s in clin in g a gen ts to repress or d isgu ise eco n o m ic interest and ten d in g to m ake th e accum ulation of sym b olic capital the on ly recogn ized . in the form o f political aid against attack th eft.

e .e . safe from su sp icio n . w ealth in the form of " rifles” . i. before the autumn p lou gh in g. on the grou n ds that they are needed for treading ou t the grain . T h u s the m terest at stake in the con d u ct of h onou r is on e for w h ich eco n o m ism has no n am e. and in particular th e honour o f its w om en (i. to attest the good faith o f a m arket transaction or to strengthen the p osition o f the lineage in m atrim onial negotiation and to solemnize the contract. w itn esses and guarantors w h o can be m ob ilized at aDy tim e and place. to acquire p ow erful affines (i. and defines the g ro u p ’s capacity to preserve its land and h onour. although it is su ch as to inspire actions w h ich are very d irectly m aterial. without forgettin g the u nd ifferen tiatedn ess of the sy m b o lic and m aterial aspects of the patrim ony. O nce on e realizes that sym b olic capital is alw ays credit. It is th u s by d raw ing u p a comprehensive balance-sheet of sy m b o lic profits. is w'hat enables th e grou p . i. the capital o f m aterial and sym b olic strength w hich can actually be m obilized for m arket transactions. A nd th e h yp ersen sitivity to th e slightest . T h e perfect rationality o f this strategy o f bluff lies in the fact that marriage is the occasion for an (in the w id est sen se) econ om ic circulation w h ich cannot be seen purely in term s of m aterial go o d s. their p oin t o f h on ou r).o n ly to have to sell th em again for lack of fodd er. T h is stand in g. like law and m ed icin e. its stand in g in the eyes of other grou p s. w h en they wr ld be techn ically necessary. it can be seen that the exh ib ition of sym b olic capital (w hich is alw ays very exp en sive in econom ic term s) is on e o f th e m echan ism s w hich (n o d ou b t u niversally) make capital g o to capital. its capital of h onou rab ility. 80 a fam ily has a vital interest in k eep in g its capital of honour.e . in the w id est sense of th e w ord. that it b ecom es p ossib le to grasp the econ om ic rationality o f con d u ct w h ich econ om ism d ism isses as absurd: the d ecision to buy a seco n d pair of oxen after the harvest. w hich depends on the capacity of the g rou p ’s p oin t of honour to guarantee the invulnerability of its h onour. m ainly through m arriage. and wT hich has to be called sym b olic.Sym bolic capital occasion of the m arriage. co n tests o f h on ou r. and con stitu tes an u n d ivid ed w hole in d issolu b ly uniting th e q uan tity and q uality of its go o d s and th e q u an tity and q uality of the m en capable of turnin g th em to good accoun t. seem s ou econom ically aberrant on ly if on e forgets all the material and sy m b o lic profit accruing from this (albeit fictitiou s) addition to the fam ily ’s sy m b o lic capital in the late-su m m er period in w h ich m arriages are n egotiated. the profit a grou p can exp ect to draw from the transaction rises w ith its m aterial and especially its sy m b o lic patrim ony. m easured not only b y the n um ber of m en b u t also by their quality. i. or work on the la n d ).w h ich is a w ay o f m aking it know n the crop has been p len tifu l . in other w ord s.e . just as there are p rofession s. a sort of advance w hich the grou p alone can grant th ose w h o give it th e best m aterial and sym b olic guarantees. in w h ich th ose w h o practise th em m ust be "above s u sp ic io n ”.e .

w ith in this lo g ic . the land b ou gh t from strangers rather than that bough t from k insm en. p o w er slu r or in n u en d o (tkasalqu bth ) . to th e axiom atics ob jectively in scrib ed in the regularities o f the (in the broad sen se) eco n o m ic order w h ich co n stitu tes a d eterm in ate typ e of sy m b o lic capital as w orth y o f b ein g pursued and pre* served. sin ce. T h u s the first p lo ts to be relinquished w ill be the land least integrated in to the estate. and it m ay rise to exorbitan t p rices. habitus . as a fu n ctio n of th e socially accepted definition o f th e sym b olic p atrim on y. T h e ob jective harm ony b etw een the a g en ts 5d isp o sitio n s (h ere. It m ay h app en that a third grou p w ill step in w ith a h igher b id . W e m ust analyse in term s o f the sam e logic th e m echan ism s w h ich som e­ tim es endowr a p iece of land w ith a value not alw ays corresp ond ing to its strictly techn ical and (in the narrow sen se) eco n o m ic q u alities. are p red isp osed to be m ore h igh ly valued by a n y purchaser. D o u b tless the nearest fields. is equal to th e other sid e ’s d eterm in ation to b u y it back and to a v en g e the injury d o n e to the hurma o f their lan d.h ow ever. thikh uradjiyin). an alogous to avenging an in su lt. T h e y are purely theoretical prices m ost of th e tim e. S o .31 O n ly an in con sisten t . th ose m ost accessib le to the w o m en (b y private paths. the sy m b o lic p rofits o f making the ch allen ge are greater than th e m aterial profits that w o u ld accrue from cynical (h en ce repreh en sib le) ex p lo itin g o f the situ ation . their . are dictated b y interests no less vital than are in heritan ce or fertility strategies * T h e interest leadin g an agent to d efen d h is sy m b o lic capital is inseparable from the tacit ad heren ce. in cu lcated in th e earliest years of life and reinforced by all su b seq u en t ex p erien ce. b u y in g it back b eco m es a q u estion o f honour. least associated w ith the name o f its present ow n ers.m aterialism can fail to see that strategies w h ose ob ject is to con serve or increase th e honour of th e grou p . th e point of honou r the p ossessors set on k eep in g the land. on e m an ’s greater w ealth m ade the others that m u ch poorer. w ill readily w ithd raw that credit and d irect its su sp icio n s at the stron gest m em bers. W h en a field en d o w ed w ith all th e properties wr ich d efine a stron g in tegration in to th e patrim onial estate is ow ned by h strangers. a p iece of land w ill so m etim es take on a sy m b o lic value dispro­ p ortionate to its econ om ic valu e. and h en ce the most " p r o d u c tiv e ”. th ereb y ch allen gin g not th e seller. in the forefront o f w h ich stand b lood ven gean ce and m arriage.becau se reduced an d redu ctive . as if in m atters of honour as in land. . esp ecially if their appropriation is su fficien tly recent to retain its value as a ch allen ge to the alien group. can be exp lain ed by th e fact that sy m b o lic capital is jess easily m easured and cou n ted than land or livestock and that the group u ltim ately th e on ly sou rce o f cred it for it. th o se best m aintained and best farm ed. b u t the " le g itim a te ” o w n e rs . and the m u ltip licity o f strategies designed to b elie or avert th em . the land w h ich w as b o u g h t (esp ecia lly by a recent purchase) rather than in h erited . w ho o n ly profits from th e co m p etitio n .18 2 Structures .

and th e circulation o f w om en g iv en and received . or h om age h ave not b een brought to geth er. T h u s. through th e en su in g co m p etitio n and rarity. b u t su scep tib le of increase or d ecrease d ep en d in g on h ow they are u sed . T h is value is such to in d u ce in vestm en ts and o v er-in vestm en ts (in b oth the eco n o m ic and the psychoanalytic sen ses) w h ich ten d . the h o m o lo g ies estab lish ed b etw een the circulation of land sold and bought. services. relation s o f dom ination can be set up and m aintained on ly at th e cost o f strategies w h ich m ust be en d lessly ren ew ed . and n o S tate. By con trast. that is. to rein force the w ell-grou n d ed illu sion that th e value o f sy m b o lic g o o d s is inscribed in the nature of th in gs. althou gh su b ject to strict laws of eq u ivalen ce and h en ce m utally con vertib le. capable of treating all practices. the source o f its effects. the energy o f social d yn a m ics . as it con ceals the fact that it originates in " m aterial ” form s o f capital w h ich are also. produce sp ecific effec ts . d om in ation n o lon ger n eed s to b e exerted in a direct. m isrecogflition o f the arbitrariness o f the value it con fers on th em . oblige u s to abandon the d ich o to m y of the eco n o m ic and the n o n -eco n o m ic which stand s in the w ay o f seein g the scien ce of eco n o m ic p ractices as a particular case of a general science o f the economy o f practices. m ean s that m em b er­ ship in this eco n o m ic co sm o s im p lies u n con d ition al recogn ition of the stakes which. and h en ce n o n -eco n o m ic. no ed u cational sy stem . personal w ay w h en it is en tailed in p ossession of th e m ean s (eco n o m ic .can exist in different form s w h ich . that is. a transform ed and th ereb y disguised form of p hysical " e co ­ n o m ic” capital. in th e last analysis. as eco n o m ic p ractices d irected tow ards the m axim izing o f m aterial or sy m b o lic profit. p rod uces its proper effect in asm uch. by its very ex isten ce. losttng appropriation of other agents* labour. b etw een the different form s of capital and the corresp on d in g m o d es of circu lation .in this case their capital o f p hysical strength (related to their m o b ilizin g cap acity. M odes o f dom ination In so cieties w h ich have n o " self-regu latin g m arket ” (in K arl P o ly a n i’s se n se ). it p resen ts as taken fo r granted. n o juridical apparatus.M odes o f domination propensity and capacity to play the gam e of h onou r) and th e ob jective regularities o f w h ich their dispositions are the p rod u ct. the circulation o f " th ro a ts” " le n t ” and " retu r n e d ” (m u rd er and vengeance). just as in terest in th ese g ood s is in scrib ed in the nature of m en . their eco n o m ic capital (land and liv esto ck ) and their sym bolic capital. and on ly in asm u ch . and h en ce to the n um ber o f m en and their readiness to fig h t). alw ays ad dition ally associated w ith p o ssessio n o f the other kinds o f capital. becau se the co n d ition s required for a m ediated.33 Sym bolic capital. T h e capital accum u lated by grou p s. in clu d in g th o se p urportin g to b e d isin terested or gratu i­ tous.

on the one hand social universes in w h ich relation s o f d om in ation are m ade. the m eans eat up the end. su ch as th ose p rod ucing and guaranteeing the d istrib u tion o f " titles” (titles of n ob ility. services.). reproduces the structure o f the relations of dom ination and d ep en d en ce. and on the other hand. th e con stitu tion o f w hich is inseparable from the d evelop m en t of a body o f specialized agents. and rem ade in and b y the in teractions b etw een persons. and in so d oin g. as the in stru m ent for appropriating the in stitu tional eq u ip m en t and the . social form ations in w h ich . very schem atically. fu n ction in g in accordance w ith rigorous m echan ism s capable o f im ­ p osin g their n ecessity on the agen ts. because th e profits of these in­ stitu tion s are th e ob ject o f differential appropriation. in its various form s. u nm ade. in d ep en d en tly o f any deliberate intervention by the agents. m ediated by ob jective. e tc . b ecau se strategies d esign ed to establish or m aintain lastin g relations of depen­ d en ce are generally very exp en sive in term s o f m aterial g o o d s (as in the p otlatch or in charitable acts). habitus . in th e form o f capital. it is p recisely because there exist relatively autonom ous fields. O bjectification guarantees the perm anence and cu m u lativity o f m aterial and sym b olic acq u isition s which can then su b sist w ithou t the agen ts having to recreate them co n tin u ou sly and in th eir en tirety b y d eliberate action. wr hich is wr y . academ ic d egrees. objectification also and inseparably en su res the reproduction of the structure o f the distribution of th e capital wrh ich . that is. that th ose wr o are in a position to h com m and th ese m echan ism s and to appropriate the m aterial an d /or sym bolic profits accruing from their fu n ction in g are able to dispense w ith strategies aim ed expressly (w h ich d oes not m ean m anifestly) and directly (i. it is in this relationship that w ealth is con stitu ted .184 Structures . S o . but. in stitu tionalized m echan­ ism s. is th e precond ition for su ch appropria­ tio n . b etw een . a dom in ation w hich in th is case is the con d ition o f the appropriation of the m aterial and sym b olic profits o f their labour.e . w ith specific in terests. and the actions necessary to en su re the con tinu ation o f pow er th em selv es help to w eaken it . po w er or cultural capital) o f appropriating th e m echan ism s o f the field of production and the field of cultural p rod uction . P aradoxically. it is in the d egree o f objectification of the accum ulated social capital that on e finds th e b asis of all th e p ertin en t differences betw een the m odes of d om in ation : that is. d eed s o f p ossession .34 E conom ic powr lies not in w ealth b ut in th e relationship b etw een wealth er and a field of econ om ic relations. w ithout b ein g m ed iated by th e m echan ism s) at the d om in ation o f individuals. w h ich ten d to assure their owr reproduc­ n tion b y their very fu n ctio n in g . b y a h paradox con stitu tive of this m ode o f d om in ation . T h e savin g is a real one. or sim p ly tim e. relations of d om in ation have the op acity and perm anence o f th in g s and escape the grasp o f individual co n sciou sn ess and pow er.

Strictly personal qualities.in other words. just "to show he could do it ”.and even "to wager [to make an offer].w hich w as m arked by th e spatial d istin ction betw een th e place o f resid en ce. and the place of transactions.T h e r e w as m oneylending in p len ty b u t it was concentrated on sm all u surious loans to peasants or con su m ers. both the organizational and the opera­ tional d ev ices w ere lacking for the m obilization of private capital resources . In short. whether they have money on them or not". w ho vouches for the quality of his animal in their presence. promises that he will repay his debt prom ptly. count at least as much as wealth or solvency. In reality. a man "w ho has not been brought up for the m arket” tries BO T . by drawing on the credit and the capital o f trust which com e as much from a reputation for honour as from a reputation for w ealth. Men whose reputation is known to all are predisposed to play the part of guarantors . Sim ilarly in the field o f b u sin ess organization: there w ere no lon g-term partnerships or corporations. and in large borrow in gs to enable m en to m eet the political or other con ven tion al exp en d itu res o f the upper c la s s e s . or. . If.. no brokers or agen ts. " T h ere w ere no proper credit in stru m en ts no negotiable paper. and th ereb y also appropriating the profits from it. or he may boast of having managed to strike a bargain w ithout laying out a penny in cash. enable them to "go to the market with only their faces. "which cannot be borrowed or le n t’*. w hich lacked even the m ost elem entary in stru m ents o f an econ o m ic in stitu tion . T h u s M oses F in ley con v in cin g ly sh o w s that the an cient econ om y lacked not resources b ut the m eans " to overcom e the limits of individual re so u rces’*. their names.37 T he strategies of honour are not banished from the market: though a man may enhance his prestige by tricking a stranger. occasion ally serving as secu rity. the village. and the connections w hich they can mobilize. no book clearance.either for the seller. as P olyani p uts it. V illage and tribal m arkets rem ained isolated and there w as n o way in w h ich th ey cou ld be linked up in a sin gle m echan ism . °r for the buyer. . incarnated by the bu n iya . if he is not paying in cash.again w ith the occasional and unim portant ex cep tio n . even in the market the degree of mutual information is such as to leave little scope for overpricing. and their honour for m o n ey ” . Land was in fact m ore or less totally exclu d ed from circulation (th o u g h . T h e op p osition m ade by traditional m orality.”35 T h is analysis is even m ore relevant to an cient K abylia. b etw een the "sacrilegious c u n n in g ” custom ary in m arket transactions and the good faith appropriate to exchan ges among kinsm en and friends 36 . the only things w hich can take the place of money in this econom y .m ust not be allow ed to mask the op p osition b etw een the sm all local market. n o gu ild s . it w as liable to pass from one group to an oth er). better still. and the market w hen it has b ecom e th e "d om inan t transactional m o d e ”. still "em b ed d ed in social re la tio n sh ip s”. cheating.M odes o f domination m echanism s in dispensab le to th e fu n ction in g o f the field. . no credit p a y m e n t s .38 T h e trust in which they are held. to satisfy his point of honour. the market . he may also take pride in having bought som ething at an exorbitant price. exceptionally. either by m obilizing a number of guarantors. and bluff. w ho. It is said of such a man that "he could come back with the whole market even if he left home with nothing in his pockets”.

w itn esses. remain a fireside man” (thakwath. pow er to ''make a b id ”. but rather the collective judgm ent shaped and mani fested in the market. based on the trust and good fa ith that are p ossib le w h en the purchaser is well inform ed about the prod ucts exch an ged and the se lle r’s strategies. typically female objects which m ust not be seen in broad daylight . b y tran sform ing th e im personal relationships o f com m ercial transactions.). Either a man is a "market m a n ” ( argaz nasuq) or he isn’t. In fact. and like all such judgm ents in every society it involves the ultim ate values laid dow n in the mythical taxonom ies.spoons. T h e suq does not p rovid e all the traditional in form ation . so cultural co m p eten ce in its various fo rm s cannot be con stitu ted as cultural capital u ntil it is in serted in to the objective relations betw een th e system o f eco n o m ic p rod uction and the system p rod ucing the producers (wr hich is itself con stitu ted b y th e relation b etw een the school system and th e fam ily). he is soon put in his place. w hich in a very different univers sanction reckless undertakings. in to lasting relationships of reciprocity: by callin g u p on guarantors. weaving tools etc. it can on ly p reserve them in their incor­ porated sta te . to en su re the p erpetuation o f cultural resources w hich wr u ld oth erw ise d isappear alon g w ith th e agen ts w h o bear th em . and m ediators th ey are able to estab lish . W h en a society lacks b oth the literacy w h ich would enable it to preserve and accu m u late in ob jectified form th e cultural resources it has in herited from the p ast. the alcove in the wall o f the house w hich is used to hide the sm all. or re-establish. n either o f w h ich is ever fu lly actualized: on the one hand there are th e exch an ges of th e fam iliar wr orld o f acquaintance. Just as eco n o m ic wr ealth cannot fu n ction as capital u n til it is linked to an econom ic apparatus. T h is is wr hy all the strategies applied by th e peasants aim to m in im ize the risk im p lied in the u np redictab ility of the o u tc o m e . but n either does it create the con d ition s for rational in form ation . w h ich are m ade p ossib le b y th e standardization of its products and th e quasi-m echan ical n ecessity o f its processes. " T h e market will ju d g e ”. rags. w h ich have n either past nor future. and when the relation ship b etw een the parties con cern ed ex ists before and after the exchan ge. a total judgm ent is passed on the whole man. A "house mari” (argaz ukhamis) w ho takes it upon him self to overstep his "natural” lim its is put in his place with the w ords " Since you're only a fireside m an. it has o . habitus . they sav m eaning by "m arket” not the laws of the market.Structures . the fu n ction al eq u iva len t of a traditional network of relation ship s b etw een th e con tractin g parties. wr ether a small h tribal m arket or a b ig regional m arket. and on th e other hand there are the rational strategies o f the self-regu latin g m arket. the suq represents a transactional mode interm ediate b etw een tw o extrem es. and also the ed u cational system w h ich would give its agen ts the ap titu des and d isp o sitio n s required for th e symbolic reappropriation o f those resou rces. T h e village/m ark et d ich o to m y is no d ou b t a m eans of p reventin g the im personal exch an ges of th e m arket from ob tru d in g the d isp o sitio n s of calculation in to th e wr orld of reciprocity relation sh ip s." C o n seq u en tly.

41 it enables a society to accum u late culture h ith erto preserved in em b o d ied form . th e partial or total m o n o p o lizin g o f the so c ie ty ’s sym b olic resources in religion. like m on ey. m ay last as lon g as the p eriod d u rin g w h ich the resou rces are actually u sed . is inseparable from the objectification w h ich the law guarantees by d efin in g perm anent positions w h ich are d istin ct from the biological in d ivid u als h old in g them . a p rocess w h ich . is freed from local lim itation s (in contrast to sch olastically u ncertified cultural capital) and tem poral flu ctu a tio n s: the cultural capital w h ich th ey in a sen se guarantee on ce and for all d oes n ot con stantly need to b e p roved . they are set u p in Pure o b jectivity b etw een in stitu tion s. and correlatively en ab les particular grou p s to practise prim itive accumulation o f cultural ca pital. reading. at a determ inate cost in labour and tim e. by all form s o f cred en tials. as is sh o w n b y the case J the b ard s.in particular th ose of in dividu al m em ory . it m akes it p o ssib le to relate all q ualification-holders (and also. have a co n ven tion al. how ever. O n ce th is state of affairs is estab lish ed . n egatively. b ein g guaranteed b y law . T h e transform ations m ade p ossib le by an in stru m en t of cultural com m unication su ch as w ritin g have b een ab un dan tly d e sc r ib e d :4 b y d etach ­ 0 ing cultural resou rces from persons. W ith ou t en terin g in to d etailed analysis. in a m ore general w ay. b etw een the 7-2 . th ereb y settin g u p a single m arket for all cultural capacities and guaran teein g the con vertibility of cultural capital in to m o n ey . all unqualified in dividu als) to a single standard. relation s o f p ow er and dom ination no lon ger exist directly b etw een in d ivid u als. and through th em .42 By g iv in g the sam e value to all holders o f the sam e certificate.and frees it from the con strain ts im plied b y m n em o n ic d ev ices su ch as poetry.e . and scien ce. T h e objectification accom plished b y acad em ic degrees and d ip lom as and. by m o n o p o lizin g the instrum ents for appropriation of th ose resources (w ritin g . so that any on e of th e m can take the place of an y other. b etw een socially guaranteed qualifications and socially defined p o sitio n s. art. literacy en ab les a so ciety to m ove b eyon d im m ediate hum an lim its . and other d eco d in g tech n iq u es) henceforw ard preserved not in m em ories but in texts. the p reservation tech n iq u e par excellen ce in non-literate so c ie tie s . sacrificing th e advantages of th e charis­ matic id eology o f th e irreplaceable in d iv id u a l). But th e ob jectification effects o f literacy are n o th in g in com parison w ith those p rod u ced b y the educational sy stem . p h ilosop h y. A cad em ic q ualifications. fixed value w h ich .M odes o f domination 18 7 resort to system atic in cu lcation . and m ay be o ccu p ied b y agents w h o are biologically d ifferen t b u t interchangeable in term s of th e qualifications required. it m u st suffice to point ou t that academ ic q ualifications are to cultural capital w hat m on ey is to econ om ic ca p ita l . i. the educational sy stem m in im izes th e ob stacles to the free circulation o f cultural capital w h ich resu lt from its b ein g incorporated in individual persons (w ith o u t.

not so m uch through the ideologies it produces or in cu lcates (as those w ho speak o f "id eological ap paratu ses” w ould have it). together w ith the relationship obtaining at a particular m om ent b etw een qualifications and jobs (reflecting the relative bargaining pow er of the buyers and sellers o f qualified. am ong b iological in d iv id u a ls . su ch as law. w hich they produce by reproducing . in cid en tally that any analysis of ideologies. T h e system o f sym b olic go o d s production and the system p rod ucing th e producers fulfil in ad d ition . in the narrow sense of " legitim atin g d isc o u r se s”. i. undercover of form al equality . It fo llo w s. labour pow er) w hich appears con cretely in a particular distrib ution o f the material 'and sym b olic profits assigned to the holders (or non-holders) of qualifications. the power and its holder. it records and legitim ates th e d istinction b etw een the p osition and the person.in other w ord s. by virtue o f th e fact that the m echanism s through w hich they con trib ute to the reproduction o f the estab lish ed order and to the perpetuation o f d om in ation rem ain hidden. b ut rather through the practical justification of the established order which it ach ieves b y u sing the overt con n ection b etw een qualifications and jobs as a sm okescreen for th e con n ection . and ask n o m ore than com p licitou s silen ce.43 L aw d oes no m ore than sym b olically con secrate . cam ouflage and legitim ation.b etw een the qualifications people obtain and the cultural capital they have inherited .through their over­ .b y recording it in a form w h ich renders it both eternal and universal . or a e s t h e t i c id eologies w h ich forget that the political fun ction o f these id eologies may m som e cases be reduced to the effect of d isp lacem en t and d iversion .w hich it records surreptitiously. religious. po w er social m echan ism s w h ich p rod uce and guarantee both the social value o f the qualifications and th e p osition s and also the distrib ution o f these social attributes. through the legitim acy it confers on the transm ission o f th is form o f heritage. T h e educational system h elp s to p rovid e the d om in ant class w ith w hat M ax W eber term s "a theodicy o f its ow n p riv ileg e”.the structure of the power relation b etw een groups and classes w hich is produced and guaranteed practi­ cally by the fun ction in g o f these m ech an ism s.e . b y the very logic of their normal fu n ction in g. habitus . T h e m ost su ccessfu l ideological effects are those w hich have n o need of w ords. T h e law thus contributes its o w n (specifically sym bolic) force to the action o f th e various m echanism s w hich render it superfluous con stantly to reassert pow er relations by overtly resorting to force.1 88 Structures. w hich fails to in clu d e an analysis of th e corresponding in stitu tional m echan ism s is liable to be n o more than a contribution to the efficacy o f th ose ideologies: th is is true of all internal (sem iological) analyses of political. For exam p le. scholastically guaranteed. ideological fu n ction s. educational. i. T h u s the task of legitim atin g the estab lish ed order does not fall exclusively to th e m echanism s traditionally regarded as b elon gin g to the order o f ideology.e .

or.’* 6 And there is 4 every reason to b elieve that the break w ith th is artificialist vision. T h e greater the exten t to w hich the task of reprodu cing the relations of dom ination is taken over by objective m ech an ism s. a so cia l w orld w h ich . kindness. in reality. w ith H o b b es. as D u rk h eim puts it .4 4 It has b een necessary at least to sketch an analysis of the ob jective m echan ­ isms w h ich play a part both in se ttin g up and in con cealin g lasting relations of d om in ation . In th is w ay.the effects of the objective m ech an ism s . b ecom e th e strategies objectively oriented tow ards reprodu ction : it is not by lavish in g gen erosity. of objective m ech an ism s like th e self-regulating market. w hich serve the interests of the d om in ant group w ith ou t any co n sciou s effort on th e latter’s part. In order to "ground social being in n a tu re”. w h ich is the precond ition for scien tific ap prehension. and in their deliberately or in volu ntarily com p licitou s silences . could not be m ade before the con stitution . m ust be kept up through n oth in g less than a process of continuous creation. the more in direct and. that the possessor of econ om ic or cultural capital perpetuates the relationship of d om in ation w hich objectively links him w ith his charw om an . social scien ce. as Polyani p oin ts ou t. not containing w ithin th em selves th e principle o f their own reprodu ction . am ongst the different types of con d u ct directed tow ards gaining or keeping p ow er. containing w ithin itself the prin cip le of its o w n con tinu ation. m akes it p ossib le to recognize as political. °r p oliten ess on his charw om an (or on any other " socially in ferior” a gen t). T h is op p ositio n finds expression in the history or prehistory o f sociological th ou gh t. on the other side. But social reality had another trap in store for scien ce: the existence o f m echan ism s capable of rep rod u cin g the political order.45 it has b een necessary to break w ith the p rop en sity to see it as founded on the arbitrariness o f individual w ills. writes D u rk h eim . in d ep en ­ dently of any deliberate intervention. w h ich . was in trin sically co n d u civ e to b elief in determ inism . in order to understand fully th e radical difference betwr een the different m od es o f dom ination and th e different p olitical strategies for conservation characteristic o f social form ations w h ose accum ulated social energy is unequ ally objectified in m echan ism s. or the best school for bis so n .M odes o f domination 189 sights and om ission s. in a sen se. but by ch oosin g th e b est in vestm en t for his m on ey. on the arbitrariness of a sovereign w ill: "F or H o b b e s ”. taking for its object the sphere o f legitim ate p o litics (as so-called "political s c ie n c e ” d oes now adays) adopted th e p reconstructed object w hich reality fo isted upon it. on ly su ch practices as tacitly exclu d e control over the reproduction m ech an ism s from the area o f legitim ate co m p etitio n . frees agents from the endless work of creating or restoring social relations. O n the o n e sid e there are social relations w h ich . " it is an act of w ill w hich gives birth to the social order and it is a perpetually renew ed act of w ill w hich u p h old s it . im personal.

190 Structures . i. p ersonally. which might at first sight seem very close to a sim ple capital-labour relation. in other w ord s. g ood s. creatin g a bond betw een p ersons. T h ey can n ot appropriate the labour. Here again. indefinitely. with his fam ily. bonds which durably tie his khammes to him. T h e compact uniting the master and his khammes is an arrangement betw een one man and another guaranteed by nothing beyond the “ loy a lty ” w hich honour dem ands. p o w e r and ev e n her d escen d an ts. often take a long tim e to discover what their position is. But each particular relationship is the product of com plex strategies whose efficacy depends not only on the material and sym bolic strength of either party but also on their skill in arousing sym pathy or indignation so as to m obilize the group. with local variations). T h e master may bind his khammes by a debt w hich forces him to keep renewing h is contract until he finds a new master willing to pay off the debt to the former em ployer . the d om in ant class have o n ly to let the system they dom inate take its own course in order to exercise their d o m in a tio n . and respect of o th ers w ith ou t " w in n in g ” them p ersonally. B ecau se they cannot b e satisfied with ap propriating the profits of a social m ach ine w h ich has not yet developed the pow er o f self-p erp etu ation . the children. they are ob liged to resort to the elem entary forms o f dom ination . O n ce a system o f m echan ism s has b een constituted cap ab le of ob jectively en su rin g the reprodu ction o f the established order by its ow n m otion (apo tou autom atou. day out.in other words. T h e value of the relationship for the dom inator does not lie exclusively in the resultant material profits.) being ow ned in comm on. with the goods (the flock. and the first of these is generosity and dignity in his relations with his “ clien ts”. the master m ay arrange the marriage of his khammes (or his son ) and instal him. the best way in which the master can serve his own interests is to work away. reinforce the bonds of obligation. in the master's own house. and many masters who are not m uch richer than their khammes and would gain by cultivating their lands them selves refrain from doing so because they prefer th e prestige of possessing a "clientele” . th e d irect d om in ation o f on e person by an oth er. day in. slavery. as w ell as econom ic.in short. habitus . brought up together. T h is is why a social relationship such as that between the master and his khammes (a sort of m etayer who gets only a very small share of the crop. It involves no abstract discipline. as th e G reeks p u t it). the lim itin g case o f w hich is appropriation of persons. But the “great '' are expected to show that they are worthy o f their rank by affording material and sym bolic “ protection” to those dependent upon them . it is all a question of strategy. but u n til su ch a system exists. in this econom y. services. Given that there is no real labour market. He may also resort to brutal measures such as seizing the entire crop in order to recover his loan. and the reason w hy the “ enchanted relations of the pact of honour are so frequent is that. to produce and reprodu ce con d itio n s of d om in ation which are ev e n then never en tirely tru stw orth y. hom age. and that m oney is rare (and therefore dear). " ty in g ” th em . with constant care and attention. fields. It is not uncom m on for one . weaving the ethical and affective. they have to w ork directly d aily. etc. and no specific sanctions. no rigorous contracts. cannot in fact be kept up w ithout the direct application of material or sym bolic violence to the person who is to be tied . the strategies of sym bolic violence are often ultim ately more econom ical than pure “economic violence.e. usually a fifth. But a man who wants to be treated as a '*m aster” m ust show he has the virtues corresponding to his status.

euphem ized. T h e khammes "treats the land as if he ow ned i t ” . or restored. the official m o d el of w hich is presented b y relations b etw een kinsm en. b etw een one person and another. in a w ord. overt (physical or econom ic) v iolen ce.4 It w ou ld be a m istake to 9 see a con trad iction in the fact that vio len ce is here both m ore present and m ore h id d en . i. i. because there is nothing in his m aster’s conduct to belie his claim to have rights over the land on which he works. and one’s honour (as is shown by the form ula used by a master leaving to go and work in a town or in France: ’'A ssociate. is su bjected by th e logic characteristic o f an econ om y in w hich in terests can o n ly be satisfied on con d ition that th e y be d isguised in and by th e strategies a im in g to satisfy th e m . that the sweat o f his brow entitles him to pick fruit or enter the estate. w h ich coexist in the sam e social form ation and som etim es in the sam e relation ship :47 w hen dom ination can on ly be exercised in its elem entary form . being exp ressly oriented tow ards th e estab lish m en t o f relation s of personal d ep en d en ce. T h ere is an in tellig ib le relation not a con trad iction . T h e khammes is the man to whom one entrusts one’s goods.censored. lon g after leaving his "m aster”.M odes o f domination 19 1 0f the sons of a khammes to g o and work for wages in the tow n.e . T h u s this system con tain s only tw o w ays (and they prove in the end to be just one w ay) of g ettin g and keep in g a lasting hold over so m eo n e: gifts or d eb ts. bring back his savings to the master. socially recogn ized vio len ce.50 Because th e pre-capitalist econ om y cannot cou n t on the im placable. in sh ort. as gen tler. I’m counting on you. it cannot take place overtly and m u st be d isguised under the veil of en ch an ted relation ship s. d irectly. And just as he never feels entirely freed from his obligations towards his former m aster. and it is not unusual to hear a khammes saying. or sym b olic violen ce . m aintain ed . so.4 T h e reason for the pre-capitalist eco n o m y ’s 8 great n eed for sym b olic violen ce is that the only w ay in w h ich relations of dom ination can b e s e t u p . I ’m g oin g off to be an associate m y self’'). h idden violen ce of ob jective m ech an ism s. it resorts simultaneously to form s o f d om in ation w h ich m ay strike the m odern observer as m ore brutal.b etw een these tw o form s o f v io len ce. together with one 0f the m aster’s sons. is through strategies w h ich . m ore p rim itive. or th e " m o ra l”. m asking the d y s s y m m e t r y 0f the relationship by sym bolically denying it in his behaviour.e . m ore resp ectful o f p erson s . in order to be socially recognized it m ust g et itself m isreco g n ized . after what he calls a "change of heart” he may accuse his master of "treachery*’ in abandoning som eone he had " ad op ted ”. the overtly eco n o m ic ob ligations o f d eb t. th ey m ust b e euphem ized. he has to associate him com pletely w ith those interests. m ust be d isgu ised and transfigured lest th ey d estro y th em selv es by revealing their true nature. o n e’s house. m ore hum ane. or at the sam e tim e. " affective” obligations created and m aintained b y exch an ge. esp ecia lly in its naked eco n om ic form . u n ­ recognizable.51 T h is coexisten ce of o v ert physical and . if the master wants to persuade the khammes to devote him self over a long period to the pursuit of the master’s interests. In short. m ore barbarous. H ence the censorship to w hich th e overt m anifestation of v iolen ce. and like him .

personal loyalty. w ith the " c h o ic e ” b etw een overt violen ce an d gen tle. w h ich . In a society in w h ich overt violence. m ay coexist u nd er th e sam e n am e. and savoir-faire w h ich m ust be s q u a n d e r e d to p rod uce a personal gift irreducible to its eq u iv a len t in m o n ey . o b lig a tio n . th e violen ce o f cred it.the extrem e case of w h ich is the p otlatch . and at th e heart of every soCia| rela tion sh ip : it is present b oth in th e d eb t and in th e g ift. i. T h e gift. h idd en violen ce d ep en d in g on th e relative strengths of the tw o parties at a particular tim e. and in gen u ity is the very essen ce o f th e social alchem y through w h ich an in terested relation ship is tran sm u ted in to a disin terested. " s o c ia lly recog­ n iz e d ” d o m in a tio n . atten tion . It is as false to id en tify this essen tially d u a l econ om y w ith its official reality (g en ero sity . habitus . the form w h ich exp loitation has to ad opt in ord er to take place. all the virtu es honoured by the cod e o f h on ou r . co n sp icu o u s distribution . in visib le form of vio len ce. W astage of m o n ey.are op eration s o f social alchem y w h ich m ay b e ob served w h en ever the direct ap plication of overt physical or eco n o m ic v io le n c e is n egatively san ction ed . and is n ot so m uch undergone as ch o sen . T h e fu n d am en ta l a m b ig u ity of all the in stitu tion s w h ich m odern taxon om ies ten d to present as eco n o m ic is evidence that contrary strategies. tim e. the khammes as a sort of slave. in the absence o f any other recourse. w h ich is n ever recogn ized as su ch . and w h ich ten d to b rin g about th e tran sm u tation o f eco n o m ic capital in to sy m b o lic capital. sy m b o lic vio len ce.e . w h ich . have in com m on the p o w er o f fo u n d in g either d ep en d en ce (and even slavery) or solidarity. en erg y . gratitud e. tim e . in either case.cannot fail to be seen as the m o st econ om ical m ode of d o m in ation . gifts. as w e have also seen in th e case o f the masterkhammes relation sh ip .19 2 Structures . i. as it is to reduce it to its ob jective reality. a p r e s e n t in w hich w h at co u n ts is n ot so m uch w hat you g ive as th e w ay you g iv e it. G en tle. h id d en exp loitation is th e form taken by m a n ’s exp loitation of man w h en ever o v ert. and on the d egree o f integration and ethical in tegrity of the arbitrating grou p . the v io le n c e of th e usurer or th e m erciless m aster. the g en tle. in spjte o f their ap paren t o p p osition . m eets w ith collective reprobation 52 and is liable eith er to provoke a vio len t rip oste from th e victim or to force h im to flee (that is to say. in other w ord s. care. p iety . etc. legitim ate au th o rity. and so o n . overt d om in ation in to m isreco g n ized . are interchangeable w ays of p erform in g the sam e fu n ction .). to provoke the an nih ilation of th e very rela tio n sh ip w hich was in ten d ed to be ex p lo ite d ).e . h osp itality. gratu itou s relation sh ip . T h e active prin cip le is the labour. seein g m utual aid as a corvee. p o w e r eco n o m ic v io le n c e and of the m ost refined sy m b o lic v io len ce is foun d in a|| th e in stitu tio n s characteristic o f this ec o n o m y . m utual aid .in sh ort. brutal exp loitation is im p ossib le. . d ep en d in g on the strategic w ith in w h ich they are d ep lo y ed . the m od e w h ich b est corresp ond s to th e eco n o m y of the sy stem . con fid en ce. g en ero sity .

and it w as n ot uncom m on for the m ost influential and m ost important m em bers of a group to refuse the job or soon ask to be replaced: the tasks of representation and mediation w h ich fell to the tamen did indeed demand a great deal of tim e and effort.55 It fo llo w s that in su ch a sy stem . b ecau se the d elegation w hich is the basis o f personal authority rem ains d iffu se and is n either officially declared nor in stitu tio n a lly guaranteed. grace. feel obliged (by a sense of duty towards them ­ selves resulting from considerable self-esteem ) constantly to recall the group to the values it officially recognizes. Those on w hom the group bestow s the title "w ise m e n ’* or "great m e n ”.is not en tirely an illu sio n . th e " g r a c e ” w h ich gratitude recogn izes is in d eed . A u th o rity .for those who practise it. " g es­ tures”. etc. and w ho. sar. *t can o n ly b e lastin gly m aintain ed through action s w h o se co n form ity to the values recogn ized by th e grou p is a practical reaffirm ation of that a u th o rity .M odes o f domination m the s e e m in g ly " gratu itou s ” surrender not on ly o f g o o d s or w o m en b u t o f th in g s that are e v e n m ore personal and therefore m ore p recio u s. th e "g r e a t” are th o se w h o can least afford to take lib erties w ith the official norm s.53 T h e exercise of g en tle v io len ce demands a " person al” price from its users. in cases of serious conflict between m em bers of their own clan.and not only in econom ic term s . the " spokesm an” or “guarantor” w ho represented his group ( thakharrubth or adhrum ) at the m eetings of the m en’s assem bly and on all solem n occasions.the tiine that has b een taken to do th e th in g s that " w o n ’t b e fo r g o tte n ”. In sh ort. Fides. to arrange marriages for the orphans.54T h e illusion im plied by personal fid elity . becau se. as Benveniste p o in ts o u t. for exam ple). in the absence of any official mandate. as the k a b y les say. for exam ple) they meet together in an assembly with the m arabout so as to reconcile the antagonists. th ey can " n eith er be borrow ed nor le n t ”. the . " R espon sib ilities” such as those of the tamen. are alw ays seen as a property of the p erson. charism a. is not " tr u st” b u t the fact that " th e in herent q uality of a person in spires con fid en ce in h im and is exercised in the form o f a protective au th ority over th ose w h o entrust th em selves to h im ” . to give them presents when the traditional collections are made (for the thimechret. Gentle exploitation is m uch more costly . for the K a b y les. gave rise to little com petition or envy. " k in d n e sse s”. th e recogn ition of an " antecedent gra ce” .that the ob ject is the sou rce of th e feelin g s responsible fo r the particular representation of the ob ject . as H o b b es observes. both by their exem plary conduct and by their express utterances. becau se they are d o n e the right w ay at th e right tim e . never an easy task and som etim es a dangerous one. they feel required to recall both parties to w isdom . su ch as tim e . and that the p rice to be paid for their ou tsta n d in g value is ou tsta n d in g con form ity to th e valu es o f th e grou p . find them selves invested with a sort of tacit delegation of the group’s authority. to assist the w idow s. if they see two w om en of their group quarrelling they feel it incum bent upon them to separate them and even to beat them (if they are w idow s or if the men responsible for them are w ithout authority) or fine them . to sen d them food at feast times. they feel it their duty to protect the interests o f the clients and the poor. in any situation liable to lead to inter-clan conflict (in cases of crim e. or.m arks o f ap preciation. and " c o n sid e ra tio n s ” .

i.) to be entrusted with the totality of th e cap ital w h ich is the basis of th e group. inspired b y pure resp ect for th e cu sto m s and co n v en tio n s recogn ized by the grou p . (A parenthesis of the benefit of th e m oralists: an ab solute.)57 E veryon e know s th a t " it’s not what you giv e b u t the way you g ive i t ” that co u n ts. and so o n . a member of a board o f directors. and to exert over this capital. justification of th e en ch an tm en t felt b y the ob server of en ch an ted social relations m ay be fo u n d in the fact that. i. m u st be su ch that the outw ard form s of th e act present a practical d en ial of th e co n ten t of th e act. w h ereb y n o th in g is ever given for n o th in g . d oes not am ount to " an accep tance of w h at is repressed ”. a d elegated authority not strictly related to h is personal co n tr ib u tio n .55 T h e sy stem is su ch that the d om in ant agen ts have a v ested interest in virtu e. g iv in g for g iv in g ’s sake. sym b olized by the name of the fam ily or lin eage. the d iscou rse w hich says w hat it says only in a form that ten d s to sh ow that it is not sayin g it. sy m b olically tran sm u ting an in terested exchan ge or a sim p le pow er relation in to a relation ship set up in d u e form for fo rm ’s sake.e . i.e . to an ex ten t directly proportionate to his own co n trib u tion .e . th ey m ust have the " v ir tu e s ” o f their pow er because th e o n ly basis of their pow er is " v ir tu e ”. and person are a credit to th e g ro u p . th ey can accum u late political pow er o n ly b y paying a personal price. the m anner of g iv in g . G en erou s co n d u ct.*94 Structures . they satisfy interest in a (d isin terested ) m ann er d esign ed to sh ow that th ey are not sa tisfy in g interest. that w hat d istin g u ish es the g ift from m ere "fair e x c h a n g e ” is th e labour d ev o ted to form : the presentation. a m em b er of an acad em y. collectiv ely ow n ed b y all the " shareholders ”. T h e con stitu tio n of in stitu tionalized m ech a n ist^ m akes it p ossib le for a sin g le agen t (a party leader or u n ion d elegate. d eed s.con versation for conversa­ tion s sake (and not in order to say so m eth in g ). ethical. b u t in pre-capitalist societies each agent shares d irectly in the collective capital. e tc . m igh t se em to su spend th e universal law of interest and "fair e x c h a n g e ”. But in reality su ch d en ials of interest are n ever m ore than practical disclaim ers: like F reu d ’s Vem einung. as w ith d esire. because in them the cen sorsh ip o f d irect exp ression of personal interest is stronger . th ey thu s offer con n o isseu rs o f b eau tifu l form s the en ch an tin g sp ectacle of an art o f livin g raised to the level of an art for art’s sake foun ded on the refusal to ack n ow led ge self-ev id en t realities su ch as th e " b u sin ess is b u s in e s s ” or . o f w hich the p otlatch (a curio for anthropologists) is sim p ly the extrem e ca se. exactly to the exten t that h is w ord s. habitus. as Freud says. and n ot sim p ly b y red istrib u tin g their g o o d s and money. p o w e r sou rce of all sym b olic valu e. so w ith material in terest: society cannot ask or ex p ect o f its m em bers an yth ing m ore or better than d enial. a " liftin g o f r e p r essio n ” w h ich . (A p aren thesis for the b en efit o f the aesth etes: archaic so c ietie s d ev o te m ore tim e and effort to the form s. and to set up instead relation ship s w h ich are their ow n en d .

econom ic capital can be accum u lated on ly in the form of sy m b o lic capital.°9 T h is is an exem plary d isclaim er: becau se g iv in g is also a w ay o f p o ssessin g (a gift w h ich is not m atched b y a cou n ter-gift creates a lastin g b ond .6 P rocesses of circular 0 circulation. am assing food o n ly to lavish it on others. in M alinow sk i’s p hrase. at the cost of a w astage o f social en ergy w h ich is the con d ition for the perm anence of d o m in ation . su ch as the le v y in g o f a tribute follow ed by hierarchical redistri­ bution. ob ligation .i. on e con sid ers o n ly the p a rticu la r case of exch an ges of m aterial and/or sy m b o lic g o o d s in te n d ed to legitim ate relations of reciprocity. can exert pow er. and exert it durably. restrictin g the d eb to r’s freedom and forcing him to adopt a p eacefu l. and becau se the on ly recogn ized .e . w hen th e op p o rtu n ity arises. in order to b u ild up a capital of obligations and d eb ts w h ich w ill be repaid in th e form o f h om age. b ecau se in th e ab sen ce of any juridical guarantee. resp ect. th e ultim ate basis o f p ow er. T h e en d less recon version o f eco n o m ic capital in to sy m b o lic capital. th e w h ole so ciety pays itself in the false coin of its dream . T h e rich m an is " rich so as to be able to give to the p o o r”. these consecration cycles perform the fun dam en tal operation of social a lch em y. a "tribal b a n k er”. a n d . T h e co llectiv e m isrecogn ition w h ich is the basis of . say the K a b y les . or personal loyalty. a co llectiv e u nd ertak ing. on e o f the few w ays of “ h o ld in g ” so m eon e is to keep up a lastin g asym m etrical relationship su ch as in d eb ted n ess. form of the other kinds of capital. If. D istin c ­ tions and lastin g associations are foun ded in th e circular circulation from w hich the legitim ation o f p ow er arises as a sy m b o lic su rp lu s valu e. g ratitu d e.) G ood s are for g iv in g .e . on e is in danger of forgettin g that all stru ctures o f inseparably m aterial and sy m b o lic ex ch an ge (i. W ealth. de facto d ifferen ces in to officially recogn ized d istin ctio n s. w h ich m ay be the bases o f a n ew accu m u lation of m aterial g o o d s . p ru dent attitu d e). in v o lv in g both circulation and co m m u n ica tio n ) fu n c­ tion as id eological m ach ines w h en ever the de facto state of affairs w hich th ey tend to legitim ate by tran sform in g a co n tin g en t social relationship in to a recognized relationship is an u n eq u al balance o f pow er. w ork and services. T h e ch ief is in d e ed . loyalty.M odes o f dom ination *95 “■time is m o n e y ” on w h ich th e u n aesth etic life-style o f the harried leisure classes?* in so-called advanced so cieties is b ased . the transform ation of arbitrary relations in to legitim ate relations. and h en ce socially recogn izab le. p restige. in other w ord s. w o u ld appear absurd b u t for th e effect they have of tran sm u ting the nature of the social relation b etw een th e agents or grou p s in v o lv ed . like L evi-Strau ss. the u n recogn izab le. like m agic. W herever they are ob served . or an y coercive force. cannot su cc ee d w ith ou t th e com p licity o f th e w hole grou p : the w ork o f denial w h ich is th e sou rce of social alchem y is. legitim ate form of p ossession is that ach ieved b y d isp o ssessin g o n eself . on ly in th e form o f sym b olic capital. co-op era tive. A s M a\iss puts it.

w h en the group lies to itself in this w ay. ten d ed to p rod uce th e " d ise n c h a n te d ” d isp osi­ tio n s their d evelop m en t d em an d ed . public (" so c ia l” p o licies) and private (fin an cin g o f " d isin ter ested ” fou n d ation s. it also has a practical efficacy. for. m aster and khammesf -only through th e d isp o sitio n s w h ich the grou p in cu lcates in th em and con­ tin u ou sly rein forces. It is eq u ally clear w h y th e progressive u n co verin g and neutralization o f the ideological and practical effects o f the m echan ism s assu ring the reprodu ction o f th e relations o f d om in ation sh ould d eterm in e a return to form s o f sym b olic v io len ce again based on d issim ulation of the m ech an ism s o f rep rod u ction through th e con version of eco n o m ic into sy m b olic capital: it is through legitim acy-giv in g red istrib u tion . grants to hospitals and to acad em ic and cultural in stitu tio n s). p o w e r the eth ic of h on ou r. in rend erin g superfluous the w ork of eu p h em ization .196 Structures . and w h ich render unthinkable practices w h ich would appear as legitim ate and even be taken for granted in th e disenchanted eco n o m y o f "naked se lf-in te re st ” . and the d isenchantm ent wr ich leads to the p rogressive u n v eilin g of repressed m ean ings and functions h can on ly result from a collapse of the social co n d itio n s of the cross-censorship to w h ich each agent su b m its w ith im patience b u t w hich he im p o ses on all th e oth ers . but also as creditor and d eb tor. w hich they . T h u s the m ech an ism s resp onsible for reprodu cing the appropriate h abitus are here an integral part o f an apparatus o f p rod uction w hich could not fu n ction w ith o u t th em . h idd en form w hich vio len ce takes w h en overt v io le n c e is im p o ssib le. even if it wr ere con trad icted by ev ery o n e’s behaviour. is not sim p ly the g ro u p ’s means of savin g its " spiritualistic p oin t of h o n o u r ” . a collective d enial of the eco n o m ic reality of exchange is on ly p ossib le becau se. it w ould still rem ain a true d escrip tion of su ch behaviour as is in ten d ed to b e accep table. becau se that is th e cu stom and becau se honour requires him to do so . an elem entary form of the labour o f ob jectification w h ich even tu ally leads to the juridical d efinition o f accep table b eh aviour. T h e cod e of h onou r weighs on each agent w ith the w eigh t of all th e other agen ts. d eceiv es h im self as m uch as he d eceives h is kham m est sin ce th e only form in w h ich he can serve h is interest is the eu p h em istic form presented by the eth ic of h onou r. A g en ts lastingly " b in d ” each other. it is und erstan dab le why sy m b olic form s of d om in ation sh ou ld have p rogressively w ithered away as ob jective m ech an ism s cam e to b e con stitu ted w h ich . habitus . like a rule to which every case p roved an excep tio n . there i$ neither d eceiver nor d eceived : th e peasant w h o treats h is khammes as an associate.61 T h e official truth p rod uced b y th e co llectiv e work o f eu p h em iza tio n . not only as parents and ch ild ren . and n oth ing su its th e khammes b etter than to play his part in an in terested fiction w h ich offers him an h onou rab le representation of his co n d ition .6 2 If it be true that sym b olic violen ce is the g en tle.

M odes o f domination *97 make p o ssib le. everyday w orld of p rod u ction . like th eo lo g y in a past ep o ch . th e site of pure con su m p tion . through w h ich the d om in an t groups or classes secure a capital of " c r e d it” w h ich seem s to o w e n o th in g to the logic o f ex p lo ita tio n .of m on ey. offers. T h e denial o f eco n o m y and of eco n o m ic in terest. o f cou rse. thus finds its favourite refuge in th e d om ain of art and cu lture. a sanctuary for gratu itou s. an im aginary an th rop ology ob tain ed by denial of all th e n egations really b rou ght about by the eco n o m y . that th e efficacy o f the m echan ism s of reproduction is exerted. a sacred island system atically and osten ta tio u sly op posed to the p rofane. . the collection of lu xury goo d s attestin g th e taste and d istinction of their ow n er. T o th ese form s o f legitim ate accu m u lation . b u t also o f tim e con vertible into m on ey.63 m u st be added another form of accum u lation of sym bolic capital. which in pre-capitalist so cieties at first took place on a ground from w hich it had to be exp elled in order for ec on om y to be con stitu ted as su ch . T h e w'orld o f art. disin terested activity in a universe g iven over to m o n ey and self-in terest.

T H E O B J E C T I V E L I M I T S O F O B J E C T I V I S M 1 C. 3 Consider. pp. is to invoke frustrated expectation. 2 See E. to describe the logically but also chronologically articulated sequences of a musical com position. p. so as to refer in their coding and decoding operations. 5-21) find to explain the m ovem ent from structure to form. to one and the same system of constant relations. 72. 1956). conditions which phenomeno­ logical analysis ignores. taken in the sense of " structure o f becoming” which it has in musical theory (e. pp. " Introduction a 1'oeuvre de Marcel M au ss”. in very different fields.N o tes C H A P T E R 1. the suite.” [T h ese exam ples. and those which follow. which means both a gift and peace. to m etonym ic form .-A p ril 1962). or "L eave us in peace [lahna] with your gift [lahdia]. Bally. 1968. or sonata form ) w’ould no doubt be more appropriate than the language of logical structure. the petty bourgeoisie with its avid consum ption of manuals of etiquette. Education et sociologie (Paris: P U F . xxxviii. draw on the au th ors fieldwork in Kabylia. Levi-Strauss. with their treatises on style. o r ” T he best gift is p eace. and all academ icism s. to poetic and musical pleasure. the cat). independent of individual consciousnesses and wills and irreducible to their execution in practices or works (e. 6 Ibid. coexist with proverbs betraying the tem ptation of the spirit of calculation: "A gift is a m isfortu ne”. a dance. or work).] 8 T he language of form . 1 (Jan. pp. the cat. 102. L ’Homm*> 2. English trans. p. 1965). the lover. Saussurian "longue” as code or cipher). It merely defines the lim its of its validity by establishing the particular conditions within which it is possible. In so doing. practice. says one of them . L e langage et la vie (G eneva: D roz. 1950). that is to say. and another: "A present is a hen and the recom pense is a camel. the m ovem ent from the metaphorical form. acts. meaning a gift.e. L^vi-Strauss (w*Les chats’ de Charles Baudelaire”.g. p. the essentially [1 9 8 ] . 58. the suprem e virtue of the man of honour. strictly speaking. Algeria. or any tem porally structured practice. in Sociologie et anthropologie (Paris: P U F . 1st e d . Translator. playing on the word lahna. to put it another way. in their practices and interpretations. for exam ple. objectivist analysis does not. and the experience of form . which objectivist analysis can describe only by bringing together in sim ultaneity. xxxvi. or works of others. in the form of a set of them es linked by relations of logical transformation (e. 1922). and the word lahdia." A nd. or. the scientist. D urkheim .. 68-9. 5 See C. i.g. It is significant that the only way which R Jakobson and C.g . leave us in p eace”. 4 Objectivism posits that im m ediate com m unication is possible if and only if the agents are objectively harmonized so as to associate the same m eaning with the same sign (utterance. Education and Sociology (N ew York: Free Press. 101. 7 Sayings w hich exalt generosity. they say: "Y ou w ho bring us peace [a gift]. contradict phenom enological analysis of primary experience of the social world and of the im mediate com prehension of the utterances.

p. 187-211. the product of a jurisprudence directly applied to the particular case and not of the application to the particular of a universal rule. D ostoyevsky. 1910. trans. essentially consists of an enumeration of particular offences.that is to say. p. Hanoteau and A . M ind. 88 per cent. 1956). T h e qanun. Bourdieu. musical or poetical forms can only be understood inasmuch as they perform expressive functions of various types. Jourdan. Etude de droit musulman algerien. pp. Coulson (L ondon: P enguin. the sole alternatives being the riposte which restores honour or the retreat which condem ns the offended to social death or exile. A . Revue des . T h u s. M arcy. You can’t take offence at a gift from m e ” (see F. is an attack on the sacred (haram) and in particular on the honour of the w om en. includes. Morand. Comparison of the quanuns of different groups (villages or tribes) brings out differences in the w eight of the punishm ent inflicted for the same offence.N otes fo r pp . a collection of custom s peculiar to each village. no. L a K abylie et les coutumes kabyles. rational. J. 1966). predictable and calculable) acts of jurisprudence. for exam ple. explicit principles but on the " se n se ” of honour and equity. in J. 10 per cent.e. T hree case studies illustrating these analyses are to be found in P. unlike the sim ple challenge.e. w hile Dean M . Morand (see M. the qanun of A gouni-n-T esellent. p. 2).e. " L es vestiges de la parente maternelle en droit coutum ier berbere et le regime dessuccessions touraegues ”. and only 5 articles concerning the foundations of the political system . 42-3. is based not on formal. Honour and Shame (L ondon: W eidenfeld and N icholson. that you can even take money from me. Peristiany (e d . " D o n ’t be offended at me for making this o f f e r . Algiers: A . 58. Bobok.). I am so thoroughly conscious of counting for nothing in your eyes.33$ (m y italics). 191-241. G . 1965). the totality of the values and principles that the com m unity affirms by its very existence . 1962). T h e customary rule. these differences are understandable if it is a question of the same im plicit schem es being put into practice. and "L e statut de la fem m e kabyle et la reforme des coutum es berberes”. R . In the case of the offence w hich. 44). a village of the Ath Akbil tribe. 1873). Revue Africaine. i. In reality. who present their analysis of Kabyle custom s along the lines of the French "Code C iv il”. L etourneux. A . Its essence . attribute the role of judge to the village assem bly (see Hanoteau and L etourneux. 85 (1941). in a total of 249 articles. S elf and Society (Chicago: U niversity of Chicago Press. pp. i. Letourneux (an Appeal Court Judge). 219 "repressive” laws (in D urkheim ’s sen se). L a K abylie et les coutumes kabyles (Paris: Im prim erie N ationale.remains im plicit because unquestioned and unquestionable.. but would not be found if it were a matter of the application of a single explicit code expressly produced to serve as a basis for hom ogeneous and constant (i. The Gambler. v°l* 111> P. A N asty S tory./ 7 199 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 polythetic (in H usserl’s sense) structure of a poetic discourse which in practice is com m unicated only in and through tim e. . followed by the corresponding fine. pp. Jakobson. "T h e Sentim ent of Honour in Kabyle S o c iety ”. as against 25 "restitutory ” laws. Fundamentals o f Language (T h e H ague: M outon. as temporal structures. T h e statem ents contained in the custom s of any particular group represent only a very sm all part of the universe of possible acts of jurisprudence (and even if one adds to them the statem ents produced from the sam e principles to be found in the custom s of other groups one still has only a very lim ited idea of the full possibilities). Hanoteau (a brigadier) and A . 9 . the room for manoeuvre is considerably reduced.

1928). is made the object of teaching (differentially) d i s p e n s e d by a specific institution and becom es thereby the principle of a cultivated habitus. i. For exam ple. W. Reason in H istory: A General Introduction to the Philosophy of H istory. Garfinkel. I: The Problem o f Social R eality. because they are what they know. but the new masters can safely challenge the kaloi kagathoi. with an introduction b y R . Studies in Ethnomethodology.: P r e n t i c e . p. Anthropology and M odem L ife (N ew York: N orton. edited and introduced by Maurice Nathanson (T h e Hague: M artinus Nijhoff. p. 1927. G . T h e upholders of old-style education have no difficulty in devaluing a knowledge w hich. which goes directly from practice to practice w ithout passing through discourse. 164-6). no one knows how. Collected Papers. F . 124. Schutz. . the meanings agents give to rites. 59Schutz seeks to show that the contradiction which he him self observes between what he calls the postulate of subjective interpretation and the method o f the m ost advanced sciences. . H egel. A s is suggested by a reading of the Meno. 34-5). H . In realitv the assembly operates not as a court pronouncing judgem ent by reference to a pre-existing code. J . nor what they are. is only an apparent c o n tr a d ic t io n (see pp. a normative description. the em ergence of institutionalized education is accompanied by a crisis in diffuse education. pp. such as econom ics. Excellence has ceased to exist once people start asking whether it can be taught. Fisher (London: M ethuen.. but as a council which endeavours to reconcile the adversaries’ points of view and persuade them to accept a com prom ise. or a sub-proletariat. and possess only "insofar as they are what they are w ho. hence to apprehend what had formerly seem ed to be part of the nature of things (phusei) as in fact based on the arbitrary institution of law ( nomo). justify what is taken for granted. who are unable to bring to the level of discourse what they learned apo tou automatou. 967 * 25 T h u s it is the objectivist construction of the structure of the statistical c h a n c e s objectively attached to an econom ic or social condition (that of a simple* reproduction econom y. Alden L . p. Hartmann (Indianapolis: B o b b s M errill. for exam ple) which makes it p o ss ib le to give a com plete explanation of the form of temporal experience w hich pheno* m enological analysis brings to light.e. X . M . based on conventions and contractual agreem ents. m yths. bears the marks of apprenticeship. as soon as the objective confrontation of different styles of excellence makes it necessary to say what goes w ithout saying. part 1. than the structures of the corresponding practices (see F . make an ought-to-be and an ought-to-do out of what had up to then been regarded as the only way to be and do. trans. M erleau-Pontv. 196$). since the m ediator’s decision can be applied only w ith the consent of the "convicted ” partv (w ithout w hich the plaintiff has no alternative to resorting to force) and will not be accepted unless it is consistent with the "sense of ju sticc” and imposed in a manner recognized by the "sense of h on o u r”.200 JViotes fo r p p . Boas. Englewood Cliffs. or decorative motifs are m uch less stable in space. 1962). 47-94) regards the qanun as a set of provision in the form of rules. and doubtless over tim e. S ee A . do not have what they know. pp. 26 T h e effect of sym bolic im position w hich official representation intrinsically p r 0 " duces is overlaid by a more profound effect when sem i-learned grammar.Hall. The Structure o f Behaviour. S. like that of the mathontes. trans. T h is means that the functioning of the system presupposes the orchestration of habitus. 17-22 19 20 21 22 23 24 Etudes Islamiques. 1st ed . 1953). 1962. 3.

grammar. 4 ( x935). H . 2 2 . 1966. " fixed ”. C oursde linguistiquegenerate (P aris: Pavot. p. 30. N ew York: Philosophical Library. leaving em pty the place of the second constructed object. Language.N otes fo r pp . the legitim ate linguistic habitus. it is b ehaviour” . Broadly speaking. they range from excellence. trans. T h is apart. T h e imaginary dialogue on the notion of culture presented by C lyde K luckhohn and William H . an d . more precisely. " cu ltu re” is opposed to concepts as different in their epistem ological status as society. M alinowski.g.2 5 201 T h u s. D . presupposes objectifica­ tion (and. w e shall call it sp e ec h ” (ibid. i960). 30 T h e m ost violent opponents of the notion of "culture”. 79). Coral Gardens and Their M agic. H jelm slev. nam ely practice as execution. then it is conduct. have nothing better than a naive realism to offer against the realism of the intelligible which presents "cultu re” as a transcendent reality endow ed with an autonom ous existence and obeying its internal laws even in its history. T h u s . compilation into a ''treasury” and form alization by a body of grammarians) and inculcation by the family and the educational system . or conduct. JZeitschrift fu r Sozialforschung. Culture and Personality”. 27 Ritual denunciation of the reassuring half-truths of legalism (to which som e may be tem pted to reduce a num ber of the analyses set out here) has doubtless played a part in discouraging any serious consideration of the relationship between practice and the rule. as respectively. W . If wr except the rare authors who give the e notion of conduct a significance rigorously defined by the operation which sets it up in opposition to " cu ltu re” (e. see English translation. more precisely."Collective Autism as a C onsequence of Culture C ontact”. *95929 ’'N eith er is the psychological part wholly involved: the executive side is left outside.and this is far from being the worst exam ple .institution. Relations to learned culture (including learned language) are objectively defined b y the degree of internalization of the linguistic norm. to the dispossession of the laym an. 1 (L ondon: A llen and U nw in. non-fixed (L . Language. p. Baskin as Course in G eneral Linguistics. individual. 288-333). 379). the rule converted into a habitus capable of playing w ith the rule of the gam e. 28 F . PP. 27. for execution is never the work of the mass. w ho posits that "if an act conform s to culture. 3 (1951). esp. 13). p.. as M alinowski termed it (B. social. and the individual is always th e master of it. p. ist e d . "Review of Selected Writings of Edward Sapir. 1935). In this case. T h e most explicit formulation of the theory of speech as execution is doubtless found in the work of H jelm slev. if not. pp. pp. wr clearly brings ho out the various d im ensions of the Saussurian opposition betw een language and speech . and of learned culture in general. in a class society. it is always individual. K elly (see " T h e Concept . of the strategies em ployed in the games (and tricks) played with the rules of the gam e. Harris. "what is constructed by the anthropologist” and "what mem bers of the society observe or im pose upon o th ers” (M . vol.232“ 47)> m ost users of the opposition put forward epistem ologically discordant definitions of culture or conduct. which give the rule a practical efficacy quite different from the efficacy naively attributed to it by the " legalistic approach”. through the strict conform ity of those condem ned m erely to execute. de Saussure. such as Radcliffe-Brown. 1959). as in the domain of art. and execution. 37-8. Lasswell. of the product of that objectification. it is the sem i-learned norm which is internalized to becom e th e principle of the production and com prehension of practices and discourses. which oppose a constructed object to a preconstructed datum . the individual.Harris op p oses "cultural patterns” to "culturally patterned beha­ v iou rs”. Essais linguistiques (C openhagen: Nordisk Sprog-og Kulturforlag.

p. L e langage et la vie. first an essential identity . structuring dispositions . Linton (e d . the selection of "practical” kinsmen among the nominal kinsmen. between two contradictory explanations of the declared identity of the mind and nature. in R. See M. In a typical statement of a highly ecelectic philosophy. 21. Pariente. Bally. The Savage M ind (London: W eidenfeld and N icolson. Van Velsen. Harvard U niversity Press. of rather diverse kinds. comparison of d if fe r e n t societies consisting of exam ining whether "the sam e kinds of parts ” are to be f o u n d in all cases (E . th o u g h livelier. Cambridge. April 1966. 334-58. Oswald Ducrot makes the same point when he indicates that presupposition is part of language use itself and that every speech act entails assum ptions which may or may not be satisfied or accepted by the interlocutor.. 1 (March 1961). Van V elsen. The Science o f Mart in the World Crisis (N ew Y o rk Columbia U niversity Press. 346). 182. D espite this point of disagreement. p. Van V elsen ’s analyses are essentially consistent with my own analysis of the strategic uses made of kin relations (w hich I wrote before The Politics of Kinship came to my notice): cf. Manchester: M anchester U niversity Press. Malinowski and Radcliffe. J. picture of this debate than A.. unm ediated identity between the mind and nature: "As the mind too is a thing. Levi-Strauss. 133. R. pp. n e w e d . 1961). p. The Politics o f K inship. groups of people. for exam ple. 1971.). Kluckhohn in th e ir Culture: A Critical R eview o f Concepts and Definitions (Papers of the P e a b o d v 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology. E.then identity acquired through learning . 'in stitu tion s’. empirical ‘th in g s’. Leach. matrilineal descent seen as a privileged rationalization of action in fact determined by other factors. 1964."an image of the wr orld inscribed in the architecture of the m in d ” : L e cru et le cuit (Paris: Plon. and J.two theses which merge in the ambiguity of another formulation . Prieto. 73— 4. 9. 1964).” M an. Levi-Strauss explicitly evacuates individual and collective history (and everything covered by the concept of the habitus) by establishing a direct. K roeber and C. of mind and . R. 62 (1962).. p. 1952).the m ind is a thing . 25 -2 7 o f Culture ”. my italics to em phasize the oscillation. "On Certain U nconsidered A spects of D ouble D escent System s. The Politics of K in sh ip: A S tu d y in Social Manipulation among the Lakeside Tonga.Brown at least agree in considering each " society’* or each "cu ltu re” (in their respective vocabularies) as a "totality made up of a number of discrete. "Vers un nouvel esprit linguistique”. and the function of the idealization of cross-cousin marriage as "a means of counteracting the fissiparous tendencies in the marriage and thus the village”. L. It has not escaped Leach that despite th e ir apparent opposition. x lv i i. "Ethnographic Data in British Social A nthropology”. Paris: M outon. in the same sentence. pp. 6). e. while ignoring the dialectic of the social structures and structured. the functioning of this thing teaches us som ething about the nature of things: even pure reflexion is in the last analysis an internalization o f the cosmos'* (C . C. this philosophy of mind returns to a form of idealism affirming the universality and eternity of the logical categories. in a more eighteenth-century language. xxvi. 78-105) gives a more sum mary. on pp.or. Beneath its airs of radical materialism . Critique. p. cu sto m s” or again as "an empirical whole m ad e up of a limited number of readily identifiable parts”. Principesde nodlogie. on p.g . 1964. Gluckm an.202 N otes fo r p p . Rethinking Anthropology ( L o n d o n : Athlone Press. Leach. 1. p. 1945). L. pp. 248. J. 1966). 5-17. Socio­ logical Review .internalization of the cosm os . M a s s .

D urkheim . it follows that any scientific objectification ought to be preceded by a sign indicating*'everything takes place as i f . . It is clear what theoretical (and political) effects arise from the personifi­ cation of collectives (in sentences like "the bourgeoisie thinks t h a t . 38-9. according to M erleau-Ponty.N otes fo r p p .9'.them selves more or less sanctioned by the collectivity they give of their practice to them selves or others. 114 and 124). p. The Rules of Sociological Method (N ew York: Free Press. starting with the logic of ordinary language. If it is the case that making practice explicit subjects it to an essential alteration. p. Levi-Strauss. even when they are the product of collective conditions such as the awakening of awareness [prise de conscience) of class interests. esp. by free iteration. P. 1969). Les regies de la methode sociologique. w hich inclines us to infer the substance from the substantive or to confer on concepts the power to act in history as the words designating them act in the sentences of historical discourse. as historical subjects. Elementary Structures. . L . as surely as D urkheim ’s pro­ fessions of faith. w ould constantly remind us of the epistem ological status of the constructed concepts of objective science. L. p. 38. ist ed . 18th ed. It is an unwarranted transfer of the same type w hich. and in particular the logical categories. pp. Ibid. Philosophical Investigations (O xford: Blackwell. in I. . i960). P. p. . T he hypnotic power of the notion of the unconscious has the effect of blotting out the question of the relationship between the practice-generating schem es and the representations . one gets out of having to analyse these conditions. The Elementary Structures of K inship. in particular those determi ning the degree of objective and subjective hom ogeneity of the group in question and the degree of consciousness of its members. * A person w h o knows a language has represented in his brain some very abstract ' system of underlying structures along with an abstract system of rules that determ ine. It thereby discourages analysis of the theoretical or practical alterations that the various forms of discourse about practice impose on practice. which leads.) Brain iMechanism Underlying Speech and Language (N ew York and London: Grune and Straton. correspond to the structure of the social world and not the natural world. 32. w hich. Darley (ed . Structural Anthropology (L ondon: Allen Lane. (Paris: P U F . Semantic Analysis (N ew York: Cornell U niversity Press. 34. an infinite range of sound-m eaning correspon­ d en ce” (see N . A lcan. ”). 1973. rev. 7.e.. 1963). . ed. i. by speaking o f what goes without saying or by naming regularities by definition unremarked. W ittgenstein. functioning in the same way as quantifiers in logic. p. 2 7 -2 9 203 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 nature . Levi-Strauss. 73— 88). pp. 33 (m y italics).w ithin which the schem es of thought are formed and transformed. ”. (L ondon: Social Science Paperbacks. 1895). Chomsky. principles of division which through the intermediary of the principles of the division o f labour. pp. ” or ’'th e working class refuses to accept. engenders the intellectualist and empiricist errors in psychology (see The Struc­ ture of Behaviour. 1967). to postulating the existence of a group or class ''collective consciousness” : by crediting groups or institutions with dispositions which can be constituted only in individual consciousnesses. . E. English translation. Ziff. ’'General Properties of L anguage”. 1964).. 1968). Everything conspires to encourage the reifying of concepts and of theoretical constructs. C. Ibid.

So it was not possible to give an account of matrimonial exchanges unless. Tractatus Logico-philosophicus. pp. 199-219. which made it possible to measure in concrete terms all that the ordinary genealogist neglects. of which a genealogical diagram gives only a skeleton. the agents responsible for it. Systemes de parente (C ontributions to the interdisciplinary confercnce on M oslem societies. Davidson (ed s. pp. carried out between 1962 and 1964. W ittgenstein. Berque (ed . N eedham . jn D . 1976). pp. in J. 2nd ed. in addition to the purely genealogical relationship between the spouses. one established the objective relationship betw een the positions in the social structure of the groups brought together by the marriage. 55 See Claude Levi-Strauss. and finally in the Chelif valley and Ouarsenis. 117-44. 54 T h e research leading up this study was carried out with other projects between i960 and 1970. which would in fact be interminable: this w'ork. established certain extrem ely obvious relationships such as the higher rate of endogamy am ong marabout families or the dyssym m etry of matrimonial exchanges betw een groups separated by econom ic inequalities. p. the history of the econom ic and sym bolic exchanges which had occurred betw een them . Quine. 49. its length. Semantics o f N atural Language (DordrechtReidel. " L e problem e des relations de parente”. which I had initially been led to treat as sim ple "variants”. T h is is w'hv I undertook to reconstitute a fam ily’s social history. see P. and in particular the value of the bridewealth. to unions which were structurally and functionally different. the history of that negotiation. But it was impos­ sible not to feel the artificial and abstract nature of the distributions and groupings which it was necessary to carry out in order to calculate rates of parallel-cousin marriage. Family and Society: Selections from the Annales (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins U niversity Press. the m om ent at which it took place in the lives of the spouses (childhood or adolescence).). I soon realized that the variations observable in the unfolding of sequences of ritual actions. In the context of an analysis of econom ic and social structures carried out first in various villages in Kabvlia. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology. . 14 (1958). which had yielded only negative information. 1959). 2 Q -31 51 W. also provided most of the illustrations for the theoretical analyses set out here. in the case of marriage. I collected genealogies which attempted to situate in a rough way the relative econom ic positions of groups brought together by marriage. 1971). 442-S 4 52 L. (L ondon: Routledgeand Kegan Paul. Forster and O. " T h e Formal A nalysis of Prescriptive Patrilateral Cross-cousin Marriage”. then in the Collo region. for the analysis of ritual. the study of matrimonial exchanges cannot be separated from the fam ilies’ econom ic and social history. R a n u m (ed s. the ritual deployed in full for marriages between great fam ilies from different tribes being reduced to its simplest form for marriage between parallel cousins: thus each marriage (and each form which the rite takes) appeared as a m om ent of a strategy the principle of which lies in objective conditions of a particular type and not in a norm explicitly posited and obeyed. 1972). 11957 R. In other words.). etc. 13-14* 56 Introduction a deux theories d ’anthropologie sociale (Paris: M outon. Paris. 1971). Bourdieu. Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes. without really being able to com plete the task. corresponded. H aving abandoned the study of genealogies. and the state of those transactions at the mom ent when matrimonial negotiation was undertaken. or in an unconscious " m o d el”.). p. pp. 53 For another application of the analyses in section I. in R. " M ethodological Reflections on Current Linguistic T h eo r y ”. "Marriage Strategies as Strategies of Social Reproduction ”. Harman and G . V.204 N otes f o r p p . Statistical analysis of these genealogies. t h e exchanges to which it gave rise.

often so much so that the notion of a com m on descent becom es m erely theoretical” (Levi-Strauss. G ranqvist. Fertility and reproduction rates. 62. see D um ont. " Most explanations of patrilateral parallel cousin marriage are of a causal-motivational kind. 1952).8 On the deductive relationship between kinship term inology and kinship attitudes. Kasdan. 63 J. see A . 48 ( i 957)> PP. 7. International Archives o f Ethnography. pp. Rosenfield. 41: "jural” relationships are those "which are subject to precise. by a second-order abstraction. and African Systems o f K inship and Marriage (L ondon: Oxford U niversity Press. p. 65 T he calculation of "rates of endogam y” by genealogical level. 60 R. binding prescriptions. individuals w ho. although on the same level of the genealogical tree. M urphy and L . Structure and Function in Prim itive Society (L ondon: Cohen and W est. 59 "Principles of Social Organization in Southern K urdistan”. 38. Oslo. p. the demographic balance of the sexes and the age pyramid never show the perfect harmony necessary for every individual. leads one to treat as identical. p. introduction. encysts the patrilineal segm en ts” ("Structure of Parallel C ousin M arriage”. an unreal intersec­ tion of abstract "categories”. p. Murphy and Kasdan write. it may lead one to treat genealogically . through in-marriage. "Endogam ie et exogamie dans le mariage arabe”.the closeness of the relationship between marriage and inheritance practices. 1953. Levi-Slrauss. L ’Homme. i960). even if the kinship nomenclature is broad enough to confuse degrees of the same type but unequally distant. advancing as evidence . as demonstrated by Kunstadter and his team through the use of computer sim ulations. Cuisenier. 17-29. RadclifTe-Brown. xxx). 80-105. 64 " It has long been knowr that societies which advocate marriage betw een certain n types of kin adhere to the norm only in a small number of cases. no.32-62)62 Both these theories accept an undifferentiated definition of function. Structural Anthropology. and. For exam ple.N otes jo r pp . p. We have not attempted to explain the origin of the custom in this paper but have taken it as a given factor and then proceeded to analyze its function. F . 61 (February 1959). It was found that parallel cousin marriage contributes to the extrem e fission of agnatic lines in Arab society. conversely. Against this explanation Murphy and Kasdan very rightly object that the Koranic law which gives to a woman half of a so n ’s share is rarely observed. Or. may be of widely differing ages and w hose marriages for this very reason may have been arranged in different circum stances corresponding to different states of the matrimonial market. Elementary Structures o f Kinship. 27). "An Analysis of Marriage Statistics for a M oslem and Christian Arab V illage”. which reduces it to the function for the group as a whole.e. Introduction a deux theories. w hether concerning people or th in gs”. Societas Scientiarium Fennica 3 (1931). On the term ju ral and the use which RadcliffeBrown makes of it. 31-33 205 . Universitetets Ethnografiske Museum Bulletin. its operation within Bedouin social structure. p . to be assured of finding a suitable spouse in the prescribed degree. when the tim e com es for him to marry.and w ith som e reason . and that the fam ily can in any case count on the inheritance contributed by in-marrying w om en (H . "T he Structure of Parallel Cousin M arriage”. pp. 2 (M av-A ugust 1962). Commentationes Humanarum. R. " Marriage Con­ ditions in a Palestinian V illage”. 2. 25. 61 T he majority of earlier investigators accepted the native explanation that endoga­ m ous marriage had the function of keeping the property in the fam ily. i. American Anthropologist. H . in which the institution is explained through reference to the consciously felt goals of the individual role players.

arabicized forms . Ouali or Alilou instead of Ali. And there is every reason to believe that entire lineages may be left unmentioned by informant* w hen the last representative has died without leaving any descen­ dants or (which am ounts to the same thing) without male descendants. even in relationships with kinsm en. by his mother and the women of the fam ily). m ultiple marriages after divorce or the partner’s death). Som etim es the same first name is given in slightly different form s to several children. 37. of course. single marriages rather than much-married individuals ’ com plete series of marriages (polygam y . But. It is as instruments of knowledge and cbnstruction of the social world that kinship structures fulfil a political function (in the same way as religion and all other ideologies). it would be naive to suppose that social practices. although giving a child the same name as his elder brother is avoided. thereby throwing dow n an insulting challenge.g . pp. Murphy was saying the same thing but without drawing conclusions when he remarked that genealogies and the manipulation of genealogies have as their main function the encouragement of the vertical integration of social units which parallel-cousin marriage tends to divide and close in upon them selves. T h e most rigorously checked genealogies do indeed contain system atic lacunae: since the strength of the group's m em ory of an individual depends on the value they attach to him or her at the m om ent of data-collecting. M ohand Ourabah instead of Rabah. this is avoided. Som etim es the name the child was first given is changed so as to give him a name made available by the death of his father or grandfather (the original name is then reserved for private use. A father cannot give his son his own first name. is brought hom e when one considers all that is contained in a phrase like " S h e’s your sister” . or again.206 N o tes f o r p p . structured in accordance with kinship categories. Hamimi or Dahmane instead of Ahmed. pregnant with a universe of prescriptions and taboos. when the latter married within the lin ea g e). certain 66 67 68 69 70 . and. and vice versa) or with a slight alteration (Beza instead of Mohand A m eziane.a n im perative declaration which is the sole practical statem ent of the incest taboo. Similarly.it being pos. with an elem ent added or suppressed (e.3 6 separate but chronologically sim ultaneous marriages as different . T h e error is that of all academ icism s. there is no lack of subterfuges and loopholes.instead of Meziane or Mohand A m eziane). Akli instead of Mohand Akli. worse. especially w hen they have produced many male descendants. What are term s of address and reference. for exam ple. in the etym ological sense of collective. A new-born child is not normally given the name of a living relative. and vice versa . which subject the production to the rules they have retrospectively derived from the product. 261-82. because it would mean "bringing him back to life ” before he was dead. A frica. Seghir or Mohand Seghir . But. public im putations? (Kategoreisthai: to accuse publicly. genealogies are better at recording men (and m en ’s marriages). sible. to im pute a thing to som eone in front of everyone). 3 (July 1967). if not categories of kinship. for a man to marry at the same time as one of his uncles. they record close marriages better than distant marriages. 3 3 . than at recording w om en (except. "Som e Structural Aspects of the Feud among the Cam el-herding Bedouin of C yrenaica”. this is true even when the breakup of the undivided patrimony is consecrated by a formal sharing out or when the family splits up on m oving to the city or emigrating to France. here as elsewhere. though every social relationship is organized in terms of a representation of the social universe. are im plied in their genealogical definition. and when a son does bear his father’s name it is because the father died ‘'leaving him in his m other’s w o m b ”. The constituting power of these designations. casting a curse on h im .

the problem s of inheritance and succession. 3 8 -4 3 207 71 72 73 74 75 associations of names w hich are very close to one another or derived from the sam e name are much appreciated (Ahc&ne and E lhocine.the theft of an animal or an insult to mem bers of the group. But the m ost im portant thing would be to carry ou t an epistem ological study of the mode of investigation which is the precondition for production of the genealogical diagram. the choice of first names actually made gives an indication of the "strength of feelin g ” in the lineage. thus perpetuating the m em ory of the same ancestors in increasingly autonom ous lineages. T h u s. T h e sam e nam e. 85-8) that the agents organize their practice in relation to the useful divisions.which by their degree of solem nity have the secondary function of declaring the social significance of the marriage (the . also endow ed with a ritual function. It is possible to understand in term s of this logic. especially if one of them is the name of an ancestor. T he ritualization of violence in fighting is doubtless one of the most typical manifestations of the dialectic of strategy and ritual: although the battles were alm ost always motivated by harm done to econom ic or sym bolic interests . Seghir or Meziane and M oqrane. im plying a break with the practical relation directly oriented towards functions. finding in the genealogical representation an instrum ent of legitim ation. which applied even more strictly in the seasonal gam es. as it lies behind all inquiries. T h is social genealogy of genealogy would have to extend into a social history of the relationship between the " scien tific” uses and the social uses of the instrum ent. have produced and reproduced the need for this instrument. one would first have to study the social history of the genealogical tool. T o make com pletely explicit the im plicit demand which lies behind genealogical inquiry. the greater the range of unusable first-names. the seem ingly most ritualized acts in the marriage negotiation and in the ceremonials accom panying the wedding . D um on t. It can be shown in a particular case (P . e.e. pp. Bourdieu.N o tes f o r p p . i.). running down parallel lin e s: the more remote the com m on origin (or the weaker the unity between the sub-groups). Esquisse d ’une theorie de la pratique. which are the product of the history of the econom ic and sym bolic exchanges.g . 1972). may coexist in a genealogy. 21-3). pp. in the traditions of w hich anthropologists are the product. as the sym bolic manipulation of violence aimed at resolving the tensions arising from contact between alien and som etim es traditionally hostile groups. in a general w ay. Introduction a deux theories d ’anthropologie sociale. viz. A hm ed and M ohamed. e tc . why the ritualization of inter­ actions rises with the distance between the individuals or groups and hence with the size of the groups). Rules and ritual becom e increasingly necessary as it ceases to be possible to count on the autom atic orchestration of practices that is ensured by hom ogeneity of habitus and interests (w hich explains. pp. T h is would aim to determ ine the full significance of the ontological transmutation which learned inquiry brings about sim ply by virtue of the fact that it dem ands a quasi-theoretical relation to kinship. U nder the network of genealogical relationships is dissim ulated the network of practical relationships. paying particular attention to the functions w hich. 122-3. or whole series com posed of the same names. Esquisse. the shepherds their lim its were set by the ritualized m odel of the war of honour. the more it seem s legitim ate to use the sam e names. Sincc the more integrated the fam ily is. all the particu­ larly strict rites to w hich marriage between distant groups gives rise. precede de trois etudes d ’ ethnologie kabyle (Paris and Geneva: Librairie D roz. such as the ball games played in autumn and spring (see Bourdieu.

Marry the daughter of your 'amm if she has been abandoned [is lying fallow ]” . the man of trust. “ You must marry your paternal uncle's daughter. to express the total lack of any genea­ logical relationship.mefthah n ss'ad (the key of good luck. people will laugh at him . 3-4 (July-D ecem ber 1964). the road of peace even if it tw ists. symbolic. says the proverb. 1920). T h is 6ara/ui-endowed person is referred to by the names am ezw ar (the first). w ho will take her? You are the one who must take her. because it explicitly states the ploughing-m arriage homology manifested by countless other indications. 4. in Kabylia. J. whether you want to or n o t. had no political role to play and that his duties w ere purely honorary.” And various other proverbs point in the same direction: "Turn with the road if it turns. parallel-cousin marriage (like marriage to a brother’s widow) is seen more than often not as a forced sacrifice which it is desirable to turn into a voluntary subm ission to the call of honour. in the case of the vengeance of honour. every sort of com prom ise and.’” But here. the best-placed relative may be aware that more distant kin would willingly steal a march on him and win the sym bolic and material advantage accruing from such a meritorious purchase. Paris: Challamel. 4 4 -4 7 solem nity of the cerem ony tending to rise with the families' position in the social hierarchy and with the genealogical distance betw een them ) . of course. the unmarried girl is the very incarnation of the group’s vulnerability. Chelhod. her paternal uncle is expected to take her for his son. who reports th a t“ in the low language of A leppo. is unquestionably boula'ras (the man of the w edding). even if she has fallen into neglect. Laoust. aneflus (the man of trust) or aqdhim (the elder).” A s the metaphor show s (the twisted road as opposed to the straight way). he who opens) (see E. T he most significant term. also quotes a Syrian proverb which expresses the same disapproval of marriage with the m other’s sister’s daughter: “ Because of his impure character. that a rival avenger is ready to step in and take over 76 77 78 79 80 . T h e same connotation is found in another designation . amghar nat-yuga (the first. pp. men will say. or. or. the action hom ologous with inaugural marriage.making a virtue of necessity . amghar (the old m an). whether by choosing the inevitable and . is to be found: although in the case of land. or by disguising the objective significance of the marriage under the ritual intended to celebrate it. “ If you do not marry the daughter of your amm. So the father’s ch ief concern is to get rid of this danger as quickly as possible by putting her under the protection of another man.” “ Even if she be ugly and worthless. “ the straightest of them is twisted as a sick le”. 113-73). prostitutes are called 'daughters of the maternal a u n t”’. the old man of the team of oxen or of the plough). Mots et choses berberes: notes de linguistique et d ’ ethnographie.e. T h is explains in part the early age of marriage. i. “ What are you to me? N ot even the son of the daughter of my m other’s sister [mis Mis kh alti]. one might say. at once undem anding and respected. he married his maternal aunt’s daughter” ( * Le mariage avec la cousine parallele dans le system e arabe ” .constitute so many opportunities to deploy strategies aimed at manipulating the objective meaning of a relationship which is never entirely unequivocal. L ’Homme. if h e seeks a wife for his son elsewhere. " T h e daughter of your r amm even if she has been abandoned. too. amas'ud (the man of luck). or. and say: *He has gon e and found a stranger for his son.scrupulously conform ing to the proprieties. more precisely. am ezw ar. aneflus.208 N otes fo r p p . and left his brother’s daughter. strategy. Similarly.” An indirect confirmation of the meaning given to marriage betw een parallel cousins may be seen in the fact that the person responsible for the solemn opening of the ploughing.

Lefevre. 1939. pp. Tunisienne et Marocaine de Legislation et Jurisprudence. ibid. For exam ple. 85 (1941). she will never say 'a curse on your father’s father’. and there will be no need to spend a great deal on the w ed d in g. in such cases. "Le mariage en droit coutum ier zem m ou r”. 475. to use their own term inology. as a "contract for the adoption of an adult m a le” (for Algeria. If you have no tea she will not dem and any from you. nothing similar occurs in the case of marriage. 41). 34-40. ” "Make your offspring out o f clay . Bousquet. she w ill bear it all and never complain about y o u . 9 -1 1. Jurisprudence Cherifiennes. " N o te sur le mariage mechrouth dans la region de G ouraya”. your grandfather and hers are one. the follow ing are typical: "Sh e will not ask you for m uch for herself. lame. M arcy. w ho are bound by all sorts of " obligations’* to the richer m em bers of the group. those with the spatially and socially m ost distant groups. Doctrine.” A m ong the eulogies of parallel-cousin marriage I have collected. she will be an insult to your ancestors. Revue Algerienne. however distant) than the use that may be made. p. all om ens of barrenness and wickedness. p. only 8 % .” " H e may do what he will with his brother’s daughter and no evil will com e from her. 3 (1935). Revue Algerienne. Hanoteau.N otes fo r p p . and there may be many ways of backing out: som etim es the son takes flight. Revue Marocaine de Legislation. which they see. in a large family in the village of Aghbala in Lesser Kabylia. H . and even if she should die of hunger in your house. and "L es vestiges de la parente maternelle en droit coutum ier berbere”. 1867). January-Februarv 1934. thereby providing them with the only acceptable excuse that a brother can be given. Thereafter he will live in greater unity with his brother. Short of this extrem e solution. pp.to marry a woman who is left-handed. with his parents’ connivance. Jurists’ fascination with what survives of matrilineal kinship has led them to take an interest in the case of the aw rith. Whereas w ith the daughter of your 'amm. T h e daughter of your 'amm will not abandon you. see G . Physical and mental infirmity presents an extrem ely difficult problem for a group which rigorously denies social status to a woman without a husband or even to a man w ithout a wife (even a widower is obliged to rush into a new marriage). and no. "You give w heat. Recherches sur la condition de la femme kabyle. Capitaine T u rb et. pp. no. but take barley. and L. Revue Africaine. if you d on ’t get a cooking pot you will get a couscous d ish . p. And there is no better proof of the ideological function of marriage to the parallel cousin (or to any female cousin in the paternal lineage. or hunchbacked (this deform ity representing an inversion of pregnancy) or who is sim ply sick and weak. G . no. for M orocco. All the more so when these infirmities are seen and interpreted through the mythico-ritual categories: one can imagine the sacrifice it represents . 40.” "You give wheat to bad teeth. doing as their father recomm ended for the sake of brotherhood [thaymats]: 'D o not listen to your w om en! ’” " T h e woman who is a stranger w ill despise you. 2 (1935). 4 9 -5 3 209 81 82 83 84 85 the revenge and the ensuing honour. 187-211: Capitaine Bendaoud. it is not uncom m on for the obligation to marrv left-over daughters to devolve upon the "poor relations’*. of the exalted representation of this ideal marriage. believing that hers are more noble than yours. of 218 male marriages (each man’s first) 34% were with fam ilies outside the lim its of the tribe. . " L ’adoption des adultes chez les Ighezrane”.in a u n i­ verse in w hich a w ife can be repudiated because she has a reputation for bringing bad luck .” A . half-blind. Poesies populaires de la K abylie du D jurdjura (Paris: Imprimerie Imperiale. Algiers: Carbonel. July 1930. " L ’adoption des adultes par contrat mixte de mariage et de travail chez les Beni M g u ild ”.

all the other unions fall within the class of ordinary marriages. She never missed an opportunity . 110-12). departures and returns. the frequency and solemnity of ritual acts increase as one m oves from marriages contracted within the un­ divided family or practical kinship. in the village. we find that these ordinary' marriages are described no differently from parallel-cousin marriage. as capable of securing agreement among the w om en and the w ife’s respect for her husband’s relatives (her khal and her khalt) at the lowest cost. that the least of its ow n members was superior to the greatest of its opponents. T h e victorious group intended to show . Le manage en Kabyhe (Fichier de D ocum entation Berbere).2 10 N otes f o r p p . at the fountain. T he other distant marriages (26% ) merely renew established relation­ ships (relationships "through the w o m en ” or "through the maternal uncles ”. T hese extra-ordinary marriages are not subject to the constraints and proprieties which apply to ordinary marriages (partly because they have no " seq u el”) : apart from the cases in which the defeated group (clan or tribe) w ould give the victorious group a w om an. and even when she had to go and present her condolences. the tw o groups exchanged w om en. on pilgrimages. 5 5 -5 4 present all the features of prestige marriages: they are all the work of one family which wants to distinguish itself from the other lineages by original matrimonial practices. it also som etim es happened that the victorious group would give the other group a woman without taking anything in return.she kept her eyes open on all occasions. far from hom e. i960. T w o thirds of the marriages (66% ) were made within the tribe (m ade up of nine villages): apart from marriages with the opposing clan. and finally to extra-ordinary marriages. or. but between families asymmetrically situated: a small family in the victorious group gave a woman to a great family in the other group. at w eddings. As I have shown elsewhere (cf. pp. virtue. but then the marriage took place not between the most powerful fam ilies. p. through marriages within close and then distant practical relationships. since the tension resulting from the rivalry implicitly triggered off by any marriage betw een different groups over the status and living conditions offered to the young wife has no reason to occur at this degree of familiarity. funerals and som etim es even large work projects). marriage with the father’s sister’s daughter is regarded. Only 6 % of the marriages were made w ithin the lineage (as against 17% in the other lineages and 39% in the field of practical relationships): 4% with the parallel cousin and 2% with another cousin (and it must be added that in tw o-thirds of these cases the fam ilies w hich make this marriage have abandoned undivided ow nership). Everything takes place as if extra-ordinary marriages gave us the opportunity to grasp in its achieved form a ceremonial which is reduced to its sim plest expression when the marriage is situated in the ordinary universe. For exam ple. when visiting friends. Esquisse. among her own fam ily. to show that there was neither winner nor loser. like marriage with the parallel cousin. in her neighbour’s houses. T h e follow ing testim ony is particularly significant: "As soon as her first son was born. * 86 87 88 89 . If we leave aside the mythical idealization (blood. by the very inequality of the union. etc. the inside) and ethical exaltation (honour. 10). which are very rare (4% ) and always have a political significance (especially for the older generations) on account of the traditional antagonism betw een the two groups. constantly maintained on the occasion of marriages. purity.) surrounding purely agnatic marriage. In this way she married off all her children w ithout difficulty and almost without noticing it ” (Yam ina Ait Amar Ou Said. Fatima set about finding his future wife.

358. Let her see her native land. which all. say the K abyles. sennif"by nif. the act of challenging. for him .” In the case of a slur upon hurma. L a K abylie et les coutumes kabyles. the indefinable attribute of the man of honour.). a m other often says when her daughter has been given to another group in which she has no acquaintances ( thamusni) and not even distant kin (arriha.” 96 A nd indeed the customary law’s. O f the man s w ho accepts. the pressure of opinion is such as to rule out any outcom e other than vengeance: if vengeance is not forthcom ing. 92 In such a system . 95 H onour in the sense of esteem is term ed sar: essar is the secret. are motivated not by a spirit of " q u ib b lin g ” but by the intent of throwing down or taking up a challen ge: the sam e is true of the (very rare) lawsuits which have been conducted in the hope of obtaining the annulm ent of a land sale in the name of the right of pre-em ption. provide for sanctions against the person who murders the man from whom he is to inherit. the order of the challenge and the order of the offence which involves the most sacred values. T o put a man to sham e is "to take away his essar” (or " to take away his lah ya”. are evidence that overt conflicts were freq u en t: " If a man kills a relative (w hose heir he is) unjustly and so as to inherit from him . "presence”. w ithout exception. open your door to the exile. H e was confusing two totally different orders. the djemaa shall take all the murderer’s g o o d s” (qanun of the Iouadhien tribe. marriage into e x ile ” (a z w a j ibarra. the coward lacking in nif can only choose between dishonour and exile.are undoubtedly the principal factors responsible for trans­ form ations of the econom ic and social hierarchy. see also pp. . resp ect): essar. radiance. 368. by the fear (alhiba) it inspires. reported in Hanoteau and Letourneux. I challenge you! I dare you! ”) is not the sam e thing as the offence w hich calls hurma into question. p. An attack on hurma tends to exclude evasions and settlem ents such as dtya. 432. " H e’s a man w h o’s agreed to eat his brother’s blood. azw ajelgh u rba). people say. albeit indirectly or thoughtlessly.” 91 T h e generalization of monetary exchanges and of the associated calculative disp o­ sitions has brought about a decline of this tradition (w hich was kept up longer in more profane exchanges such as the sale of a yoke of oxen) by destroying the am biguities which characterized it and reducing it to a sham eful and ridiculous haggling over the am ount of the bridewealth. 356.matrimonial misalliance. ignorant of the rules of honour and attem pting to redress a slur upon hurma. " glory”. is as fragile and vulnerable as it is im ponderable. It is said of a man that " essar follow s him and shines about h im ”. There is derision for the attitude of the nouveau riche w ho. riposted by challenging his offender to beat him in a race or to lay out more thousand-franc notes. som e of which com e before the courts. the failures of the reproduction m echanism s . sterility leading to disappearance of the lineage.Notes f o r p p . " T h e burnous of essar”. 5 4 -6 2 2 11 90 "Marriage afar is e x ile ” (a z w a j lab'adh d ’ anfi): "Marriage outside. 94 T h e sim ple challenge to the point of honour ( thirzi nennif. for man as for w om an . prestige. vol. etc. com pensation paid to the victim ’ family by the m urderer’s fam ily. 93 T h e countless chikayat. "lies lightly on a m an’s shoulders. the break-up of undivided ownership . in . It is also the song of the wife who has been married into exile: "O m ountain. or that he is protected by "the fence of essar” (zarb nessar) : the holder of essar is exem pt from challenge and the w ould-be offender is paralysed by its m ysterious influence.of her native land). a scent . Foreign soil is the sister of death. only the belly co u n ts.

or " con stip ated ”. "In the past. 6 2 -6 5 97 Here is just one typical testim ony relating to the breaking up of undivided ownership: "You can’t find two brothers w ho live together (za d d i) now . One evening. sitting in thajma'th. it’s all over. Sooner or later it’s bound to happen. They chatted. all observations confirm that the tendency to . being head of the fam ily. especially mothers. w ho wield a whole arsenal of curative and prophylactic rites (to suggest an insurmountable hatred. they are the enem ies of za d d i. p.212 N otes fo r p p . with her grain and her chaff. the little girl s t r e t c h e d out her arms towards her uncle. which only exceptionally intervenes in dom estic life. vol. I give her to you. the fallow of the h o u se]. Chelhod rightly points out. and cursed: ‘He is a cause of bankruptcy \lakhla ukham. 102 A s J. saying 'M ay G od make her Idir’s wife! T h at’s so. there's nothing for it. T h e women already thought that way. in . h e’d have been beaten. L a K abylie. they never fail. If they separate. everyone thinks he does too much for the others *If I only had my w ife and children. T h a t’s what all the w om en want. bubran). 'T h o se w ho were children only yesterday want to run things n o w !”’ 99 W ithout speculating as to the causal link between these facts. I w ouldn’t have to work so hard or *I would have reached the "divine throne" [the seventh h eaven ]. no one dared to ask for the heritage to be broken up. for n o th in g !” ’ (Y am ina Ait Amar Ou Said. suddenly deprived of his m other’s affection by the arrival of a new baby. If anyone had tried. w ho picked her up. after supper. am'ut. His brother’s w ife had her daughter on her lap. the younger generation demand the right to dispose of the profit of their labour. and when the men join in and start saying the same things. still less we w ho are not sprung from the same w om b. meant som ething. in order to spend it on consum er goods rather than on the svmbolic goods which would increase the fam ily’s prestige and influence. it may be noted that " illnesses of acute jealousy ” (atan an-tsismin thissamamin. goin g to market. they pay like other p eo p le” (Hanoteau and Letourneux. it’s finished.’ *He wants it all shared out ’ [itsabib ibbatu] ’: the elders refuse to 'give him the share-out ’. 100 It is significant that customary law. because the devil is in them : they do all they can to contam inate the men. Once it was 'eat your piece of wheatcake and keep q uiet’: once. Arab went to call on his elder brother (dadda). explicitly favours undivided ownership ( thidukli bukham or z a d d i): "People living in a family association pay no fine if they fight. da d d a ? You w on ’t say no? *Arab’s brother replied: ‘What does a blind man want? Light! If you relieve me of the care she gives m e. isn ’t it.’ O nce people start thinking like that. reference is made to the feeling of the little boy w ho. 10). the sickness of bitter jealousy) receive great attention from relatives. N ow . I swear that I can't even remember what relation I am to dadda Braham. It’s like a canker. T here was the authority of the elders. p423)101 A female informant gives a typical account of how this sort of marriage is arranged: "Before he had leant to walk.” 98 T he weakening of the cohesive forces (correlative with the slum p in symbolic values) and the strengthening of the disruptive forces (linked to the appearance of sources of monetary incom e and to the ensuing crisis of the peasant economv) lead to refusal of the elders’ authority and of the austere. and everyone in his heart wants it to . grew thin and pale like som eone moribund. L e m anage en K a b ylie. may God take your cares from you. cast out. everyone knows that w idow s’ houses are more prosperous than those of men [of honour]. his father found him a bride. frugal aspects of peasant existence. Now everybody insists on their rights. With their determ ination.

N otes [or pp. 65-70
marry endogam ously, which is more marked in nomadic tribes in a constant state of war than in settled tribes, tends to reappear or to be accentuated when there are threats of war or conflict ("L e mariage avec la cousine parallele dans le system e arabe”, pp. 113-73). T hose w ho perpetuate undivided ownership - or the appearances of it - often invoke the danger of separating so long as rival fam ilies remain united. It follow s from this axiom that the dom inant are functionalists, because function so defined - that is, in the sense of the structural-functionalist school - is simply the interest of the dom inant, or more precisely, the interest the dominant have in the perpetuation of a system consistent w ith their interests. T hose w ho explain matrimonial strategies by their effects - for exam ple, the "fission and fu sion ” of Murphy and Kasden are effects which one gains nothing by term ing functions - are no less remote from the reality of practices than those who invoke the efficacy of the rule. T o say that parallel-cousin marriage has the function of fission and/or fusion w ithout inquiring for whom, for w hat, to what (m easurable) extent, and under what conditions, is to resort, sham efacedly of course, to explanation by final causes instead of inquiring how the econom ic and social conditions charac­ teristic of a social formation im pose the pursuit of the satisfaction of a determinate type of interests which itself leads to the production of a determ inate type of collective effect. By m eans of secret negotiations, lhamgharth som etim es manages to interfere in a marriage being arranged entirely by the m en, and to make thislith promise to leave her com plete authority in the house, warning her that otherwise she will prevent the marriage. T he sons have som e justification in suspecting their m others of giving them for wives girls they - the mothers - will be able to dom inate w ithout difficulty. T h e marriages of the poor (especially those poor in sym bolic capital) are to those of the rich, mutatis mutandis, what female marriages are to male marriages. T he poor cannot afford to be too dem anding in matters of honour. " T h e only thing the poor man can do is show he is jealous.” T h is means that, like w om en, the poor are less concerned with the sym bolic and political functions of a marriage than w ith its practical functions, attaching, for exam ple, much more importance to the personal qualities of the spouses. T h e girl’s value on the marriage market is in a sense a direct projection of the value socially attributed to the tw o lineages of which she is the product. T h is can be seen clearly when the father has had children by several marriages: whereas the boys’ value is unrelated to their m others’ value, the girl’s value depends on the social status of their m others’ lineages and the strength of their m others’ positions in the fam ily. T h e relevant genealogy is to be found in Bourdieu, Esquisse, p. 149. "Spontaneous p sych ology” perfectly describes the "girls’ b o y ” (aqchich bu thaqchichin), coddled and cosseted by the w om en of the fam ily w ho are always inclined to keep him with them longer than the other boys; he eventually identifies with the social role created for him , and becom es a sickly, puny child, "eaten up by his many long-haired sisters”. T h e same reasons which lead the fam ily to lavish care on a product too rare and precious to be allowed to run the slightest risk - to spare him agricultural work and to prolong his education, thus settin g him apart from his friends by his more refined speech, cleaner clothes, and more elaborate food - also lead them to arrange an early marriage for him . A girl’s value rises with the number of her brothers, the guardians of her honour (in particular of her virginity) and potential allies of her future husband. T ales





107 108



N otes f o r p p . 7 0 -7 3

express the jealousy inspired by the girl with seven brothers, protected sevenfold like "a fig among the lea v es” : "A girl who was lucky enough to have seven brothers could be proud, and there was no lack o f suitors. She was sure of being sought after and appreciated. W hen she was married, her husband, her husband’s parents, the whole fam ily, and even the neighbours and their w ives respected herhad she not seven men on her side, was she not the sister of seven brothers, seven protectors? If there was the slightest argument, they came and set things right and if their sister com m itted a fault, or ever came to be repudiated, they would have taken her back home with them, respected by everyone. N o dishonour could touch them. N o one would dare to enter the lions’ d e n ” n o Particularly skilful strategies can make the m ost of the lim ited capital available, through bluff (difficult when one is operating in the area of familiar relationships) or, more sim ply, through shrewd exploitation of the am biguities of the symbolic patrimony or discrepancies betw een different com ponents of the patrimony. Although it may be regarded as part of sym bolic capital, which is itself relatively autonom ous of strictly econom ic capital, the skill w hich enables one to make the best use of the patrimony through shrewd investm ents, such as successful marriages, is relatively independent of it. T h u s the poor, w ho have nothing to sell but their virtue, can take advantage of their daughter’s marriage to gain prestigious allies or at least powerful protectors, by purveying honour to highly placed buyers. i n Inasmuch as they belong to the class of reproduction strategies, matrimonial strategies differ in no way in their logic from those strategies designed to preserve or increase sym bolic capital w hich conform to the dialectic of honour, whether they involve the buying back of land or the paying back of insults, rape, or murder; in each case, the same dialectical relationship can be observed between vulnerability (through land, w om en, the house, in short, hurma) and the protec­ tion (through men, rifles, the point of honour; in short, nif) which preserves or increases sym bolic capital (prestige, honour; in short, hurma).

C H A P T E R 2. S T R U C T U R E S A N D T H E H A B IT U S 1 T h e word disposition seem s particularly suited to express what is covered by the concept of habitus (defined as a system of dispositions). It expresses first the result of an organizing action, w ith a m eaning close to that of words such as structure; it also designates a w a y of being, a habitual state (especially of the body) and, in particular, a predisposition, tendency, propensity, or inclination. [T he sem antic cluster of " d isp osition ” is rather wider in French than in English, but as this note - translated literally - show s, the equivalence is adequate. Translator.] 2 T h e m ost profitable strategies are usually those produced, on the hither side of all calculation and in the illusion of the m ost "authentic” sincerity, by a habitus objectively fitted to the objective structures. T hese strategies w i t h o u t strategic calculation procure an im portant secondary advantage for those w ho can scarcely be called their authors - the social approval accruing from a p p a r e n t disinterestedness. 3 "H ere w e confront the distressing fact that the sam ple episode chain under analysis is a fragment of a larger segm ent of behavior which in the com plete r e c o r d contains som e 480 separate episodes. M oreover, it took only tw enty m inutes for these 480 behavior stream events to occur. If my w ife’s rate of behavior is roughly representative of that of other actors, we must be prepared to deal with

N otes f o r p p . 7 3 - 7 7

2 15



6 7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18



an inventory of episodes produced at the rate of som e 20,000 per sixteen-hour day per a c to r .. .I n a population consisting of several hundred actor-types, the number of different episodes in the total repertory must am ount to many m illions during the course of an annual cycle" (M . Harris, The N ature o f Cultural Things (N ew York: Random H ouse, 1964), pp. 74-5)See A . T ouraine, Sociologie de Vaction, Paris: Seu il, 1965, and "L a raison d'etre d’une sociologie de Taction”, Revue Frangaise de Sociologie, 7 (O ctober-D ecem ber 1966), pp. 518-27. J.-P. Sartre, L ’etreetle neant (Paris :G allim ard, 1943), p. 510 (Being and Nothingness (L ondon: M ethuen, 1957), pp. 434-5 [translation em en d ed ]); see also Sartre, "Repose a L efort”, L es Temps M odem es, no. 89 (A pril 1963), pp. 1571-1629. L ’etre el le neant, p. 669; Being and Nothingness, p. 580. L ’etre et le neant, p. 521; Being and Nothingness, p. 445. E. D urkheim , Les regies de la methode sociologique, 18th ed. (Paris: P U F , 1973), p. 18; English trans. T he Rules o f Sociological M ethod (N e w Y o rk : Free Press, 1964), p. 17. L’ etre et le neant, p. 543; Being and Nothingness, p. 465. Critique de la raison dialectique (Paris: Gallimard, i960), p. 161. Critique, p. 305. Critique, p. 357. Regies, p. 19; Rules, p. 18. Critique, p. 133. Critique, pp. 234 and 281. Critique, p. 294. Critique, p. 179. Can one avoid attributing to the permanence of a habitus the constancy with which the objective intention of the Sartrian philosophy (despite its language) asserts itself against the subjective intentions of its author, that is, against a permanent project of " conversion ”, a project never more m anifest and m anifestly sincere than in certain anathemas which would perhaps be less violent if they were not redolent of conscious or unconscious self-critique? (T h u s, for exam ple, one needs to bear in mind the fam ous analysis of the cafe waiter for a full appreciation of a sentence such as this: " T o all those w ho take them selves for angels, their neighbour’s activities seem absurd, because such people presum e to transcend the human enterprise by refusing to take part in i t ” : Critique, pp. 182-3). And when, in his analysis of the relationship betw een Flaubert and the bourgeoisie, Sartre makes the awakening of consciousness the basis of an existence and an oeuvre, he testifies that it is not sufficient to becom e aware of class condition in order to be liberated from the lasting dispositions it produces (see P. Bourdieu, "Champ du pouvoir, cham p intellectuel et habitus de classe”, Scolies, 1 (1971), pp. 7-26, esp. pp. 12-14). See the whole chapter entitled " R echtsordnung, K onvention und Sitte ”, in which Max Weber analyses the differences and transitions between custom , convention, and law (W irtschaft und Gesellschaft (C ologne and Berlin: Kiepenhauer und W itsch, 1964), vol. 1, pp. 240-50, esp. pp. 246-^9; English trans. "L aw , Convention and C u stom ”, Economy and Society, ed. G . Roth and C. W ittich (N ew York: Bedminster Press, 1968), 1, pp. 319-33). "We call this subjective, variable probability - which som etim es excludes doubt and engenders a certainty sui generis and which at other tim es appears as no more than a vague glim m er - philosophical probability, because it refers to the exercise of the higher faculty whereby we com prehend the order and the rationality of

2 l6

N otes fo r pp. 79-8$
things. All reasonable men have a confused notion of similar probabilities; this then determ ines, or at least justifies, those unshakable beliefs we call common sense ” (A . Cournot, Essai sur les fondements de la connaissance et sur les caracteres de la critique philosophique (Paris: H achette, 1922; 1st ed ., 1851), p. 70). E. Durkheim , devolu tion pedagogique en France (Paris: Alcan, 1938), p . 16. R. Ruyer, Paradoxes de la conscience et limites de I'automatisme (Paris: Albin M ichel, 1966), p. 136. T h is universalization has the same lim its as the objective conditions of which the principle generating practices and works is the product. T h e objective conditions exercise simultaneously a universalizing effect and a particularizing effect, because they cannot hom ogenize the agents whom they determ ine and w hom they consti­ tute into an objective group, w ithout distinguishing them from all the agents produced in different conditions. O ne of the merits of subjectivism and moralism is that the analyses in which it condem ns, as inauthentic, actions subject to the objective solicitations of the world (e.g . Heidegger on everyday existence and "das M a n ” or Sartre on the “ spirit of seriousness”) dem onstrate, per absurdum, the im possibility of the authentic existence that would gather up all pregiven significations and objective determ inations into a project of freedom . T he purely ethical pursuit of authenticity is the privilege of the leisured thinker who can afford to dispense with the econom y of thought which " inauthentic ” conduct allows. G . W. Leibniz, “ Second eclaircissem ent du system e de la communication des substances’* (1696), in Oeuvres philosophiques, ed. P. Janet (Paris: de Lagrange, 1866), vol. 11, p. 548. T h u s, ignorance of the surest but best-hidden foundation of group or class integration leads some (e.g . Aron, D ahl, etc.) to deny the unity of the dominant class with no other proof than the im possibility of establishing empirically that the mem bers of the dominant class have an explicit policy, expressly imposed by explicit co-ordination, and others (Sartre, for example) to see the awakening of class consciousness - a sort of revolutionary cogito bringing the class into existence by constituting it as a “ class for itse lf” - as the only possible foundation of the unity of the dominated class. L eibniz, “ Second eclaircissem ent”, p. 548. Were such language not dangerous in another way, one would be tempted to say, against all forms of subjectivist voluntarism , that class unity rests fundamentally on the “ class unconscious”. T h e awakening of "class consciousness” is not a primal act constituting the class in a blaze of freedom ; its sole efficacy, as with all actions of sym bolic reduplication, lies in the extent to which it brings to consciousness all that is im plicitly assumed in the unconscious mode in the class habitus. T h is takes us beyond the false opposition in which the theories of acculturation have allowed them selves to be trapped, w ith, on the one hand, the realism of the structure which represents cultural or linguistic contacts as contacts between cultures or languages, subject to generic laws (e.g . the law of the restructuring of borrowings) and specific laws (those established by analysis of the s t r u c t u r e s specific to the languages or cultures in contact) and on the other hand the realism o f the element, which em phasizes the contacts betw een the societies (regarded as populations) involved or, at best, the structures of the relations betw een those societies (dom ination, etc.). The People o f Alor, M inneapolis: U niversity of M innesota Press, 1944. Culture and Personality (N ew York: Random H ouse, 1965), p. 86.

21 22 23




27 28


30 31

N otes f o r p p . 8 8-92

2 17

32 If iiliterate societies seem to have a particular bent for the structural games which fascinate the anthropologist, their purpose is often quite simply m nem onic: the remarkable homology to be observed in Kabvlia between the structure of the distribution of the fam ilies in the village and the structure of the distribution of graves in the cemetery (Ait Hichem , T izi Hibel) clearly makes it easier to locate the traditionally anonymous graves (with expressly transmitted landmarks added to the structural principles). 33 B. Berelson and G . A. Steiner, Human Behavior (N ew York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1964), p. 193. 34 The Singer o f the Tales (Cambridge, M a ss.: Harvard U niversity Press, i960), p. 30. 35 Ibid. p. 32. 36 Ibid. p. 24. 37 T hus, in the game of qochra, which the children play in early spring, the cork ball (the qochra) which is fought for, passed and defended, is the practical equivalent of woman. In the course of the game the players must both defend them selves against it and, possessing it, defend it against those trying to take it away. At the start of the match, the leader of the game repeatedly asks, "W hose daughter is sh e ? ” but no one will volunteer to be her father and protect her: a daughter is always a liability for men. And so lots have to be drawn for her, and the unlucky player w ho gets her must accept his fate. He now has to protect the ball against the attacks of all the others, while at the same time trying to pass it on to another player; but he can only do so in an honourable, approved way. A player whom the “ father” manages to touch with his stick, telling him “ S h e’s your daughter”, has to acknowledge defeat, like a man temporarily obliged to a socially inferior family from whom he has taken a w ife. For the suitors the tem ptation is to take the prestigious course of abduction, whereas the father wants a marriage that will free him from guardianship and allow him to re-enter the gam e. T h e loser of the game is excluded from the world of men ; the ball is tied under his shirt so that he looks like a girl who has been got pregnant. 38 It is said that formerly the wom en used to go to market alone; but they are so talkative that the market w ent on until the market time of the follow ing week. So the men turned up one day with sticks and put an end to their w ives’ gossip ing. . .I t can be seen that the “ m y th ” "exp lain s” the present division of space and work by invoking the "evil nature” of w om en. When a man wants to say that the world is topsy-turvy, he says that “ the w om en are going to market 39 A full presentation of the analysis of the internal structure of the Kabvle house, of which it has only been possible to give the indispensable outline here, can be found in P. Bourdieu, Esquisse d ’une theorie de la pratique (Paris and Geneva: Libraine D roz, 1972), pp. 45-69. 40 T h is means to say that the “ learning by d o in g ” hypothesis, associated with the name of Arrow (see K. J. Arrow, “ T he Econom ic Implications of Learning by D o in g ”, Review of Economic Studies, 29, 3, no. 80 (June 1962), pp. 155-73) is a particular case (whose particularity needs to be specified) of a very general law: every made product - including sym bolic products such as works of art, gam es, m yths, etc. - exerts by its very functioning, particularly by the use made of it, an educative effect which helps to make it easier to acquire the dispositions necessary for its adequate use. 41 Erikson’s analyses of the Yoruk might be interpreted in the same light (see E. H. Erikson, "Observations on the Yoruk: Childhood and World Im age” (U niversity of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, vol. 35, no. 10, Berkeley: U niversity of California Press, 1943), pp. 257-302).



the latter "salutations” or "sen tim en ts” . and the impersonal . 2 T h e history of perspective offered by Panofsky (E . Individu et societe chez Spinoza (Paris: Editions de M inuit. see P. practical mastery of what are called the rules of politeness. as H egel does when in the Phenomenology of Mind he speaks of " habit as dexterity 48 For a sociological application of these analyses. doubtless. L eipzig and Berlin.can deliver it only at the price of a sort of gymnastics intended to evoke it: mimesis.46 T hus. H. " D ie Perspektive als 'sym bolische F orm ’”. Revue Fran$aise de Sociologie. which can never have the objectivity and distance stem m ing from objectification in writing. of a set of oppositions constituting the im plicit axiomatics of a determinate political order: in the example considered these are (in France) the opposition between men and w om en. 92-97 42 E. In reality these system s remain. in order to make a radical break with the idealist tradition of "symbolic forms*’ one would have to relate . 258-330) is an exemplary contribution to a social history of conven­ tional m odes of cognition and expression. 1969). and together they reinforce the tendency of structuralist anthropology to credit historical system s with more coherence than they have or need to have in order to function. and in particular the art of adjusting each of the available formulae (e.2l8 N otes f o r pp. presupposes the im plicit mastery. A m ong other consequences. which governs the subtle grading of marks of respect. p. pp. the former requiring " h om age”. P. Vortrage der Bibliothek Warburg. Matheron. 260m. pp. Panofsky. Bourdieu.-even if these patches are constantly undergoing unconscious and intentional restructurings and reworkings tending to integrate them into the system . 1. which refuses to take account of the practical functions w hich symbolic system s may perform. G E N E R A T I V E S C H E M E S A N D P R A C T I C A L L O G IC 1 T h e antigenetic prejudice leading to unconscious or overt refusal to seek the genesis of objective structures and internalized structures in individual or collec­ tive history com bines with the antifunctionalist prejudice. 47 One of the reasons for the use of the term habitus is the wish to set aside the com m on conception of habit as a mechanical assembly or preformed programme. equals.349. or private. 319-50. 1948). 109m and p. "things of shreds and patches”. (January-March *974)» PP‘ 3~ 42. like culture as described by Lowie.as Plato noted . the opposition betw een the personal.English translation forthcoming. and inferiors. 1924-5. hence the recognition. In societies which lack any other recording and objectifying instrum ent. vol. the opposition between the older and the younger. it follows that it is never detached from the body which bears it and which .g. in The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child (N ew York: International U niversities Press 1945). "Childhood and Tradition in T w o American T ribes ”. 45 A. 15. "A venirde classe et causalite du probable”. 43 Contributions to Psycho-analysis 1921-/945 (L on d on : Hogarth Press. T he body is thus con­ tinuously m ingled with all the knowledge it reproduces. C H A P T E R 3. at the end of a letter) to the different classes of possible addressees.with administrative or business letters. inherited knowledge can survive only in its embodied state. 44 Every group entrusts to bodily automatisms those principles most basic to it and most indispensable to its conservation. and finally the hierarchical opposition between superiors. Erikson.

T h e degree to which the principles of the habitus are objectified in knowledges fixed and taught as such varies considerably from one area of activity to another: a rough count indicates that the relative frequency of highly codified sayings.N otes fo r p p . whereas it is the most influential members of the group. official. obligatory rites w hich. the scholar. while presenting the marked m om ents of the agrarian year as the ordinate points of a linear. i. such as the w om en’s w eaving and pottery calendar. minor. such as the organization of the space inside the house. or animals. autum n). and the sm ith or the butcher) inclines the different categories of agents (w hose practical calendars. in terms of their degree of objectification. in particular. and the cooking calendar) to the divisions of the day or the ages of human life. Striking evidence of the connivance between the anthropologist and his informant in legalist formalism may be found in the fact that the hierarchy of domains. not to mention areas apparently given over to arbitrariness. the one which most directly bears the mark of Islamic contributions. that one generally finds the greatest com petence in private magic. It is am ong the old women and the sm iths. like the agrarian rites. proverbs. to the structure of the groups producing and reproducing them and the position of those groups in the social structure. T he (arbitrary) mode of representation which has been adopted here to reconsti­ tute the logic im manent in representations and practices (and which runs the risk of encouraging a “ structuralist ” reading through the effect of a synoptic diagram) highlights the turning-points or thresholds (spring. such as the rites of curative or love magic. the oldest men of the most respected families. both of whom occupy an am biguous position in the group. and rites declines as one m oves from the agrarian calendar (and the calendars closely associated with it. w hich wielded sufficient authority to im pose a genuine religious code. T h is capital of knowledge is not distributed uniformly among all m em bers of the group (although the disparities are never so great as those found in literate societies with educational sy stem s): the division of labour between the sexes or the age-groups and (albeit in a rudimentary form) between the professions (with the oppositions between the peasant. are objectively orchestrated) to practise very different degrees of accu­ mulation of the various instrum ents handed on by the cultural tradition and. more or l e s s matches their relative prominence in anthropologists’ data-collecting. involve the whole group because they fulfil the same function for every m em ber of the group. colours. which are already less codified. though different. who are generally the most adept in the rites of collective magic.those which are conveyed by the ephem erides and almanacs and have long been diffused through the intermediary of the literate . T h is sort of homogenization and unification was successfully undertaken by the great priestly bureaucracies of antiquity. which generally make use of transparent sym bolism and sim ple ritual strategies. with its rites performed on fixed dates regardless of fluctuations in the climate and the diversity of economic and social conditions. Because its social function puts it into com petition with the M oslem calendar and the learned or semi-learned traditions associated with it . such as the transference of good or evil on to a person or an object. intended to serve private ends. oriented 8-2 . of all the different domains of the tradition. 9 7-9 8 219 3 4 5 6 historical forms of perception and representation more systematically to the social conditions in which they are produced and reproduced (by express or diffuse education). the parts of the body. optional rites.the agrarian calendar is. predisposes and prepares them in very different ways to memorize those instrum ents which are objectified in the form of codified (and som etim es written) knowledge.e.

Sim ilarly. 10 0 -10 4 sequence (running from autum n to sum m er. sex. broad daylight (as opposed to night and m orning). and more especially the hottest m om ent of the sum m er day. etc. The "return of a z a l” is essentially marked by a change in the rhythm of daily a c t i v i t y . husum. w eaving.) or as the points on a circle w hich may be obtained by folding the diagram along the axis X Y .e. etc. to draw w ool. in m id-A pril. In a general w ay. qa. \[ z imirghane. spring. D oubtless for the same reason. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 . like the marriage of the earth and the sky. working at night. Other taboos of hayan and husum: ploughing. by a mnemonic device used by the marabouts. nisan. and the stubborn­ ness in anim als w hich makes them resist training. or a Negro) who had issued a challenge. or February. or buy an anim al”. w eddings. burgeon. in the form of a s e r ie s .it is el faragh. all the beings on the earth marry. T h is was how an informant spoke of la'didal. tell the shepherds to flee to the village. the place of ruh. a period of dreadful cold w h o s e com ing can never be predicted. one night in the month of bujember (no one knows which o n e ) water turns to blood. the male sou l). em ptiness. celebrate a marriage. during husum. iquranen).220 N otes f o r p p . thamgharth. in the last case. so sleep is excluded from the first day of sum m er: people take care not to sleep that day for fear of falling ill or losing their courage or their sense of honour (the seat of which is the liver. hayan. hold a feast. from west to east. a set of features present in a particular region is itself an entirely artificial syncretic operation. the series is also som etim es designated by the first consonants of the roots of the Berber names for the divisions: z a . all work on the land is forbidden . i. or in spring. Thafsuth. to Lesser Kabylia.” And according to informants in th e Djurdjura region. It is inauspicious "to start any building work.) borrowed a few days from the next period so as to punish an old woman (or a goat. thimgharine. ahgan or thiftirine. preparing w ool. untie. to the most Islamized areas or to li t e r a t e informants. and in the passive. It is m entioned in a song which the w om en s in g w hile working at the flour mill: " If la'didal are like the nights of hayan for m e . Just as acts of fecundation are excluded from the month of M ay. el qw arah. w’hich is analysed below. Marriages take place either in autum n. which tells how winter (or January'. evening to morning. at the tim e of in sfa. nisan. Sterile w om en are recom m ended to eat boiled herbs picked during natah. flower. el szcalah. is related to efsu. Smoke is som etim es credited with fertilizing powers. w hich. to undo. ra. according to a scholarly tradition. natah. it is thanks to its m nem onic qualities that informants almost always cite the series of the divisions of the beginning of sum m er ( izegzaw en. amerdil. sa. the three main series are indicated in the diagram. earth dug up on that day is used in the magic rites intended to reveal the weakening or disappearance of the point of honour (nif) in m en. nisan. T h is sem i-scholarly series is som etim es called ma. iwraghen. A z a l denotes the daytim e. T hese s e r ie s could (for the sake of sim plicity) be said to correspond to the Djurdjura r e g i o n . people refrain from any activity involving the future. Although it m ust not be forgotten that to bring together. Other informants even say it is im possible to know which is the first day of winter. imellalen. At Ain A ghbel. el mwalah. w hen. to open out. devoted to rest. e lfw a ta h . and. in which each name is represented by its initial. fin. qin. making and firing pottery. T hese names refer to the legend of the borrowed days. ma.

or ought to perceive. such as sort oft pretty much. W. in which the surface expanse is more or less successfully exploited to represent system atic relations and links w hich it would be difficult to make out in the flow of d iscou rse” (A . 1922). For exam ple. 309-11.1 1 0 221 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 mainly act on the fig-trees (w hose cycle is relatively independent of that of the cereals. with very different assum ptions and m ethods. Sm oke. 18-44. The Algerians (B oston: Beacon Press. a synthesis of the moist and the dry obtained by burning moist things (green plants. T h e logic of rite and m yth belongs to the class of natural logics. one of the founders of “ generative sem an tics”. H usserl. Cours de linguistique generale (Paris: Payot. Boyce G ibson (N ew York and L ondon: Collier. family trees. A similar effect may be observed in any social formation in which there coexist unequally legitim ate practices and know ledges: when m em bers of the working classes are questioned about their cultural practices and preferences. 1972).N otes f o r p p . and accompanied by a relatively small num ber of rites. One must never lose sight of the conditions w hich have to be fulfilled for a genuine universe of discourse to appear: the intellectual and material equipm ent needed for the successive operations of methodical recording. T h e logic of practice ow es a number of its properties to the fact that what logic calls the “ universe of d iscou rse” there remains im plicit. and the philosophy of language are beginning to explore. joker. 105-11. and vegetation gathered from damp spots. p. "an essentially linear series” whose "mode of construction obliges us to use a successive. pp. pp. akherraf. 1959). linguistics. it is often said that if there is a severe sirocco in smaim there will be cold weather and snow in lyali. to tell funny and often obscene stories. 1962). p. A number of proverbs explicitly link the tw o p eriod s: for exam ple. m eaning “ to pick and eat fresh fig s”. Bourdieu. Baskin as Course in General Linguistics (N ew York: Philosophical Library. R. and also “ to joke. "La segm entarite au M aghreb”. according to George Lakoff. historical atlases. In a sort of com m entary on Saussure’s second principle (“ the signifier unfolds in tim e and has the characteristics it gets from tim e ”: F. in its practical state. de Saussure. L'Homme. L'H om m e. and som etim es “ to talk n on sen se” ( itskhernf "he’s ram bling”. ow ing to the fact that it involves no intervention ''against nature”). 1 0 4 . linear series of signs to express relationships which the mind perceives. 103. Cournot contrasts the properties of spoken or written discourse.. is believed to have the power to “ fecu n d ate” the fig-trees. 6. mathematical tables. 4 (1968). E. See J. the “ fuzzy lo g ic ” of ordinary language is characterized by its use of “ fuzzy co n cep ts” and “ h ed g es”. trans. they select those which they regard as closest to the dom inant definition of legitimate practice. T he word lakhrif is related to the verb kherref. and “ Relations de dependance et manipulation de la violence en K a b v lie”. such as poplars or oleander). which subject truth-values to a deform ation which classical logic cannot account for. Set out in greater detail in P. etc. i960). 70). p. trans. Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology. which logic. pp. 14-20. buffoon). 8. loosely speaking. branches. C ournot). Essai sur les fondements de la connaissance et sur les caracteres de la critique philosophique (Paris: H achette. in the style of the wandering singers”. pp. the leisure required to carry . 2 (1966). Favret. W. sim ultaneously and in a different ord er”. rather. 364). fum igation is identified with caprification. with “ synoptic tables.

J.though som e are more dependent than others. the tem pering of iron. Certain inform ants proceed in just this way w hen. the double link.with the m axim um rain or snow com ing in N ovem ber and D ecem ber. or more precisely. 1962). In another tale. cannot be dissociated from a reasonably expectation of material and/or sym bolic profit. and breathes out a jet of poisonous flame (asqi.g . Another m odulation technique is association by assonance. either of which may be taken. wet season. the plurality of m eanings of the same so u n d ). in a transfigured form . in other cases. L a civilisation chinoise (Paris: A . from N ovem ber to April . offers a crossroads.222 N otes f o r p p . by sound and by m eaning. a choice between two paths. to connections which are sym boli­ cally overdeterm ined (a zk a d a z q a . L a geometrie dans le mondc sensible. etc. tom orrow is the grave). from May to October .e . whereas the poorest farmers often have to wait until they can borrow or hire a yoke of oxen. water is trust) or. It can be seen. passim and esp. they reconstruct the calendar by means of successive dichotom ies. 1929).for ploughing . that the points of view adopted on the house are opposed in accordance with the very logic (m ale/fem ale) which they a p p ly : this sort of reduplication. avoiding mere recitation of the sem i-scholarly series.1 1 6 out these operations and analyse their products. even if not experienced as such. i. swells. pp. Colin. on the other hand. the practical logic of ritual exploits the duality of sound and sense (and. the snake which a sterile woman had brought up as her son is rejected by its first w ife: it draw s itself up. since the owners of the best land and the best oxen can plough im m ediately after the first rains. in the orientation of the house). T hese schem es can be grasped only in the objective coherence of the ritual 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 . from the existence of a market for discourse and metadiscourse. see M .the driest m onths being June. p. e. finite world and a doxic experience of that world. 1 1 0 . results in a circular reinforcem ent which no doubt makes an important contribution towards confining agents in a closed. but the generative schem es make it possible to find substitutes and to turn external necessities and constraints to good account within the logic of the rite itself (and this explains the perfect harmony between technical reason and mythic reason to be found in more than one case. founded on the correspondence betw een social divisions and logical divisions. also means poisoning) which reduces her to ashes. at different tim es and in different contexts. w ith a preface by Bertrand Russell (Paris: P U F . followed by a drier period in January and more rain in February and March . July. For similar observations. even if the soil is sticky. dry season. and A ugust. w ithout contradiction.) In the same w ay. an * interest” in such activities ' w hich. and the same is true of reaping . A s in poetry. in passing. the rhythm s of the farming year.and the hot. the sym bolic equipm ent the rites can use naturally depends on what is in season (although in som e cases reserves are set aside specially for ritual use). N icod . 43-4. 332. the clim atic rhythm s as seen w hen translated into the alternation of labour periods and production periods w hich structures the farming year. (T h e pattern of rainfall is characterized by the opposition between the cold. it may lead to connections with no mythico-ritual significance (aman d laman. T h e farmers’ dependence on the climate was obviously exacerbated by the lim ited traction power available .those richest in sym bolic capital can assem ble the labour force required for a quick harvest. T h e agrarian calendar reproduces.and the inefficiency of the techniques used sw ingplough and sickle . Granet.

"La sociologie fran^aise”. hot/cold. I first mastered practically: the concept of "resurrection” is what the outsider. needs in order to "understand” rites generated practically from these schem es. E.N otes fo r p p . 38 Cf. as if they were not unaware of the rule (which they would not be capable of form ulating expressly) that the greater the ratio betw een the two arms of the lever. dull/brilliant. Bachelard. the less force is needed to counterbalance a resistance . . F. 37 ^ id . a t these interm ediate or lower levels . Between the tw o obviously stands the unconscious finality of the m i n d . . 137. I t i s . 1967). . 39 wModern sociologists and psychologists resolve such problem s by appealing to the unconscious activity of the mind. Cf. p. according to C hom sky. 42 M ost of these meanings are expressed through euphem ism s: e. and in particular the highest variety. the rule that a loss in displacem ent is a gain in force. but when Durkheim was w riting. lacking practical mastery of the schem es of " opening ” and " sw ellin g” and of the objective intent to which they are subordinate.w ith ufthyen). p.that the apparent opposition betw een the individual and society disappears. T h is explains w hy D urkheim foundered in what he regarded as an irreducible antinom y. 35 T h is section owes much to Jean N icod. in L a sociologie au X X e siecle. L a geometne dans le monde sensible.such as that of unconscious thought . in one case in which an informant "related ”. although they can som etim es be almost directly apprehended in discourse. 1961). ed. 1947).” (C . . But then he runs the risk of giving a false "understanding” both of the "understanding” which such a concept makes possible. w hen for no apparent reason an informant "associates” two ritual practices which have nothing in com m on except a schem e (e. has no other basis). Apprentissageetactivitespsychologiques(Paris: P U F . and of the practical "understanding” which does not need concepts. and it becomes possible to m ove from one point of view to the oth er.g . . the word-play of philosophy. vol. : the blindness of history and the purposiveness of consciousness. or the arcana of a philosophy of nature postulating a mysterious harmony betw een the structure of the human brain and the structure of the physical world.g . L a poetique de I’ espace (Paris: P U F . T here is no reason to invoke the mysteries of an unconscious versed in physics.and the w edding meal . psychology and modern linguistics had not yet reached their main conclusions. . the sense " extin gu ish ” is conveyed by ferrah. the meal eaten on the first day of spring . It m ight be interesting to know w hy the fact that the manipulation of language presupposes the acquisition of abstract structures and of rules for the carrying out of those operations (such as. 34 Workmen w ho use a w ooden roller and an iron bar to raise a stone are applying the rule of the com position of parallel forces in the same direction . 201. 527). they know how to vary the position of the fulcrum depending on their exact purpose and the w eight or volum e of the load. 41 T he most accom plished prov erbs are those which manage to com bine the necessity of a linguistic connection (w hich may range from mere assonance to a comm on root) with the necessity of a mythical connection (paronomasia. L e N y . p. after a learning process analogous (mutatis mutandis) to that of the native agent. the non-recursive nature of inversion) should arouse such w onderm ent. j 18-121 223 actions to w hich they give rise. 11. to gladden. by describing them one after the other. G . Gurvich and Wr.or more generally. Levi-Strauss. 36 Q uoted in G . . Moore (Paris: P U F .with adhris . 40 T h is is why I cannot help feeling a certain unease at w riting and describing in words what. J. 43 Basic senses: heavy/light. the schem e of sw elling.

54 Measuring operations. h e a l t h (a child ’s. to neglect. spitting d istan ce. who has no m oustache. 1 (Paris: Editions de M inuit.1 2 7 44 T o cast behind is also. . . . 52 T he path (abridh) and "com panionship” (elw am ) are opposed to emptiness (lakhla). despise (''to put behind one’s ear”). u m p t e e n . a small minority of trouble­ m a k e r s . to some e x te n t . 19m and p. . the path (and the crossroads) are fullness within em ptiness. . w hich "gets b y ” in a “ rough and ready” way. . . and hence the furthest removed from rite.. p. Thajma'th is that which can be em pty w ithin fullness. synkrisis and diakrisis. 50 T h e preponderance assigned to the male principle. . finishing. . . v ir tu a lly . 1 2 2 . . a n d so it must be avoided and replaced with euphem ism s or neutralized with ritual formulae. genesis and phthora. breakage. a stone’s th ro w . 51 T h e duality of woman is retranslated into the logic of kinship in the form of the opposition betw een the patrilateral cross cousin and the matrilateral cross cousin.. the redhead (azegw ay) w ho sow s discord everywhere. . A 5. . stopping. . not to put too fine a point upon it. and there find a sm all stone and a few sticks. Bollack. 53 T h e way to get abundant butter is to go unseen to a crossroads used by the flocks. for exam ple. to "solitude. .. or wealth is an im plicit num bering. at a rough g u e ss. for exam ple). 45 Even in ordinary language. or more sim ply. when everyone forgives offences. tolerab ly. . 25113. once in a blue m o o n . w ho of all the pre-Socratic thinkers is the closest to the objective truth of rite. . all b u t. any m om ent n o w . Metaphysics. . . ritual formulae are uttered (as they are every time anything is measured or w eighed).. not to face up to. uses terms as manifestly social as philia and neikos to name these tw o principles of ritual action. sort o f . 986a-22sq. etc. despite the disapproval of certain form s of excess of the male virtues. Republic 393d). ritual expressions are used to avoid certain num bers. leaving.. w hich im pose lim itation.224 N otes fo r p p . so to s p e a k .. and on the other hand. som ething lik e. Cutting operations (extinguishing. hence a cutting. see J. . . 48 It is significant that Em pedocles. is never overtly recognized or declared. and w ho refuses indulgence at the last judgm ent. . finiteness. just a t i c k . "playing it by ear” and "follow ing its nose all is grist that com es to this mill. such as "M ay G od not measure out his bounty to u s ! ” Praise of beauty. 49 On the identification of the opposition between. at a more superficial level.. are h e d g e d with euphem ism s and magical precautions: the master of the land refrains from measuring his own crop and entrusts the task to a khammes or a neighbour ( w h o does it in his ab sen ce). *.. on the one hand. . A few specim ens: I ’ll be back in a seco n d . . it w ould not be difficult to find the elem ents of a description of this approximate logic. through mime (cf. . 46 T his is exactly Plato’s complaint against the m ythologists and poets: that they are incapable of re-producing a practice other than by " identifying them selves with som eone e ls e ” dia mimeseos. w ithin a hair’s breadth.. . such as "the D e v il’s point of honour [nt/J But it is nonetheless possible to set in this class the amengur. not to confront. never in a thousand years.. Empedocle. . . the man w ithout m ale descendants. means that the opposition between the female-male (the male tem pered by union) and the male-male. much the sa m e. most of the t i m e . . the w ild ern ess” (elwahch). . vol. only a short ste p .. whom nobody wants as a companion in the market.. . . closin g. . . the stone is put in the dish in which the milk is kept and the sticks are burnt so that the smoke impregnates it (Westermarck). -47 Aristotle. which enables it to impose its effects in every union. . etc. taking an etern ity . 1965). the average is in the region o f . not e n tir e ly .

64 Salt has strong links with the dry and with sterility: the words m eaning to be hot. The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (L ondon: Allen and U nw in. as a magical protection. says winter. w itless).often replaced by euphem ism s based on dher. w itches. 59 " Chchetwa telsemlaqab netsat d yiwen w ergaz”. is supposed to confer the im m unity needed in order to confront the fearful forces enclosed in the vagina (cf. etc. “ T h e cursed broom of M ay” is the exact opposite of the blessed broom of the "first day of sp rin g” : it brings ruin. and sterility to the house or stable in which it is used. the use of the cauris. when there is nothing to be done but try to anticipate the future. 62 May marriages suffer every sort of calamity and will not last. T h is is why the prognostication rites concerning family life and especially the com ing harvest are similar to those applied to pregnant w om en. the knives I will set to w ork. W hen I arise. T he sky shows its disapproval by sending hail and storms. he thinks his acts are of no consequence. pp. 63 T hese various instruments . Fichier d A rchives Berberes. dry if the clay is dry.” 65 T he schem e of turning round and turning over is set to work in all the rites . hom ologous with night. neat) is a purificatory cut which.especially the sickle . an expression m eaning “ T here is abundance” is used. 58 W inter. and it is reckoned that the year will be wet if the clay is wet in the m orning. overturning. w hen the “ black” nights give way to the “ w h ite ’* nights) and at the tim e o f the renewal rites which mark the start of the new year and are centred on the house and the kanun (replacing the three hearthstones. also mean to be spiced. W shall kill your cattle. stupid. as Durkheim suggests.N otes fo r p p . moreover. 3I4-'S )57 D ivination practices are particularly frequent on the first day of ennayer (in the middle of lya li. a sym bol of the vulva. to be clean. em ptiness. for example. such as the djnun.or of the old wom an).) are named by means of euphem ism s: for exam ple. or the milk are all gone. without intelligence (salt is sprinkled on babies so they w ill not be insipid. scorching. as opposed to insipid. holds no w edding-feast. 56 Circum cision ( khatna or thara . is the time w hen the oxen sleep in the stable (the night and the north of the house). whose eggs are sym bols of fecundity. no. 61 In the tale called "the jackal’s marriage”. mates during lya li). the hearthstones are coated with a paste of w et clay. T h e man who acts frivolously is said to “ think he is scattering sa lt”. D urkheim . i. the harvest. 55 It is also known that the harvesters wear a leather apron similar to the sm ith ’s (thabanda). the jackal marries outside his own species. each of whom has her particular day of the week. the destructive power attributed to menstrual blood.e.” 60 T h e return of bad weather is som etim es explicitly attributed to the m aleficent action of the “ old women ” of this or that village of the tribe or the neighbouring tribes. the days of the goat . and it is regarded as unlucky if it is a goat that com es first. he marries the camel and. the sheep and goats are called ou t.1 3 0 22 5 breaking. at dawn. 1 2 7 . w hitew ash­ ing the houses). to say that the stores. lucky if it is a sheep (cf. the sexual abstinence im posed on important occasions) and especially those w hich sexual intercourse unleashes by effecting the union of contraries (E . 1915).are used in the prophylactic rites against the malignant powers of the w et. 19 (January 1947). Oil shares these connotations: "T he sun is as scorching as o il. the time of sexual intercourse (the partridge. T h is is explained not only by the inaugural role of the first day of ennayer but also by the fact that it com es in a period of waiting and uncertainty. without bite. strong (virile).

his first haircut. Les K ebailesde Djerdjera (M arseilles: Carnion. 242-51. brings good luck. meat (raw). who are known to be the very opposite of the “ bringer of good fortune” ( elfal). D evaux. 11. curd. which is in itself a point of reversal. when they speak of the fig season. cheese). v n . 1859).g. and their role as a lightning conductor does not entitle them to a high place in the hierarchy of prestige and honour. " T he Spirits of the Corn and the W ild ”. is one of the favourite spots for such rites. green. etc. In this way the Negro or the sm ith. and these are eaten raw (w a g h za z. puts arkasen on her feet. Marx. x iii “ T h e time of p roduction”.in particular all the cerem onies marking his first entry into the male world. T he position of the family responsible for inaugurating the ploughing is no less am biguous than that of the smith (elfal is never mentioned in relation to him ). like the in sla tires. The Golden Bough. may fulfil a beneficent function as “ takersaway of ill fortu n e”.and small-scale fighting in the fig season used to lead som e observers. . it seems to be agreed that everyone shall be agitated at that tim e. corn (unripe). th izazw ath . A zeg za w brings good fortune: to make a present of som ething green. like the ox sacrificed in autum n). operations which may not be entrusted to a woman except in case of absolute necessity. and the culm inating cerem ony of circum cision. yield abundant milk. T h e cattle. to wonder if the source of the ebullience reigning at that time of year did not lie in the figs them selves: “ There is one season in particular w hen it really seem s that m en ’s minds are more heated than any other tim e . it concentrated the vital potency of the whole.226 Notes f o r p p . such as his first visit to the market. autum n. C apital. i. Frazer. the only agrarian activity exclusively reserved for w om en. part 11. F.e. and Paris: Challamel. particularly an abrupt passage from the dry to the wet and especially from the wet to the dry: the threshold.e. Circum cision and tree-pruning. just as it is customary to be merry at carnival tim es” (C . K . vol. 85-6). T h e women gather wild herbs in the course of their hoeing in the cultivated fields. J. greenery). dandelions. causing him at the same tim e to be reborn in his father and his male relatives . 214-69. H oeing. i. pp. ch. which is consumed in every form (w hey. G . som etim es known as “ the tail of the field ”. 1. a raw. encouraged by native remarks (an overexcited person is said to have “ eaten too many fig s”). childhood. it can qualify fruit (green). legum inous plants. like the last sheaf. a rainy sky (grey. T h e frequency of large. A zegzaw denotes blue.1 3 5 intended to bring about a radical change. in which the instruments made with fire have a beneficent function. which they call kherif. vol. part v. 3rd ed. green plant the leaves of w hich can be nibbled. (L ondon: Macmillan. . when they require a whole series of ritual precautions: she wears a dagger at her girdle. butter. especially beans. T h e miraculous properties of the meat of the sacrificed animal are appropriated in a comm unal meal. pp. rather than the logic of murder. 1 3 1 . ch. e. Spring is the season for asafruri. and grey. 1956). like scarification and tattooing. especially in the morning. is also marked by a whole series of ritual operations w hich aim to separate the boy from his mother and the female world. It is also in terms of this schem e that any reversal or inversion of facts is con ceived : an unabashed liar is said to have “ put the east in the w e st”. the tail of the animal receives special treatment (it is hung up in the m osque) as if. T h e corresponding period in the cycle of life. partake of the logic of purification. In several cases. Engels (M oscow: Progress Publishers. is opposed both to ploughing and to harvesting. 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 . fed on green fodder in the stable or near the house. ed. 1912). pp. a certain proportion of which are set aside to be eaten green.

80 T h e ploughing cerem ony. the sanctioning function of the marriage cerem ony is underlined by a number of features (e. or. In what is known as el haq (e.g. el haq lakhrif.1 3 9 227 75 T he men who encircle the boy comprise all the male members of the clan and sub-clan.). being a reunion of the divided and separate. 82 T h e snake. dying the hands with henna. purely male birth. " L e roman de chacal. obeys the same logic as marriage w ith the parallel cousin. in sheepskins or chests stored in the damp part of the house and som etim es even under the bed of the master of the field. form ed from the Arabic zw id ja ). a union predisposed to play this inaugural role by its conform ity to the principles of the mythical world-view. In contrast. as we have seen. the social-convention aspect of the interdict appears in the fact that the penalty for transgression is a fine (also called el haq). salt. the use of spices). to w hom the boy has been presented the previous week. syncrisis. the dry and therefore male food par excellence. Fichier d ’ Archives Berberes. is called "the pom egranate”. which also takes place before a marriage). cutting the hair or n ails). a sym bol of resurrection (see above) is often represented on the hand-made earthenware jars used to store grain for cooking or sow ing.N otes fo r p p . like the marriage cerem ony. by a delegation of rifle-bearing men from the sub-clan. which represents w om an’s belly. the bachelor for exam ple. a symbol of the marriage of sky and earth.starting with the yoke of oxen ( thayuga or thazivijth. which always includes the grains of the last sheaf reaped (som e­ tim es the grains of the last sheaf threshed or dust from the last plot of land harvested. in the order of food. Although in the case of marriage the terra lahlal is only used to denote the sura of m oney which the bridegroom gives the bride (in addition to the bride­ wealth and the presents) before the marriage is consum mated. 81 (Fort National. e tc . in the very place of procreation. contes d ’anim aux”. and contact with objects that are dry or associated with the dry (darkening the eyelids with kohl. imensi lahlal). 79 T h e primordial union is represented.18 Septem ber . a symbol of division and separa­ teness. since the assembly w hich pronounces the edict calls down a curse on all who break it. the central beam. refused to plough before lahlal). 1 3 5 . 77 Breach of the taboo of lahlal is a haram act (sacrilege) which gives rise to a haram product (c f. is systematically excluded. at the same tim e. the sym bol par excellence . 76 Brahim Zellal. is kept in the house itself. or again.g. the magical elem ent is again present. dust from the mausoleum of a saint. 1964. T h u s. or taken from the threshing floor as the last sheaf was threshed.is likely to favour coupling (the man who opens the ploughing is som etim es called "the old man of the yoke of o x en ” -a m g h a r m ay-yuga).the wise ploughman who. whitewashing the house). . the ban on fig-picking). 81 T h e seed corn. that which is singular and solitary. 78 Or "the key of good lu ck ”. its female hom ologue) and marriage all bear on acts of cutting (shaving. the m ost m asculine of women. the legend of yum chendul . closing (tying up the hair). wheatcake. T h e sym bolism of the second. is placed under the sign of the figure two: everything which com es in pairs . the marriage season often used to open with a parallel-cousin marriage. in a rite called aghrum. and thigejdith. 84 T h e sw ollen part of the lamp. 83 T h e interdicts surounding ploughing (or weaving. the pillar. no. Algeria). together with the m other’s male kinsmen and their guests (the affines. it is prepared in accordance w ith rites and taboos intended to preserve its properties. in the form of the union of asalas. despite the heavy rain on that day. purifying (sweeping.

etc. rings. . However. 91 T his function is som etim es explicitly formulated. one must "eat so ft”. 87 T h e m eaning of the rite is clearly show n in the rope game described by Laoust. boiling. It is said. protected as it is by its very weakness against contradiction or error. that when cereals.228 N otes fo r pp. 86 I say " treated practically a s ” to avoid putting into the consciousness of the agents (with expressions like "seen a s ” or "conceived a s”) the representation which we must construct in order to understand scientifically the practices objectively oriented by the schem e of "resurrection” and in order to comm unicate that understanding. chests. in the course of which the rope is suddenly cut and the women fall on their backs. 139-14$ 85 T h e action of tying is a typical exam ple of the ambiguities which give practical logic its efficacy. 88 T h e snake. With rare exceptions (w hen an animal has been slaughtered or when som eone is ill) meat is regarded as too precious to be c o o k e d on the fire. an operation male in its active form and female in its passive form. 89 All the evidence suggests that the usefulness of the almost empty notion of baraka (which has occupied a disproportionate place in the writings of anthropologists from Westermarck to the present day) lies in the fact that it makes it possible to name both the male principle of fecundity and the female principle of fertility without distinguishing between them . though useful in social practice. All forms of tying (crossing the arms or the legs. through the contradic­ tions generated by synchronization (favoured by literacy) and the system atizing intent that synchronization expresses and makes possible. It is natural that ritual. In sum m er. unspiced. it does not play a very important part in the econom y of the sym bolic system . cooking outdoors. spiced. T h is also means that. is undoubtedly the d ry which shoots out the dry: in the tale related above (p. for exam ple. sw ells. roasting. a sort of tug-of-war between the men and the women. evening meal. T h e rites intended to render a man or woman incapable of sexual intercourse apply the schem e of closing (or its equivalent.) are forbidden at the mom ent of childbirth and the opposite actions recom m ended. fuzzy relations. 222). a sym bol of the power of erection and resurrection which belongs to the male principle. etc. wearing knots or girdles. again exploiting the coincidence (well expressed by the am biguity of the verbs referring to state) of openmg and being opened. should in a sense kill two birds with one stone in recom m ending actions likely to favour (or not likely to hinder) opening. and spits out a poisonous flame. are being sow n. inviting the sky to rain its fecundating seed upon them . locks. which always seeks to put all the odds on its own side. sw eet peppers and tomatoes are cooked on the kanun. History can therefore only com e to it from outside. a soft food. 92 T h e opposition between the cooking-pot (achukth) and the griddle (bufrah) sums up the series of oppositions between the two seasons and the tw o styles of cooking: cooking indoors. T yin g is in a sense doubly forbidden because it is opposed both to the male action of opening and to the female action of swelling. could encounter w ithin itself any obstacle or resistance capable of determ ining a reflexive return or a questioning of it. cutting).) 0r closing (of doors. m orning meal. meat is always boiled in autumn whereas it can be roasted in spring. the aggrieved snake rises. 90 T h e familiarity with this mode of thought that is acquired in the course of scientific practice gives one an idea (though still a very abstract one) of the subjective feeling of necessity which it gives to those it possesses: there is no way in w hich this laxist logic of overdetermined.

w eaving begun elsewhere is not brought into the house (unless a chicken is sacrificed first). less highly spiced. can be eaten by women. thereby underlining the fact that practical unity lies not in the series (of farming tasks or the rites of passage) but in practice generating similarly structured behaviour in all dom ains. worn pinned in front. which is simply sprinkled. a meat couscous. 100 For example. "All the shepherds are o u t. the guest one wants to honour. less nourishing. T he autonomy of the logic of ritual with respect to objective conditions is even clearer in the case of clothing. are (relatively) independent of climatic conditions: thus the characteristic rhythm of the winter day is kept up both at the coldest m om ents and in the warmer and already "springlike” days of the wet season. when everyone knows that they are the footwear which characterizes the genuine peasant and the strong walker? H ow could the mistress of the house give up the traditional pair of blankets. unlike couscous.e from w est to east. because they can be accompanied by meat. he has a right to the afternoon snack (a handful of figs.N otes f o r p p . which as a sym bol of social status cannot vary according to the season: how could the burnous be taken off in sum mer. 98 T he divisions of the year. which also denotes tem pering and p o ison in g). never soup.1 S t 229 93 Winter food is overall more fem ale. the male par excellence. 97 T hese various tasks are only part of the w om en’s activities. their couscous is made with barley or even bran and flour (abulbul). particularly the m ost important one. which sym bolize her authority. conversely. a male food. 'Allam is to separate the strands of the warp into tw o strips and to mark out the field with the first furrow which divides it into plots. a man who gets up early on the first day of sum mer will get up early all through the year. sum m er food more male. 1 4 5 .” And to indicate a late hour in the afternoon: "All the shepherds have already 'given back’ a z a l. the even-numbered ones running eastward and the odd ones westward. "the return of a z a l”. which partake of all the more or less abstract series that can be constructed. 95 T o tie a thread so that it cannot be untied is to "tie its so u l”. . is a m oist form of the corresponding male fo o d : the m en’s food is based on wheatcake (aghrum) and couscous. and som e shepherds spend a za l in the shade on the grazing land. T h is belief is also invoked at harvest time to justifying sacrificing an animal. and sauces (asqi. broths. hence som etim es eaten by men. and her power over the running of the household. berkukes. In fact things are not so sim ple: sem olina dum plings. a man who is late in the m orning is told. the warp I'alam. In every season. Once he is old enough to take the goats to pasture. which marks the separation between the dry season and the wet season. as does the belt on w hich she hangs the keys to the household stores ? 99 For exam ple. or boiled sem olina. A boy eats with the men as soon as he starts to walk and to go to the fields. which may appear as female because they are boiled in water. T he w om en’s food is liquid. T h e weft is called thadrafth. i.t In fact the return to the village at the tim e of a za l is not abso­ lutely obligatory. 96 For the same reason. her ascendancy over her daughters-in-law. not even wheat soup. based on boiled cereals. and if possible. because it is boiled.. is offered at least one couscous. female food. are also the most male of female foods. even if it has to be made with barley. a man who does not get up early on the first day of spring is likely to die in the course of the year. if a man without a burnous is dishonoured ? H ow could anyone fail to put on winter m occasins before reaping or undertaking a long mountain journey. as one m ight expect. 94 Other direct indications of the hom ology: the weaving is done upwards. half a pint of milk).

virility.230 N otes f o r p p .g. m etal).itself situated at different m om ents according to the occasion . “ I am done fo r”) because it reads the future in the present as a potentiality objectively inscribed in the directly perceived present (and not.e. with the birth of the year.C . is in question. or to the sprouting of the corn. Theorie dessystemesevolutifs (Paris: Gautier-Villars. a scholarly elaboration (third to second centuries B . explicitly posited in a project. depending on the needs and occasions of ritual practice. all of these being categories whose future. som etim es euphemistically called "the last grave” (even if it is very old). to which birth is opposed. 304-9).e.m . the sorceress lights the lamp ( mesbah). from being identified either with the harvest. 103 People must particularly watch their language in the presence of young children. leaving the shells and the pot behind after burying or burning the sacrificed object or victim on which the evil has been " fixed”. in the order of the m onth. growth. can be linked either to the birth of the year . but merely fantastic. as a possible. seven times the other. within the cycle of the life of the field. the iron kanun) is turned seven times one way. wood. or again between all the curative practices applied to the child and the sacrifice of sparrows at the time of asifedh. to dawn. 108 For example. It is the outsider’s grave. the seasons. and then it is buried in the grave of the outsider.) and great azal. a distinction is made between lesser azal. or with fecundation treated as resurrection. on to which the evil afflicting babies or animals is transferred: the women go there taking a pot of water and an egg.e of these relationships prevents death. the theory' of the five elem ents. as an opening and a beginning. 107 In each village cemetery there is a grave covered with potsherds. or again. 1 5 2 . 104 For the feast called tharurit w a za l (the return of azal). the mom ent at which the wom en and children come back from the fields (about 10 a. the trivet (elkanun u'uzal. about 11 a . the man w ho is truly dead. 1965)’ PP &-'°102 T h is future already present is the future of the emotion which speaks the future in the present ("I am d ead ”. E . recently circumcised boys. nor. of which ancient societies have no m onopo’y. . a number of the taboos and interdicts of spring can be seen as practical euphem ism s intended to avoid com prom ising the fecundity of nature’s labour. or to the appearance of the new moon. pp. establishes hom ologies between the cardinal points (plus the centre). constructs produced by the effort to resolve the contradictions arising from the hopeless ambition of giving the objectively systematic products of analogical reason an intentionally systematic form . around the pregnant woman’s girdle.m . the symbol of the hoped-for man. etc. Sim ilarly. and newly wed husbands.e. in the order of the day. fire. i. in the order of the grain cycle. the substances (earth. 106 One could go on to draw a parallel between prophylactic rites such as "the dis­ sociation from the month ” and the separation from ennayer. i. in an act of fr e e d o m -th e consequence of this view being that emotion becomes bad faith). 110 Having failed to see in mythico-ritual logic a particular case of practical logic. or between the first haircut and the expulsion of maras. within the grain cycle.or to the birth of spring. 109 Granet gives some striking examples of the would-be im peccable. in the order of the year. i.. and the musical notes (L a civilisation chinoise. birth. T o "send the baby to sle e p ” in its mother’s womb.) of the mythical sy'stem. and w hich must be analysed as such. as Sartre would have it. etc.1 5 6 101 On this notion. at azal. see T . which they eat. when the men come back. or fertility. Vogel. 105 T h u s in a rite performed to hasten a girl’s marriage.

for exam ple. any attempt to reconstruct the original meaning of a mythical tradition must include analysis of the laws of the deformation to which the various successive interpreters subject it on the basis of their system s of interests. C H A P T E R 4 . mythological culture can become the tool. Carnap. with corps of scholars. asa point of method. has nothing in comm on with the practice of the pre-Socratic thinkers. 2 T h e "shepherds” are the small boys of the village. who mobilize all the resources of a language fraught with mythic resonances to reproduce in their discourse the objective systematicity of mythic practice or resolve the logical contradictions springing from that ambition. am ong other things. that memory is acted out and enriched through participation in the acts and ceremonies which set the seal on group unity: it is in sum mer that the children undergo practical training in their future tasks as peasants and their obligations as men of honour. 4 (1931). 219-41. Bateson shows ( Naven (Stanford.N otes fo r pp. "reason” situates the principle of these judgm ents not in itself but in the nature of its objects. which leads it to observe similarities. or the "principle of aggregation” or "hom ogeneity”. out of a taste for the p n m al which is the recon­ version of the conservative intent into the logic of the philosophical field. S T R U C T U R E S . to inspired reinterpretations. with the magi and their initiatory teachings. "t-berw indung derM etaphysikdurch logische Analyse derS p rach e”. In the dry season.. the Sophists. anthropology has becom e locked in the insoluble antinomy of otherness and identity. "routinizing” "readings”. of extremely com plex strategies (which explains.: Stanford University Press. T h e principle of this antinomy was indicated by Kant in the Appendix to the Transcendental Dialectic: depending on the interests which inspire it. C a l. "reason ” obeys either the " principle of specification ’’ which leads it to seek and accentuate differences. An internal analysis of the structure of a system of sym bolic relations is soundly based only if it is subordinated to a sociological analysis of the structure of the system of social relations of sym bolic production. It follows that it is im possible fully to account for the structure of the mythical corpus and the transformations which affect it in the course of time. H A B IT U S . with the first professional profes­ sors. . and. pp. R. Erkenntnis. and in some cases the object. through an illusion w hich characterizes it. the "prim itive mentality" and the "savage m in d ”. (Translator. POW ER 1 T h e wet season is the time for oral instruction through which the group memory is forged. It goes without saying that the regressive use which Heidegger and the gnostic tradition that he has introduced into university philosophy make of the most "archaic” devices of language. on whether they give rise to rationalizing. or to rhetorical exercises. circulation.) 3 A principle which. and consum ption in which these relations are set up and in which the social functions that they objectively fulfil at any given m om ent are defined: the rites and m yths of the Greek tradition tend to receive entirely different functions and meanings depending. 1936). 15 6 . As G . belongs as much to magic as to morality. as we have seen.1 6 1 231 11 12 13 14 without any normative reference to logical logic. It follows that. ist ed . by means of a strictly internal analysis ignoring the functions that the corpus fulfils in the relations of com petition or conflict for econom ic or sym bolic power. 1958. why agents undertake the im mense mnem onic effort needed to acquire mastery of it) even in societies which do not have a highly developed and differentiated religious apparatus.

for their part. calls the children: "Wake up. p. after the concentration. 4 5 - 6 7 8 9 10 . is to wait.2 »3~ 25> esp. the mistress of the house. PP. at the same tim e as the m en. set their point of honour on getting up at the same tim e as the m en. prosper). the longer you will liv e !” T h e w om en. is to be found in G . when deprived of the autonomy they derived from access to a separate place and time. 162-165 For example. thus the concentrations of population im posed by the French Army during the war of liberation led to a profound (and often lasting) change in the status of the w om en. there is a saying leftar n-esbah d-esbuh erbah. though always sufficient to ensure the more-or-less-perfect predictability of all members of the group (setting aside the amahbul who takes it upon him self to break with the collective rhythm s). T h e young incur even greater disapproval when the)' try to set up a power struggle between the generations. w ho. which lends itself to all sorts of strategic manipulation. 219. jeopardizing an order based on the maintenance of temporal distance. for one only has to wait and the difference will disappear . It is understandable that collective dancing or singing. who pretend to be ignorant of the w om en’s behaviour on this point). It follows that disorganization of its temporal rhythms and spatial framework is one of the basic factors in the disorganization of the grou p . w hich. the enchanted relationship w hich scientific objectification has to destroy in order to constitute itself is an integral part of the full truth of practice. who alone has a right to wake the daughters and daughters-in-law. to strengthen it. to succeed. were condem ned either to be cloistered or to wear the veil. two-faced discourse to its objective (or at least. forcing them to go out on dangerous adventures far from home. are everywhere predisposed to sym bolize group integration and.232 Notes fo r pp. Science m ust integrate the objectivist truth of practice and the equally objective m isrecognition of that truth into a higher definition of objectivity. which is as much as to say by nothing. D uby. if not earlier (the only way they can get all the tim e they want to attend to their appearance without being watched by the m en. particularly spectacular cases of the synchronization of the hom ogeneous and the orchestration of the heterogeneous. Brutal reduction of this tw ofold. Hommes et structuresdu Moyen-Age (Paris and T h e Hague: M outon. On the first day of spring. by sym bolizing it. children! T he longer you walk before sunrise. An analysis of the strategies used by the heads of noble houses to keep their heirs in a subordinate position. but the gap m aintaining and maintained by the gerontocratic order is in fact unbridgeable. Early rising to let out the animals. from sheer delay in the effective transmission of powers to the threat of disinheritance. Whether through the intermediary of their control over inheritance. It goes without saying that logical integration is never total. the generations are separated only by time. breakfast in the morning is the first w ell-om ened encounter (erbah. the elders have the means of taking advantage of the socially recognized limits of youth. objectivist) truth neglects the fact that it only produces its specifically sym bolic effects inasmuch as it never directly imparts that truth. or through the intermediary of the various strategic uses to which they can put their officially recognized monopoly of matrimonial negotiations. is an elem ent of the conduct of honour which boys are taught to respect from an early age. short of refusing the game. made its appearance among Berber populations where it was previously unknown. to go to Koran school. or sim ply to be outside with the men. since the only way to cross it. ' 973).

or. I. through first-hand ex­ perience. favours the confrontation of different cultural traditions. p. Contre Sainte-Beuve (Paris: Gallimard. Proust. one only has to remember the tradition of "confraternity” within the medical profession. 195c). of the possibility of doing the same things differently. the Calculus of Inference. the presuppositions of the traditional world-viewr. Becoming a Kivom a (N ew Haven. 17 A whole aspect of what is nowadays referred to as sociology (or anthropology) partakes of this logic.not costing too m uch more or too much less than the consultation. as an epoche of the epoche. 318. Cunnison as The G ift (L ondon. 52. Revue Fran^aise de Sociologie. Bourdieu and A. in the very heart of the routine of the everyday order. 215-20. 13 M. W. vol. this is because the concentration of different ethnic and/or professional groups in the same space. so as to rationalize and systematize them . "Essai sur le d o n ”. there is no other 'door 12 T h e full text of this conversation can be found in P. 239. Husserl. 15 T h e phenom enologists systematically forget to carry out an ultimate " reduction ”. L ’idiot de la fam ille (Paris: Gallimard. as is well illustrated by the w ords of a young Kabyle woman: "A girl doesn’t know her husband beforehand and she looks to him for everything. and also because it permits and requires the develop­ ment of a body of specialists charged with raising to the level of discourse. Bourdieu. p. 1966).-P . 3 (1971). Mauss. 1962). Sartre. M. pp. She loves him even before they marry. J. thereby giving away the interested fiction that it was free. with in particular the overthrow of spatial and temporal frameworks. a belief which the reduction subsequently causes to appear as a " th esis”. pp. 16 If the emergence of a field of discussion is historically linked to the developm ent of cities. 22 "Y ou’ve saved me from having to sell ” is what is said in such cases to the lender who prevents land falling into the hands of a stranger. 19 J. a suspension of doubt as to the possibility that the world of the natural standpoint could be otherwise. no less important. 41. because she m u st. not im mune to such ritualization. p. p. also conforms to this logic. more precisely. hitherto mastered in their practical state. because that would amount to stating the price of the consultation. 1964). she has to love him . 215. 96). 1965). p. C onn: Yale University Press. 1941). 1971). or. which tends to expose their arbitrariness practically. but also not com ing too close.without knowing what he wants or needs . 74-5. trans. Le deracinement (Paris: M inuit. the one which would reveal to them the social conditions of the possibility of the "reduction” and the epoche. in Sociologie et anthropologic (Paris: P U F . "G enese et structure du champ religeux”. 12. W hiting. see P. instead he has to find him a present . / 6 6 -1 7 3 233 ci Love. 1. of doing som ething different at the same tim e. Necessary and Probable (London: Taylor and Walton. p. by means of a sort of fictitious sale (he gives the money while allowing the owner the continued use of his property). p. Ideas (N ew York: Collier-M acmillan. 21 T o convince oneself that this is so. 1847). 23 M . 20 On belief as individual bad faith maintained and supported by collective bad faith. 783. 18 Formal Logic: Or. Sayad. 14 Cf. 24 T he sacred character of the meal appears in the formulae used in swearing an . What is radically excluded from phenomenological analysis of the "general thesis of the natural standpoint” which is constitutive of "primary experience” of the social world is the question of the econom ic and social conditions of the belief which consists in "taking th e ' factworld ’ ( Wirklichkeit) just as it gives itse lf” (E .N otes for pp. N o doctor ever pays a fellow doctor a fee.

1930). the quantity of goods offered for consum ption. R. Squandering of goods may even becom e the only way of saving tim e. the food does it [for you] "T he food will settle its score with you [if you leave it]. when it is good. as far as possible.e. because he is giving marginal individuals a chance to integrate them selves into the group by doing their duty as men. Becker.. T h e group has the right to demand of each of its members that he should have an occupation. 175-182 oa th : " By the food and the salt before us'” or " By the food and the salt we have shared A pact sealed by eating together would becom e a curse for the man who betrayed it: "I do not curse him. "dead men whom God has drawn from living m en ”. leading to the abandonment of vengeance.” T o invite one’s guest to take a second helping. time thus tends to become scarcer. and it must therefore make sure that everyone is found an occupation.W e’ve hardly spoken. and now you’re off again. 25 „ 26 27 28 29 30 31 . however unproductive. Economic Journal. And so a man who has been out of farming for som e tim e. . like the guest who leaves almost as soon as he arrives. Similarly. there are never enough hands to do the w ork. does not give it the care and time. "A Theory of the Allocation of T im e ”. is to shirk the duties and tasks which are an inseparable part of belonging to the group. kept out of transactions between kinsmen.e. no. which is now more valuable than the products which could be saved if :ime were devoted to maintenance and repair. the latter is perhaps the more pernicious.234 N otes fo r pp. i. T o remain idle. while the scarcity of goods dim inishes. 289 (Septem ber 1965). which are its due. Melanges de sociologie nord-africaine (Paris: Alcan. is quickly found a place in the cycle of work and the circuit of the exchange of services. (cf. There is strong disapproval of individuals who are no use to their family or the group. 75. which also takes tim e ).” A shared meal is also a ceremony of reconciliation. Maunier. S. A variant of this contradiction is expressed in the saying "When the year is bad. T he th iw izi is inconceivable without the final meal: and thus it usually only brings together people of the same adhrum or the same thakharubth. pp. an offering of food to a patron saint or the group’s ancestor im plies a contract of alliance. especially when one belongs to a great fam ily. even a purely sym bolic one: the peasant who provides idlers with an opportunity to work on his land is universally approved. etc. T h is is no doubt the objective basis of the contrast in attitudes to time which has often been described. because he has been away or been ill. one says: "T here’s no need to swear. T he cost of tim e rises with rising productivity (i.” T h e analogy between a m an’s relationships with others and his relationship to the land leads to condemnation of the man who thoughtlessly hurries in his work and. there are always too many bellies to be filled. in the words of the verse of the Koran often applied to them: they are incapable of "pulling any w eigh t”. and hence consum ption itself. the respect.” "Are you leaving us? We’ve only just sat d o w n . T he man who "gives others no more than the time he ow es th em ” is reproached in terms like these: "Y ou ’ve only just arrived. ancient) "democracy” similarly oppose first-degree naivety to second-degree naivety. p. 68. Such tactics are. G. because the satisfaction derived from false lucidity makes it impossible to attain the adequate knowledge which simultaneously transcends and conserves the two forms of n aivety:" ancient democracy ” owes its specificity to the fact that it leaves im plicit and unquestioned (doxa) the principles which liberal "dem ocracy” can and must profess (ortho­ doxy) because they have ceased to govern conduct in the practical state. 493-517).” It would not be difficult to show that debates about Berber (and more generally. the broth and the salt curse him .

Wealth may result from military power or from influence over opinion. 216). 182-18 5 235 32 33 34 35 36 37 and there is disapproval of the man who takes advantage of the destitution of the person forced to sell. T he best proof of the irreducibility of the stakes of matrimonial strategy to the amount of the bridewealth is provided by history. 13-14). 1959). p. New York: Rinehart. can only be partially successful. 1938). Wolf. unless other forms are taken into account. 1944. civil authority. Bohannan. did it not take on a sym bolic value of the highest importance as the unequivocal demonstration of the worth of a fam ily’s products on the matrimonial exchange market. Francisco Benet pays so much attention to the contrast between the market and the village and scarcely mentions the factors which keep the local suq under the control of the values of the good-faith econom y (see F . 18. N ew York: D oubleday. It is rather paradoxical that in his contribution to a collection of essays edited by Karl Polyani. M. conceals the total circulation. "Explosive Markets: T h e Berber H ighlands”. American Anthropologist. of goods that are indissociably material and sym bolic. 68 (1953). in isolation. Polyani. and The Great Transformation.N otes fo r pp. 1 (August 1965). Polyani. . and it should be the business of social science to seek the laws of such transform ations” (pp. T he amount of the payment. T h e trap is all the more infallible when. pp. Although he fails to draw any real conclusions from it. must be regarded as continually passing from any one of its forms into any other. Economic History Review. M. I. influence or opinion. just as the study of one form of energy will be defective at certain points. in a work which proves disappointing. like energy. thus reduced to the level of mere haggling. just as either of these may result from w ealth” (Power: A N ew Social Analysis (L ondon: Allen and U nw in. pp. Sons of the Shaking Earth (Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Bertrand Russell admirably expresses an insight into the analogy between energy and power which could serve as the basis for a unification of social science: "Like energy. such as wealth. the circulation of im mediately perceptible material goods. "Technical Innovation and Economic Progress in the Ancient W orld”. C. in K . and see "Land D ebt and the Man of Property in Classical A th en s”. actual or potential. p. "Som e Principles of Exchange and Investm ent among the T iv ”. Finley. of which they are only the aspect most visible to the eye of the capitalist homo economicus. 57. 1 (1955). pp. power has many forms. 249-68. 1968. George D alton. say wealth. See P. K. 12-13). N o one of these can be regarded as subordinate to any other. Arensberg. ed. 60-70. which here too has dissociated the sym bolic and material aspects of transactions: once reduced to its purely monetary value. and the bargains of honour. as in marriage. for example E. Primitive Archaic and M odem Economics. always of small value in relative and absolute terms. were from then on considered shameful. T h e attempt to treat one form of power. 29-45. the apparent issue at stake in matrimonial negotiations. Benet. the bridewealth lost its significance as a sym bolic rating. would not justify the hard bargaining to which it gives rise. It has often been pointed out that the logic which makes the redistribution of goods the sine qua non of the continuation of power tends to reduce or prevent the primitive accumulation of econom ic capital and the developm ent of class division (cf. he goes on to define the programme for this unified science of social energy: "Power. esp. armaments. 37. and of the capacity of the heads of the family to obtain the best price for their products through their negotiating skills. pp. such as the bridewealth. Political Science Quarterly. and there is no one form from which the others are derivative.

Bourdieu and L. often held in gnostic religions. And Eric A.most typically. 1966). who is his guru (teacher). Greene shows how a change in the mode of accumulation. "T he poet is the incarnate book of the oral p eop le” (J.: Harvard U niversity Press. 2. " Mnemosym e in Oral Literature ”. T he shady dealer cannot find anyone to answer for him (or his wares) and so he cannot demand guarantees from the buyer. H arvard Studies in Classical Philology. 1963).m usic. a practical reactivation m obilizing all the resources of a "pattern of organized actions” . which. no. through a kiss .from honour to the jus honorum. of the Romans) to the title . it is som etim es viewed as a kind of substantive magical power. W. and J.. Pearson (ed s. Ilmu is generally considered to be a kind of abstract knowledge or supernormal skill. 88).g . Trade and M arket in the E arly Empires. pp. X ew York: Free Press. L ’ ordre equestre a I’ epoque republicaine. Com­ parative Studies in Society and History. influence. C C C S Stencilled Paper 46 (U niversity of Birmingham. in which case its transmission may be more direct than through teaching” (C. M ass. and reflexion (Preface to Plato. but by the more concrete-minded and 'old-fashioned’. On this point see P. Transaclions and Proceedings o f the American Philological Association. "Qualifications and Job s”. trans. p. which is not open to analysis or criticism. rhythm. together with a change in the structure of cultural products ("T he Spoken and the Written W ord”. A. A social history of all forms of distinction (of which the title is a particular case) would have to show the social conditions and the consequences of the transition from a personal authority which can neither be delegated nor inherited (e. and in his absence it can be manipulated only in the mode of mimesis. pp. Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales. and whatever he learns. Boltanksi. In Rome. T h e belief. in favour of written discourse. for example. 185-189 and H. C. progressively subjected to detailed control by custom or law (cf.236 N otes fo r p p . an officially recognized position in the State (as distinct from a purely personal quality). Literacy in Traditional Societies. March 1975. 1957). U ntil language is objectified in the written text. Cambridge.). (1962-3). thus reproducing the effect of the 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . eques Romanus) defining a dignitas. pp. pp. i960). "L e titre et le poste: rapports entre le system e de production et le system e de reproduction”. 304ff. comparison.for m nem onic purposes in an act of affective identification. The Religion o f Java (L ondon: Collier-Macmillan. G oody and I. 9 (1951). for exam ple. 1977). 5. p. Havelock similarly shows that even the content of cultural resources is transformed by the transformation of "the technolog)' of preserved com m unication”. N icolet. and predisposed by its permanence to becom e the object of analysis. the gratia. is repeatable. was. Cambridge: University Press. 1968. words . detached from the situation. 465-93. like the use of insignia. See in particular J. circulation. the use of titles (e. he and others call his ilmu (science). reversible. by the abandonment of mimesis. Watt. 24-58). "T h e Consequences of Literacy". because it exists as a text. 236-41). esteem . G oody (ed . Geertz. and reproduction of culture results in a change in the function it is made to perform. N otopoulos.may be seen as an attempt to transcend the lim its of this mode of preservation: "Whatever it is that the practitioner learns. that knowledge may be transmitted through various forms of magical contact .). he learns from another dukun. and in particular. vol. T h is is true.g . speech is inseparable from the speaker’s whole person. 1: Definitions juridiques et structures sociales (Paris. esp. 469). contrast. t>f the charismatic (or meritocratic) ideology which explains the differential probability of access to academic qualifications by reference to the inequality of innate talent. 69 (1938). William C. In a very impressive article.

impersonal mode of domination. Carneiro (ed s.exchanges of gifts.e. Durkheim. any more than the absence of the lightning rod and the electric telegraph. L. com ­ munication and dom ination. and put forward in place of the Cartesian universe. E. which did not find expression until much later (i. which ignores the objective mechanism s and their operation. i. Rich Man. he was initiating the critique. " D e ipsa natura”. Sahlins does. Symbolic violence is that form of domination w hich. i. The Relevance o f Models fo r Social Anthropology (London: Tavistock.19746 Ibid. (U nless one chooses to posit. Montesquieu et Rousseau precurseurs de la sociologie (Paris: Riviere. p. precisely in the case in which. which cannot exist without unremitting divine attention. in G . 285-303. Comparative Studies in Society and H istory. "On the Sociology of Primitive E xchange”. that in such cases the structure lies in the ideology'. the internal logic of Greek mythology and art. as Marshall D . because of the relationship normally existing between the anthropologist and his object. i. pp. i. Essays in the Science of Culture (N ew York: Crowell. a physical universe endowed with a vis propria. it is because they always contain the possibility of domination.e. an immanent necessity. as the structuralism of Levi-Strauss im plicitly does. iS g -ig i 237 mechanisms which dissimulate the relationship between academic attainment and inherited cultural capital. D ole and R. i960). it is not sufficient to observe. in M. Another paradox appears in the fact that structuralism. pp.e. 48 It can be seen that if one is trying to account for the specific form in which domination is realized in the pre-capitalist econom y. pp. can be used to explain Jupiter and H erm es. T he analogy’ with the Cartesian theory' of continuous creation is perfect. W. 5 (1962-3). is only exerted through the comm unication in which it is disguised. 195.).). T hese negative conditions (which one is amply justified in pointing to when it is a question of countering any form of idealism or idealization) do not account for the internal logic of sy'mbolic violence. in which the worker’s dependence on the em ployer is the quasi-automatic product of the mechanisms of the labour market (cf. 49 T he interactionist "gaze”. "Poor Man. Opuscula philosophica selecta. p. in a form of cultural capital. of all form s of the refusal to acknowledge that the social world has a nature. 92). 1953).) . 45 E.e . ed. P. Big Man. is least adequate and least fruitful when applied to societies in which relations of domination and dependence are the product of continuous creation.e. And when L eibniz criticized a conception of God condem ned to move the world "as a carpenter moves his axe or as a miller drives his m illstone by directing the water towards the w h e e l” (G . and that power lies in the possession of the instrument of appropriation of these structures. 47 If acts of com m unication . in the strict sense of the word. 390-415. 1965). 1939). Chief: Political T yp es in M elanesia and P olynesia”. in Hegel’s introduction to the Philosophy of Right). Banton (e d . "Political Power and the Economy in Primitive S ociety”. i. P. transcending the opposition usually drawn between sense relations and power relations. Leibniz. the sciences of the objective structures of the social world (and not simply of agents’ im ages of them ). which Marx refers to in a fam ous passage in the introduction to the Grundrisse. it is least likely to be possible. that the pre-capitalist econom y does not provide the conditions necessary for an indirect. would find an ideal terrain in this sort of society. 139-236).e. challenges.always bear within them a potential conflict. or words . in order to look into the direct interactions between agents. Shrecker (Paris: Boivin.N otes fo r p p .

J. w ithout distinction. diffuse delegation. 54 E. 55 T h e marabouts are in a different position. vol. x ix (L ondon: Hogarth Press. Many of those w ho had been prepared to flout public opinion paid the price of their defiance. as the K abyles say. with the guarantee of the collectively owned capital. 51 T he question of the relative worth of the different m odes of dom ination . which is accom ­ panied by an explicit definition of responsibilities. through fairly strict endogamy and a whole set of traditions. by Rousseauistic accounts of primitive para­ dises and disquisitions on " modernization " . and from moral obligation to the court order ( Indo-European Language and Society (L ondon: Faber. from moral worth to creditworthiness. esp. Benveniste. fearing dishonour and ostracism by the group. take advantage of their quasi-institutionalized role as mediators. 191-194 50 Emile Benveniste’s history of the vocabulary of Indo-European institutions charts the linguistic m ilestones in the process of unveiling and disenchantment which runs from physical or sym bolic violence to law and order. from the prize for a notable action to the rate for the job.). prefer to grant their debtors new tim e-lim its for repayment (e. pp. tends to lim it the consequences of individual shortcom ings. because they w ield an institutionally delegated authority as m em bers of a respected body of " religious officials ” and because they keep up a separate status . it is possible ad infinitum to contrast representations of the tw o system s (e.e. are when their knowledge of the traditions and acquaintance w ith the persons involved enable them to exercise a sym bolic authority which can only exist through direct delegation by the group: the marabouts are most often simply the loophole.g. 1961). 2 (A pril-June 1965). Complete Psychological Works (standard e d .of the situations before and after. pp. 43.238 N otes fo r p p . . And sim ilarly. enchantm ent versus disenchantm ent) differing in their affective colouring and ethical connotations depending on which of the two is taken as a standpoint. w hich com es as the corollary of m em bership of the group. 56 C onversely. from recognition of services to recognition of debts. T h e fact remains that the only occasions on which m en who "like the m ountain torrents grow greater in stormy tim e s” can. 57 See S. som etim es with their lives. such as the practice of confining their w om en to the house. until the olive harvest) to save them from having to sell land in order to pay. Revue d'Histoire du D roit Francois et Etranger. underwrites all mem bers of the group. 1973). this accounts for the im portance which the "great” attach to defending the collective honour in the honour of the weakest m em ber of their group. which enables groups in conflict to reach an agreement w ithout losing face. pp. im plicitly at least.g . but does not cover the group against the discredit which it may incur from the conduct of any m em ber. the only interest of which lies in the revelation of the researcher’s social phantasm s. his unanalysed relationship with his own society. T h e only legitimate object of comparison is each system considered as a system . Strachev. As in all com parisons of one system w ith another.in particular. ed. and this precludes any evaluation other than that im plied in the im m anent logic of its evolution. the " d oor”. 52 Certain usurers. 4th series. as the proverb suggests. from ransom to purchase. “ N eg a tio n ”. 159-84). M oses Finley show s how debts which were som etim es contrived so as to produce situations of enslavem ent could also serve to create relations of solidarity betw een equals (''L a servitude pour d ettes”.is totally m eaningless and can only give rise to necessarily interminable debates on the advantages and disadvantages . Indo-European Language and Society. i. whereas institutionalized delegation of authority. 84ff. Freud. during the war of liberation. 101-62).a question raised. 235-6. pp.

A. 1944). e tc . 61 It follow s that the objectivist error . 195-197 239 58 See S. which brings together groups with different traditions and weakens reciprocal controls (and. pp. “ A generous man is the friend of A llah. like Polyani and Sahlins.A . P arty and Pressure Politics. the device par excellence for conversion of econom ic capital into sym bolic capital. Wealth is G od ’s gift to man to enable him to relieve the poverty of others. He who wishes to keep his wealth must show he is worthy of it.” Both worlds belong to him . . as here.the face of the man who has ceased to feel dishonour . creates lasting relations of dependence w hich.: Influential Lobby or K iss of D ea th ? ”. churchm en. results in the collapse of the collectively maintained collective fiction of the religion of honour.M .” 63 It was not a sociologist but a group of American industrialists who conceived the " bank-account” theory of public relations: “ It necessitates making regular and frequent deposits in the Bank of Public G ood-W ill. reproduction of the social order depends more on the unceasing reproduction of concordant habitus than on the automatic reproduction of structures capable of producing or selecting concordant habitus. so that there’s no trust anywhere n o w . It is possible to m ove by successive degrees from one pattern to the oth er: as one moves away from perfect reciprocity. • “ N . 63-72 (on the way in which “ an organization elevates itself in the esteem of the general public and conditions their attitudes so that a state of public opinion will be created in which the public will almost automatically respond with favor to the programs desired by the grou p ”). “ H ow Pressure G roups O perate”. obligations. 262 (on the different ways in which the National Association of M anufacturers tries to influence the general public. Linder. T hose w ho.). give to me that I may g iv e ” (only the saint can give w ithout possessing). the greatest offence im aginable. “ In the age of credit*’. Wr. “ wretched indeed are those w ho can only appeal to the trust in which their parents were held. are disguised under the veil of moral relations. 319 (Septem ber 1958). said an informant. N ew York and L o n d o n : Columbia U niversity Press.N otes fo r pp. so an increasing proportion of the counter-prestations com e to be made up of homage. farmers’ leaders. T urner. 1970. by show ing that he is generous. 2 (May I953). so that valid checks can be drawn on this account when it is desirable” (quoted in D ayton M acKean. even before urbanization.in particular the mistake of ignoring the effects of objectifying the non-objectified . otherwise his wealth will be taken from him. w om en’s club leaders. Everyone thinks he has a right to trust. The H arried Leisure Class. have seen clearly the determ ining function of redistribution in the constitution of political authority and in the operation of tribal econom y (with the circuit of accumulation and redistribution functioning in a similar way to a State’s budget) have not analysed the way in which this process. the generalization of monetary exchanges and the introduction of wage labour).is more far-reaching in its conse­ quences in a world in w hich. w hich was formerly cursed or despised (as is shown by the insult “ Face of credit! ” . B. and moral debts. Gable. 59 “ L ord. Journal o f Politics. N ew York: H oughton M ifflin.and by the fact that repudiation w ithout restitution. S ee also R. p. Trust is replaced by credit (talq ). educators. 60 It would be a mistake to overem phasize the contrast between the sym m etry of gift-exchange and the asym metry of the ostentatious distribution which is the basis of the constitution of political authority. 62 Urbanization. Everyone wants to be a market man. is called berru natalq). respect. Annals o f the American A cadem y o f Political and Social Science. 15. and H. though econom ically based. All that counts now is the goods you have im m ediately to hand.

c o o k in g . 214 n . 218 n . 83. 199 n .. 164. 198 n . 96. 5 4 -5 . 211 ri. 9 2 -4 . 38 p ra c tic a l o p e r a to r . 143-6.3 2 . a n d c u ltu r a l a rb itr a r in e s s . 88.4 1 . 235 n . 2 1 3 ^ 9 8 .3 2 b r o th e r s . 94. 2 2 1 -2 n .2 4 . m y th ic a l a n d c lim a tic . 2 6 -9 . 6 3 -5 . J . 112.3. 165. a g ra ria n . 110. 90.4 0 a r t . 195. 20. 218 n . 36. 91. 136. and see h o n o u r. 2 4 -5 . la n g u a g e a u to n o m y . 6 9 . 19. 184 azonth. m im e s is. c u ltu r a l. 117. of liv in g . 88. 3. B . 2 1 4 n . 53.In d ex a b s tr a c tio n . 107. 83 . 236 n .. 170-1. 166. 5 0 -1 . 21. c u ltu r a l. i . 171— 83. 200 n . 238 11. 236 n .2 9 a c c u m u la tio n .4 see alsos p e c ia l­ c a lc u la tio n . p rie s tly . n 8 : 219 n . 145. 187. 22. 61. 124. 206 n . see e x c e lle n c e . so c ia lly in fo r m e d . h o n o u r a c c o u n ts . 1. . 159. 43. 47.. s o c ia l. 231 n . a n d u r b a n iz a tio n . 94.8 4 B eck er. p a rtic ip a n t.1 5 B e n c t. p o in t o f v ie w o f.1 6 A ris to tle . 156. 21 a c c u ltu r a tio n . 224 n . 8 6 -7 B lo o m fie ld .2 6 b e h a v io u ris m .7 . s e x u a lity . 168. p r a c ­ tic a l. 217 n . see also c a p ita l: s y m b o lic amahbul. K . 1 -2 . re la tiv e . 89. 234 n . 142. ( a n d e a rly azegzaw.3 7 itenl'amm.r 8 . 187. 111. c o lo n ia l. 224 n. 65. 70. F. 5 7 -8 .5 . see also s tra te g y B oas. 179-83. 108. 236 n. 12.91 c a le n d a r. 163. 200 n . s p a c e . 25. 219 n . a n d m im e s is . 162. 176. G . 115.123. 18. 83 a rtific ia lis m .5.51 a n th ro p o lo g y . 89. l3l*2 1 9 n . 81 b io g ra p h y . 178. see g e n e a lo g y . see also d e le g a tio n . m a le a n d fe m a le .223 n -33 a n th ro p o lo g is t. see c o u sin B e n v e n is te . 22S n . o rig in o f.3 2 baraka. 119 a n a lo g y . s tr u c tu r a l.33 b ilin g u a lis m . see also e m b o d im e n t.8 amengur. (c o m p e te n c e a n d ) 186. R . e p is te m o lo g ic a l a n d s o cia l.4 9 . 202 n . p la c e o f ( lhajma'th) . 54.2 6 A rro w . 193. 26. 121 b re a k . 59. 122-3 b e lie f. te c h n iq u e s o f. 209 n ..4 4 . 183-4. 96. 36. 216 n .9 1 . 49. 223 n .4 . 116-19. . 216 n . re la tio n to . 41.9 4 . 8 9 . 47.4 7 A ro n . 201 n . 192-3. r it u a l. J . 10. 63. 219 n . 1-2. 4.. 156. C . 171. h is to ry . 1 -2 . 163. 232 n .. n o . 96. 21911.3 6 B ally . and see s tr u c tu r a lis m a rb itr a r in e s s . 116-17. n 1 .41 b a rle y . 185. . 143.6 9 a c c o m p lis h e d . G . 60.2 6 b r id e w e a lth . s y m b o lis m . 9 4 -5 . c u ltu r a l. 197 " a r tic u la tio n o f in s ta n c e s ” . 53. F . 100-4. s y m b o lic . 47. ( p r im itiv e a c c u m u la ­ tio n o f) 187. 222 n . o b je c tiv is m a c a d e m ic is m .5 c a n a lo g ic a l tr a n s f e r . 6. 32 B a te s o n . 189. 226 n . seee x c e lle n c e . 47. 23. 233 n .8 9 b a r d . 95 b lu ff. ists b u tc h e r . 198 n . h o m o lo g )’ o f c a le n ­ d a r s .. 15. F . 172-83. s e n s e o f. 167. in v e rs io n . 146-8 c a p ita l. 6 2 -3 . 17. h e x is.4 4 .2 . 181.1 1 2 [ 240 ] . 95 b e h in d /in f r o n t.5 0 & 54 B e rc lso n . o f la n d a n d liv e s to c k . 49.5 : a n d k n o w le d g e . 167. 217 n. 37.. v irility B o lla ck . 105. 164.3 . 76. 118. 9 7 -1 0 9 . 40. 167. . 178. 224 n .3 2 . 112-13. 7. as s y m b o lic c a p i ta l. 162-3 B a r th . see also g e n e r a tio n a llia n c e s (ites&o). 233 n . 222 n . r. >73 b u r e a u c r a c y . 224 n. 235 n . 2x9 n . 39. fo r a r t ’s s a k e . 46. 238 n n . 56. G . 141. 89.2 6 . 195 age" c la sses. 4 9 . E . e m o tio n . 48.9 1 .2 2 b o d y . 65. 115. r e la tio n b e tw e e n . S . . 24. u n r e a lity o f.5 2 a u th o r ity . 237 n . 130. 113. 194. w o m e n ’s . 119.49 b o tto m /t o p . 40. 127. 55. 216 n . 2. n a m e .4 2 . 211 n . 116. 189 a s s e m b ly . 233 n . L . 17.6 8 B a c h e la rd . o f m e n .

5 6 . 4 1 . re la tio n to . 127 c o lle c tiv e . h a b itu s . 197. 128. 91. o f m o d e o f r e p r o d u c tio n . 97. see s y m b o lic s y ste m c o ld /h o t. 13. 163. 164.4 7 . 27. 93. 202 n . 109. see also in te r e s t. 6 d e le g a tio n . 164. 126. 176 c o m m o n s e n s e .. A . a n d c u ltu ra l c a p ita l. p a ra lle l.2 7 .1 7 . 136. 140-1: d o m in a n t..1 9 c u ttin g . 195 c irc u m c is io n . 193. 236 n. R . see also d e c o d in g c o g n itio n . 2 3 -5 . 137. 90. fee also h a b itu s c e n t r if u g a l/c e n tr ip e ta l. 154. 26. 8 3 . 32. see also f u n c tio n c o m p e te n c e . 1. 221 n . 23. 215 n .8 o . 28. 46 c r e d it. 116. 224 n . 216 n . n o . >°8. 225 n . 80 c o n s c c ra tio n c y c le . c o lle c tiv e . 84. 182. 78. 141. 135. 233 n . 121. i l l . 7 . 195 c o n s e n s u s . 25. 169 -7 0 . 173. see c a p ita l c u ltu r a l in te re s ts . 9 1 .1 8 . 40. 190 (to ) c lo s e /o p e n . '4 3 .26 d a y /n ig h t. 124. 169. 225 n . 138. 124-30. 168. o f r itu a l a c tio n s .19> 4^> 167.. 166.2 0 . 1. 177.9 8 . see also g e n e a lo g y d ia le c tic . 160. 198 n . 158.9 4 C h a r . 8 5 -6 . 174. i n . m a rria g e w ith .4 .1 0 2 c h ild . 2 : 6 n n . 216 n . see p r a c tic e . x 12 c o o k e d /ra w . 193. 130. 161. 209 n . o p p o s itio n s c lie n te le . 81.. 121. 133. 80. 1 6 . 9 7 .2 2 c o u s in . 223 n -34 c ip h e r.2 6 . >44. a m b ig u ity o f. 224 n . (a n d e c o n o m ic c a p ita l) 56. 5 7 -8 . 136-7.153. 90. 143-6. 231 n . see d o x a .. 208 n n . N . 8 7 -9 . 236 n . 62. 203 n . 182. 5 1 . 2 0 i n . 62. 138.8 3 D a h l. 67. 76. 148-53. 238 n n .2 0 c u ltu r e . a n d r e la tio n to la n d . '7°> '7® c ro o k e d /s tra ig h t. 228 n. o b je c tiv e a n d in te r n a liz e d . c o m m u n ic a tio n o f c o n sc io u s n e s s e s . 2 6 & 2 8 . c ro s e -c .6 3 c u ltu r a l c a p ita l. p o litic a l.. 159. 81. o f v io lc n c c .7 5 c la ss: d iv is io n in to . R . 191. 237 n . 98. 2 3 3 -4 n. 25. 227 n . 223 n . and see ritu a l p r a c tic e . 231 n.2 2 . 106-7. a n d o ffe n c e . 8 1 . 196. 30-71 p a w im . 11. p o litic a l f u n c tio n o f. 130. 58. 47. A . 171. 177-83 passim. 8 7 -9 5 .5 6 c o n tr a r y a n d c o n tr a d ic to r y . 228 n . (f u n c tio n o f) 37. 194-5. 41. 112. 181. see also o u ts id e c h a lle n g e . 7 3 -4 . see c o d e c irc u la tio n . 192.6 .1 1 4 c e n s o rs h ip . a s c o n s tr u c te d o b je c t a n d p re c o n ­ s tr u c te d d a tu m . (id e o lo g ic a l r e p r e s e n ta tio n o f) 4 3 -4 . see p e rs o n ific a tio n c o lle c tiv iz a tio n . 8 2 -3 c o n sc io u s n e s s . 35.Index capital (con t. 23. c o n c e p t of. p e rs o n ific a tio n o f. 2 .7 7 . 140. . 201 n . 94.4 4 C h e lh o d . 92. 129. 208 n . 221 n . 218 n .8 5 . 75. 1 20-1. 97. c ir c u la r . an(^ see e x te rn a liz a tio n . 8 2 . h a b itu s C h o m sk y . o f s y m b o lic s y s te m s . 2 0 3 ^ 4 9 .9 2 c o o k in g -p o t.6 2 c ris is.5 4 . p ra c tic a l. 138. 24 c o n d u c t. 179. 216 n . a n d c ris is. 169.6 7 . 128. th in k in g in . 15-18. 41 c o m m e n s a lity . M . r e u n io n o f.5 0 . 199 n n . 212 n . see f u n c tio n . 219 n . p ra c tic a l. '9 7 D e s c a rte s . 187. 172. 220 n . 136. 116.4 1 . 159— 61 d e a th .8 5 c o d e . see also c o n s c io u s n e s s c la ssific a to ry s y s te m . 8 0 -1 . d o x ic e x p e rie n c e . s y m b o lic .) e d u c a tio n ) 6 3 -4 . 235 n . 113. 83. 143-5 c o o k in g .7 5 . see also k in s h ip . and see h a b itu s . 226 n . a n d le g itim a c y . J . R . 114. i . o f c h a lle n g e a n d r ip o s te .2 4 c o m m e rc e . 211 n . 102. 112 C o u r n o t. 237 n ..1 1 3 . 178-80. d o m in a n t. 168-9. 170 d e n ia l.2 1 5 n . a w a k e n in g o f c la ss (prise de conscience). 95. 216 n. 138.3 0 . 208 n . 64 c o n tr a r ie s .4 6 d ia g r a m . 143. 148 d e c ip h e r in g . 101. 170. 8 4 . 239 n. k n o w le d g e 24 1 c o n ju n c tu r e . h o m o g a m y . 107. g ro u p D e M o rg a n . see also a u th o r ity . J . 116. 121. 133. o f o b je c ­ tif ic a tio n a n d e m b o d im e n t. 205 n .3 2 . 225 n . a s re c o g n iz e d c a p a c ity . 179 c o n tra d ic tio n .6 7 & 70. 2. 212 n . 193 c h a ris m a tic id e o lo g y . 238 n . 1. g a m e . 61. s p e c ific . 123. R .io o . 23-4.n 8. see also e d u c a tio n . 211 n . 164.9 6 . see also e x e c u tio n . 73. 2 2 0 n . 12 1 -2 . 127.3 7 . m is re c o g n itio n C a r n a p . s p e e c h c o n fo rm ity . iee d e c o d in g d e c o d in g .7 6 & 79 C u is e n ie r. 29.. 76. s e lf-e v id e n c e . 156 c o u p le s . ‘ 54. 40 c o m p re h e n s io n .5 6 . 228 n . 44. 90. 118. 221 n . s tr u c tu r e o f d a y . h a b itu s . 208 n .< 5 -6 . 124-30. 15. 118. 148. 57. 12. 211 n . 27. 1 32-9. 186. a n d s le e p .1 7 0 .1 2 . 46. 197 c u ltu r a l p ra c tic e s .4 . 201 n . and see e x c h a n g e (connaissance) c o h e re n c e . 131.7 8 . . o f a g ra ria n a c tiv ity . 80.9 2 C o r n f o r d .4 0 . 183. s e n s e c o m m u n ic a tio n . 22. a n d in d iv id u a l. 29. 133. 227 n.41 c u s to m a r y law . 167 c o n tr a c t. 91 d e la y a n d s tra te g y .2 0 3 ^ 4 9 . 2 2 6 n n . 40. 74. a n d d o m in a tio n . F .2 8 . 119 c h a ris m a .3 0 . 20. o f o ffen c e a n d re v e n g e . o f p r o d u c ts o f h a b itu s .

238 n . G . m e n ’s a n d w o m e n ’s . 72. . 199 n . h a b itu s e tiq u e tte . 133. 7 . 14-15.2 0 . 20. 8 4 -5 D u b v . 183. 81. 8 -9 . 172. 236 n . 165.8 o e v e r y th in g ta k e s p la c e a s if. 74. 163 fo rm u la . and see fo r m u la ­ 6 t io n . 237 n . . 215 n .2. 9 1 -4 . a n d e th o s . 11. 24. o f b lo w s . 218 n . . 207 n . seealsod ia le c tic . 8 . 177— . 19. 100. 9 2 . 220 n . 14. see also d is c o u r s e .7 3 .8 7 & 8 9 . 90. 57. H . 164^71 d o x ic e x p e r ie n c e . 211 n . 95. 125. 28. 103. W .3 7 . 81.5 7 f u ll. 191. 29. see o u t( s id e ) e x te rn a liz a tio n /in te m a liz a tio n . 201 n n . n o . 36. 177-8 . a n d in c u lc a tio n . 74. p ra c tic a l. 205 n . 183 8 e c o n o m is m . 176.8 o .31 D u m o n t. p ed ag o g y e x tr a -o rd in a r y /o rd in a ry . E . 117.4 2 d iv is io n . 225 n . 122. 199 n . see c o u s in . 9 d is c o u r s e . 168. 9 7. p rin c ip le o f. 181. see also se lf-e v id e n c e d ry . 220 n . 216 n . 124. G . 183. E . 126.4 8 e m p ty /f u ll. i . 45. 52. 2 4 -5 . 190. 110.7 9 e a s t/w e s t. 94. O . 100. 178. 9 2 -3 . 2 1 7 ^ 4 0 . see w e t D u B o is. 115. 11. 2 .9 1 . M . 129. o b je c ­ tific a tio n F r a z e r. p e d a g o g y e d u c a tio n a l s y s te m .5 8 .. 171ft. 218 n . 42. a n d e t h i c s . 15. 6 4 . jr e a /s o c h ild . 112. S . 117.2 7 . 233 n. 91. 30 e x o g a m y . 127. J . 115. 175. 233 n. see also u n c o n s c io u s fin a lity F in le y . 6 2 . 196 E v a r s . s y m b o lic . 212 n . 90. fe m a le -fe m a le a n d m a le -fe m a le . 164. 125. o f w o rd s . 165. 175. of w o m e n . 50-1 d is p o s itio n . 112. see also la b o u r fin a h s m .7 0 F l a t b e r t . 48. 223 n . s p a c e .1 2 . in c e st epoche.11 E m p e d o c le s . 95. 226 n . . 96. 24. 8 7 .P r itc h a r d .1 4 . 180. 198 n . 72. 4 . 7 8 -9 . 235 n . 120. 15. a n d a r t o f liv in g . 1 -2 .6 2 . a n d h e x i s . 45.2 6 . 29.4 elbahadla. 15.5 2 e n d o g a m y .1 6 5 . m a rria g e s . 10. g o o d -fa ith . 185-6 e d u c a tio n . 42. lo g ic o f. 11. 30ft e x p lic it. 194. 4 -6 . 15.8 9 .5 . g o o d . 93. 201 n .5 0 . 6 2 -3 . 170. 236 n .7 3 D u r k h e im . 131.3 9 . 110. g ifts . 198 n . 178.5 6 . i o D u c r o t. 9 d o x a . 124. 7 2 -3 . 27. 3 3 -8 .1 8 fo o d . 11-13. 91.7 1 .2 . o f g ifts . 210 n n . 95 e u p h e m iz a tio n . m u s ic a l. 3 2 -3 . 196. 9 4 . 23. 127. o fficial. see also fe m a le / m a le .2 6 . 115. 19 e m b le m . 22. 18. 224 n . see also h a b itu s d is tin c tio n . c o g n itiv e . 217 n .3 8 . te m p o r a l. 121. 7 7 . 183... 171-85. and see p ra c tic e d is e n c h a n tm e n t. 202 n . 108-9. 207 n . 221 n -23 fe m a le /m a le . i n .4 1 . 167. c h o ic e o f te r m . 45. o f g e n e a lo g y . o f k in s h ip a n d k in . see also in te re s t. 111. 3 7 .i6 . 178. . 170. 121.1 0 2 . 49. fe m a le m ale a n d m a le -m a le 224 n . 41. 219 n . 2 3 9 n . 20. e le m e n ta r y fo r m s o f. 1 25-6. 167. 169. in c u lc a tio n . 165. 222 n . 202 n . 97. 170-1.8 . 3.4 9 . 172. see also d is p o s itio n . 40. 52-8 face u p to . i 8 6 . 'S 3 e c c e n tric ity . 31. I . 15. 203 n . 120.4 . 119. 227 n . see also th r e s h o ld D o s to y e v s k y .3 0 . 135-6. F . 20c n . 61. J . 3. 122.9 8 . 8 1. 233 n . E . 152 F a v r e t. 113. 205 n . 7 7 . 7 2 -8 .1 7 1 .2 1 . a rc h a ic . 163. 227 n . and see k in s h ip .4 2 e m b o d im e n t. 172-3. E . 167. 195. 186-8. see c o o k in g fo rm . 203 n . g r o u p . 18. see f o r m u la tio n e x te rn a l. 194. 3. m a k in g . m o d e s o f. 221 n . 194. 124. 16-22. 79. 112. 209 n . 155— . 222 n . 185.2 0 & 2 6 . C .1 5 ergon!energeia.9 6 -7 .9 5 . 219 n . u n d iv id e d d o m in a n t/d o m in a te d . 183-97 Passim d o o r . 17. 139. 168. 171-83.7 2 F r e u d . 189. 167. 7 5 -6 . 87. 227 n . 1-2. 151.. 107. 232 n . m o n e ta ry . o f h o n o u r. 130. 61. 136. 45. 89. 224 n . 98. G . " s p e c u la tiv e ” . see also c irc u la tio n . 191. re v e n g e e x e c u tio n . 19-20. 105. in c u lc a ­ tio n . see also la b o u r. 198 ri.. 42. 62.1 4 . 136. 77. 38 e v e m 'o d d . 238 n . th e o ry D ilth e y . 25. 113-14. 88 fo r m u la tio n . 118-19. u n iv e rs e o f.4 2 e th n o c e n tr is m . 161 e c o n o m ic p ra c tic e s . 72. 178.. W . 96. 2 0 3 n n -3 9 & 4 9 . 6.3 5 . 13. 122. 11. 96. 214 n . 24. 125. 95. 137. 5 2 -8 . 135. see also s e lf-e v id e n c e " f a ta l s y s te m ” . 330 n . 27. c o m m u n ic a tiv e . 10..8 . 109. 180. see e m p ty fu n c tio n . 8 7 -9 5 E m m e r ic h .2 6 e x c h a n g e .4 5 e a r th /s k y . 18. 6 2 -3 e c o n o m ic s o f p ra c tic e . 84. 80 D io d o r u s . 200 n n . 75.242 In d ex e th n o m e th o d o lo g y . 8 5 . 168. (a c c o u n ta n c y a n d ) 178. . 202 n. o f m a rria g e . 137. 119 E r ik s o n .4 9 e x c e lle n c e . 3 . see qabel fa m ilia rity . 22. f u n c tio n a lis m .6 o .5 0 fire /w a te r. 91. see also p h e n o m e n o lo g y e th o s. 45. L . 15.. p o w e r re la tio n s d o m in a tio n . 104. 93 e m o tio n . p ra c tic e . s y m b o lic . 238 n n . 90. 185. 177 e c o n o m y .. n . c la ss. 16.

2 6 . 17. 213 n . 109-13. 205 n. 132. 117. see also c a p i ta l: s y m b o lic . 228 n. M . and see im p r o v is a tio n . C . a n d te rm in o lo g y o f social u n its . 202 n . 86. 194.2 9 . 201 n . 8 0 -2 . 87— . 138 g e n e r a tio n g a p . 18. 15s. A . 94. 35. 7 9 -8 1 .R e m m a n .i f u tu r e . 198 n . 76.41 g r o u p . 1 9 . 79. n .Index fu n c tio n a lis m . 83. a n d in te r e s ts .9 6 . 7 8 -9 . a n d p o s itio n . 8. 3 6 -8 . 105.2 0 . 4 . a n d 8 b io g ra p h y . 196. 8 5 -6 . 73. 18. 73. 4 1 -3 . 171.1 8 . 38. 72. 19. 215 n . M .2 6 . 26. see also lim it g e n e r o s ity . H . 236 n . . 182. a n d d e s c e n t. 120. 119.7 . 18. 30-43 passim. 7 .3 H a r tm a n n .6 2 . a n d c u ltu r e . 27. 211 n . 78 g e n e r a tio n c o n flic ts . 20. 72. 20. 162. 48.4 4 h a b itu s . 204 n .1 0 3 . 8 1 . 207 n . T . 199 n n . 61.6 3 g a m e . 4 . 33. see o u t(s id e ) G o o d y . see h o n o u r H u s s e rl. 81. a n d p ra c tic a l lo g ic 228 n ..e r . 8 3 . 37. . m a trim o n ia l.8 5 . 20.41 H e b . 77 hurma. see also rite g a m e th e o r y . 162. 200 n .7 7 . 54.1 8 2 . a n d im p r o v is a tio n . a n d h is to ry . 21. b o d y . 87. 30. see o rth o d o x y h e x is. 9 2. 21. 8 5 . 211 n .2 9 H o b b e s . a n d u n c o n s c io u s . h y s te re s is e ffe c t a n d . 163. a n d e th o s . 218 n . 7 9 . 186.. s y m b o lic . 131. 1. 18. 78. 2. n . 95.4 0 g r a m m a r . 21. 126. 9 8 . a n d p a s t. 239 n . a n d c e n s o rs h ip . 6 3 -4 . 218 n .. 230 n. 33.. 207 n.. 77-9. 79. 107. .6 8 in c o rp o ra tio n . 87. 9 . 81. 12-13 h is to ry . 82. 6 7.. 15.. o f h o n o u r. 236 n . 19. 86.io o haram. 212 n . h a b itu s " id e o lo g ic a l a p p a r a t u s e s ” . 76. : a c q u is i­ tio n o f. 108. 193 h o e in g .113 h e re sy . E . 122.6 6 h o n o u r ( hurma). 90. 97. 7 8 . 115.. 243 27 G r a n e t. H . 8 5 . 152. 23. a s im m a n e n t la w . 18. 169. 216 n . 166-7 im p r o v is a tio n . 237 n-¥> H e id e g g e r. 218 n . . 7 8 -9 . 181. a n d p ra c tic e s . 86. i G id e .4 7 . 25.3> 221 n -2S in d iv id u a l. 8 6 -7 . is o tim y . s tra te g y h o t. 61. 6 4 . C . 72. see e m b o d im e n t in c u lc a tio n .5 .61 G r e e n e . a n d L e to u r n e u x . 83. 218 n . see s a c re d h a r d /te n d e r . 76. see also s tr u c tu r a lis m H je lm s le v . 171. 95. 1 8 7 -8 . and see h . 35.. 167. 79. m . 186. 21. 161. 66.9 0 . 113. S3.9 2 .9 5 . .5 4 . 17. 156. c y c le o f. 236 n. 130. 8. 76. a n d c o lle c tiv e a c tio n . p o in t o f h o n o u r.7 2 . 178. 77 G a rfin k e l. 21. A .. m o d e o f. M . a n d c h ro n o lo g y . 9 3 -4 . . . 8 2 -3 . 64. n . as u n ify in g p rin c ip le . a n d e arly e d u c a tio n .6 . N .8 . 81. 76. 188 id e o lo g y . io .7 . 11. a n d so c ia l p o s itio n .. s e n s e . g r o u p a n d c la ss. 200 n .8 5 . 218 n . see c o ld h o u s e ( K a b v le ) . i . 8 1 -2 .7 4 . see also fu n c tio n g y m n a s tic s .. 2 . 19. 6 3 -4 . a s s tr u c tu r e d . 171-3. 8 6 -7 . 54. n o . 84. 2 . a n d ru le s . 217 n .2 3 H a n o te a u . a n d u n c o n s c io u s .8 .3 4 G o ffm a n . g e n e r a tiv e . 200 n . h a rm o n iz a tio n (o r c h e s ­ tr a tio n ) o f. 17-18.9 4 . 2 . m a n o f.2 6 : a n d c u s to m a r y la w . 156. 206 n . a llia n c e .3 7 . g. 16. a c q u is itio n o f. 15. 175. s o o n . 8 9 -9 1 . W . 7 7 -8 . see also exchange G lu c k m a n . 2 3 9 ^ 5 9 . 200 n . 87. 226 n . 199 n . a n ti. 112 g if t. 200 n . 231 n. see also c a p ita l g e n e s is a m n e s ia . 218 n . 14. 73. 2 i 4 n . 188. 82. n o r m . 21. 196. w o m a n ’s. a n d in c u lc a tio n . 7 8 -9 . 192. see in d e te rm in a c y G a b le . see thadjadith'. 8 1 . 8 2 -3 . 23. 44. 98. M . v o n . 94. 65.9 4 .7 4 . 221 n. 62.7 . 207 n . a n d in te ra c ­ tio n . 8 2 -3 . 12. 119 H u m e . D .6 6 . 125.109 G r a n q v is t. 4 n . G . 17. see also h a b itu s . 78. o f e x c h a n g e s . c ritiq u e o f. J . 8. 171 h e rm e n e u tic s . m a n o f h o n o u r ’s.f . in d iv id u a l a n d c o lle c tiv e . ‘94-5> >98 n . W . 43. c o lle c tiv e .3 9 h u m a n is m . A .21 h y s te re s is e ffe c t. I40 . s tr u c tu r in g s tr u c tu r e . W . 8 5 -6 .2 4 G e e r tz . a n d s e x u a l d iv is io n o f la b o u r .8 1 . see also g e n e r a tio n . 236 n. see also h a b itu s in d e te rm in a c y . a n d s t r u c ­ tu re s . A . 122-3. c h o ic e o f te r m . 11. 79 H a v e lo c k . 232 n . 78. o fficial. 189.1 2 . 8 5 . E . 94 h ir e d tille r . 216 n. 108-9. see also s u b je c tiv is m H u m b o ld t. 217 n . 206 n n . 6 3 -4 . ru le illn e s s. 131.. 94 g o in /o u t. R .1 1 2 .4 7 . see also sem io lo g y h e te ro d o x y . 40. 82. a n d s tra te g ie s . a s u n iv e rs a liz in g m e d ia tio n . L . 201 n .3 0 . F . a n d g e n e a lo g is ts .. 121 fu z z in e s s .H e b . 222 n . 207 n ..2 3 .91 H a rris . 76. 81. 30.71 g e n e r a tio n .3 9 g e n e a lo g y . see also h a b itu s in c e s t.2 4 . 7 6 -8 . 1 -3. W . E .6 . 9. 114 H e g e l. 216 n . a n d h a b itu s . see also g e n e a lo g y .

224 n. 11. 169 ju s tic e . z i8 n . 96-158 k n o w le d g e (savoir). 91. 199 n . th e o re tic a l. 1 70-1.4 0 . 201 n . 176. lo g ic a l. 16. n a m e .4 . 106. B . 221 n . 222 n .4 1 . 203 n . p ra c tic a l.2 5 . 23 & 26. a n d d o x a .6 6 . 225 n .8 . 129. 140. 117. 117. a n d b o d y . 122. J . 24.61 J a k o b s o n . 160 d iv is io n o f. D . see also c o u s in . 202 n n . n . 137. 160-1. 151-2.6 5 . A . and see r e p r o d u c tio n .6 8 . 1 . 1 7 1-2.47 172. 9 0 . i n . p h e n o m e n o lo g y 109-14. 236 n . . 2 3 -4 .2 9 . 17. 88 L o w ie . 132-3. see also o f. a n d p r o d u c tio n tim e .244 Index in f o r m a n t. a n d re lig io n . 174-5.3 9 . 116..5 5 . 2 0 . 231 n. r e p r e s e n ta tio n a l. . see also in te lle c tu a lis m la b o u r . p rin c ip le o f.9 0 . 89. 9 6 . 21. o b je c tiv is m .9 3 . 163. n a tu r a l. 32. E . 43. 3 8 .3 8 L e to u r n e u x . A . 20. 5 9 . 20 L e ib n iz . see also c u s to m a r y law b o d y m o v e m e n t.1 1 0 hanun ( h e a r th ) .2 i 6 n . 9 6 . 201 n-3p khammes.. 25. 126.d a u th o r ity . 1 . 228 n . m o ra l. 198 n 5. 1 8 0-1.1 9 6 -7 kairos.8 7 . 205 n . 230 n. 6 . 237 n .3 0 lite ra c y . 93. 180... 165 4 1 -3 . 115. H . 3 3 -8 . 2 I^ n -44. b y d o in g . 118-19. E . a g e . s y m b o lic v a lu e in te r a c tio n .2 7 . 219 n . 10-11.3 . 196 64. 19. 170. 41. 126.2 0 .4 5 . G . 18-19. 91. 37. (b e tw e e n s e x e s) 41. see flk ° ea r t h . 228 n . 219 n . 166. 236 n . 223 n .3 0 & 35 le a rn . p a r tic u la r a n d g e n e r a l. . d e . R . 163.2 6 . 163.3 . 163. 46. 146-8 . h a b itu s w om an la n g u a g e : o f th e b o d y . 9 6 -7 . 196. 3 1 -2 . 186-7. 119. 203 la b o u r tim e . 146.4 .S tra u s s . 115. 217 n . 177. 3 9-40. 239 n . 179. 222 n .9 .110 K r o e b e r . see also p h e n o m e n o lo g y s c h e m e s . a r. 205 n n . 124.165. 61. 21. a n d K le in .3 8 . . 228 n. c a te g o r ie s . in te g r a tio n o f.2 9 171. 86. L a o u s t. 26. C . b y m e n a n d b y w o m e n . 151-2. a n d s p e e c h 172. 2 7 . 1 7 4-5. official n . 89. p ra c tic a l ( p r im a ry ) 3. 125. 4 1 -3 . 163. 15 L a s sw e ll. . a n d e x p e r ie n c e .2 3 -5 . 46. 196.107 K a s d a n . lo g ic a l. L e v i. 113. 9 0 -1 . 106. 171 c a tio n . see also lin e a g e in te lle c tu a lis m . 219 n . 115.3 8 . 6 0 -1 . 218 n .5 8 & K e lly . 136. 1 75-6.8 9 . 8 1 -2 . G W . 208 n .105 la n d . 30. 192. 2 3 7 n . 1 7 4-6. 219 passim. 10. see also e d u c a tio n . 19. m n e m o te c h n ic s lo g ic.3 8 . 234 n . p r a c tic c s c o n c e r n in g . f u n c tio n lin g u is tic s .. lo g ic o f. 76. see o u t(s id e ) in te g ra tio n . o f r e p r o d u c ­ M a c K e a n . (a n d n n . 200 n .4 9 . 118. 90. c a le n d a r m a le . 105. 190-1. R . R . 81. 223 n .2 5 . 202 n .4 8 9 . s y m b o lic . 204 n . 195. I . . 5 7 . 168. m o d e s o f. a n d u p b r in g in g .205 id eo lo g y . 209 n . 124. 130.3 7 . 39.2 2 -3 . 2 S .1 . F . 140-1 L a k o ff. 196. 124.. H . p lo u g h in g . 88.+2.2 2 8 L e N y .5 8 le f t/r ig h t..2 2 .7 8 . 96. lin e a g e. 221 n . see also ru le K a d i-ju s tic e . 4 0 -1 . 6 . in c u lc a tio n . 8 9. A . A . 201 n .2 5 la m p .1 9 .0 5 -6 .. 106.. S a u s s u ria n .4 . p ro d u c tiv e a n d u n p r o d u c tiv e .63 m a g ic . B . s o c ia l. o f o b je c tifi­ L u l i c s . 198 n . lim it.2 5 . 4 5 . i 44.. 30-71 p a tsim . 25. 233 n . o rd in a ry . 171. ue also a n th r o p o lo g is t in s id e . 116. 182. 225 n. lo o m . 237 n -49 k in s h ip . 194. 31..8 . 1 8 2 -3 . 132. 217 n .g o . 222 n . M .5 8 202 n . 164. 4 -5 .3 0 in v e rs io n . n . o f c o n c e a lm e n t. 172-3.3 2 lad le. *«£ m a s ­ te ry : p ra c tic a l ju ra l ru le s . C . 21. a n d c la ssific a to ry in te ra c tio n is m . 158. 129. e c o n o m y o f. te r m s . 16 L e a c h . (a n d L e v y -B ru h l. e c o n o m ic . 17 le g a list fo rm a lis m (juridisme) .5 8 . 156-7. 15. see also g r o u p . 1. S . o f e u p h e m iz a tio n . m a n ip u la tio n o f. 7 3 . 26.8 o . 180. 46 K a n t. tio n . 221 n n . re la tio n s . 239 n. 1. official a n d p ra c tic a l.4 4 " lo g ic a l lo g ic ” ) 142. 125. 115. 19. 96. . 206 n . see fe m a le o f. 57— 63. 191. see also f u n c tio n . 187-8.6 2 . see H a n o te a u . 202 n ..9 2 .3 9 . io i. e c o n o m ic a n d s y m b o lic 38. see M u r p h y . 108. a n d s tr a te g y . 36.2 o 6 n . 9 0 .. H . 231 n. 182. 73. 220 n . 142. p ra c tic a l. 2 -3 .1 8 8 . 182 in te rv a l. p e d a g o g y ja c k a l. n le a rn e d ig n o ra n c e (docta ignorantia) . 92 see S a u s s u re K lu c k h o h n .3 0 lo g ic ism . 225 n . n .68.3 & 4 . 158. 139. F . 232 n . a n d p a in s . 162. 27. R . 35. w o m e n ’s. 117 m y th ic c a te g o rie s ) 4 5 . see alsoth r e s h o ld is o tim y . and see r u le . L .. 109. 130. 1 7 0 -1 . D . 6 s c ie n tific . see also k n o w le d g e (connaissance). G . 219 n . 120. 126. L o r d . 121. 14.87 L a R o c h e fo u c a u ld . L .4 0 . 215 n . 227 n . 219 n . 201 n . 164. 7 6 . 201 n . W . 89.52 ' 57~^i 9®. in te r e s t. L in d e r . s e n s e o f.8 4 . 221 n .8 6 .. 217 n . ZI9 n n . 119. 84. {U ingueiparole).4 . 37. 171. s e x u a l. 98. 171. 8 0 . 16 le g itim a tio n .1 5 . L . 231 n . a n d law .4 2 . (la x ity o f) 91.2 2 .

see also contraries. 61. 167. implicit. R. 160-1 outsider (stranger). and unofficial. 22c n . title nationalism. practical. 118-19. 10.i12. 206 n. magic. 230 n. see execution personality. 6-7. 88-9.49.199 n. 113..41 model. 156.54 m ech an ism . 209 n. 109. 79. C. 223 n.8 Morand. 2.49. matrimonial. 8.. 233 n.52.. 46. 141 negotiation.30 Mauss. 79. 231 n n.. modal. see also opinion out(side)/m(side). 79. 73. 72. 10. C. strategy Marx. 45. 226 n. see also marriage Negro. 60. negotia­ tion. 171. 129. 101-2.g. 186-7. 127. symbolic (theoretical).31 Parmenides. 1. 112. 77. 195-6. official. 202 n.181. 96. 174. formulation. see also realism Peters. 60. 105 Marcy. J. 87. see thiwizi myth. 22c nn. 167-71 oppositions. basic.217 n. 170. 220 n.. 163. 224 n.61 obligation.46. labour. diagram.45 Maunier. M. 68-9. 203 n. 199 n. 177 Needham. 193. 223 n. 47. 32. 227 n. 94. centrifugal.. 23.28. mythico-ritual. 34-5. lineage. and main pillar.172-83. 195. 5. 168. T . .21. 95 observer. 1..171. *42> 157. 169. 111. 223 n. 31. 96. 118. 56. 125. see point of honour norm. 183. 231 n . 119. 234 n. extra­ ordinary. 162. 172. ideology officialization. labour. R. 189 marriage. see also rule Notopoulos. female/male opus operatum. G. of social capital. 171 (to) o pen.70. see also cousin. 5. theory objectivism. L. symbolic profits of.42 nif.. 3-9. 217n.n . 206 n. 198 nn. 200 n. selfregulating.38.13. 18 pedagogy. 101.25. see also economism Matheron. 35. see also exchange monothesis and polythesis. see also education. 70. see (to) close Merleau-Ponty.32. see also rite pedagogic action. 58. 17-18.57 opinion. 116. 80. 201 11. 7. 177. 96.41. see also capital: symbolic. 22. 96. 213 n. 22.48 "master beam”. 2. 107. i n . A . 33 phenomenology. 21. 37. 19-21. see also calendar. B. 213 n. 5. 87-95passim. 4. 27-8.3 & 8. 20. i n . 178. i3off. K.in-12 materialism.83-4. 71. 20. 123.14 official. 38-43.183. 97. 187.8-9. function.2 Pariente.8o obsequium. and practical.. 187. 124-7.60-2.m -12. 85 personification of collectives. 15. 3-5. 200 n.. 59. 18-19. 123. 156-8. 218 n. 27-9.61.7. 18. 36-7. 72-8 p a ssim 245 nefs. 158. 114-15. 3r. 86 manners. inculcation pedagogic relationship. 184.87. 18-19. 232 n.19. 47. 128. 237 n. 129. E. 19. 30. and Kasdan.. E. and science of myth.79. matrimonial. see also awrith. 37. 94-5. 204 n.79 mastery. h i money. 97. 139. 98. 94 map. 192-3.. 123.103 mutual aid. 26. 3& 72' .. 164. 232 n. 163. 190.191. 2. 164.163. 12. 138. 185. 236 n. A. 199 n. 90. 133. 102. 148-52. 41. see also ritual practice name. 184-6. 56.47 metaphysics. 41. 61. M.106. pairs of oppositions e. and philosophy.84 market. 36.41 misrecognition (meconnaissance). 182. n c. observer. 90. see modus operandi orchestration of practices.40. 224 n. 199 n. I22> 137. 34-5. and revenge. see even offence.4. 103. 64. 161-2 Murphy. preferential. and norm. 11 measuring. 105. M. 138.23 Mead.14. J . proposal of.32. 87. 195. 117-18. 172-3. see also kinship.30. 209 n. 170. 235 n. 115.. 94. 34-5.107.Index Malinowski. 218 n. 233 n.. see also rite mvthopoeia. 236 n. proper. 22. 20-2.44. 203 n. 225 n. 125. 21-2.41 objectification.9. 33. 83-4. 232 n. 19. 174. 45.35 Nicolet. cultural. 202 n-}° manner.. 124 Parsons. 1-30 passim. 226 n.71 Nicod. 236 n. 53. 30-71. 218 n..195-6 mnemotechnics. 222 n. 154. 1-2.27.g. G. 32-3 modus operatidijopus operatum. 176. 61. market. 156-8 mimesis. 205 nn.. outside Panofsky. 122. first (transmission of). 103. J . see also habitus orthodoxy/heterodoxy.69. H. 88• "8. 235 n. 94. 57-8. 22. 236 n. 231 n n. 90. L. 6. 118. 164. 50. 239 n.18 morning.66. R. 174. 96. rite. see genealogy. 88. 168. 10. 94 performance. 59. 77. 90-2. 135. 118. 84-5. see also anthropologist odd. 15 . 83 passages. 124. 170..37.

$ee a^° circumcision. O?"8* *54-5. 129. 139. 159.33 Ruyer.4. 118. 6-7. rain-making.122. 95.20. see also ideology realism.58 rationalization. 117. 83. 15-17. 236 n. 219 n. 227 n. and strategy. 139.62. 22-9. 82-3. 2. no. 160. 2.104. 155. 92 psychology. linguistic and ritual. 70. 25. 128. and weaving. 30. 139. 223 n. 195. position Polyani.74.118. see customary law relationships. see gift pre-Socratics. symbolic. see rational­ ization Russell. 92. 15..46. 2 point of honour (nif). 180. 165 practical logic. 52. marriage.77. 93. 115. 166. 25. (implicit) 1. 116 reproduction. K. 53-6. 24.29. 205 n. 89. 163. 31. 156. 148.16 rule. 58-71 passim. 143. 137 Poincare. 58. 29-30. 208 n. 227 n. W. A. 204 n. 125. 15. 146. mode of. 181. 170. 2. and marriage. 4c. L. 163. collective. sense of. 86 philosophy. 45. 120-1. 153. 164-5. 188-90.48 prophet. 224 n. see also conjuncture rhythms.31 probabilities.. 207 n. 98. 224 n. 113. 128.41. 140. 130. 52. 45.48.78. 22. 223 n*4°» ^ n. 132-9. 201 n. I7I> 178 religion. 143. 194.6o polysemy. 166. 9. 153. 107-8.. 100. 7. 214 n. 23 right. 183.22 . M.101.30.216 n. 165. 7.246 Index qualification.. 96. 235 n.182. 161-3. 76-8.13 psychoanalysis. 163. 17. 5-9. 162. 104. intergenerational. 72. see also etiquette political science. cycle of. and see simultaneity. 15. officialization. 204 n. see monothesis pomegranate. expulsion. temporal structure of.57. 128. 138— 208 n. 76. 180. 12. 67-8. 31. 92. 216 n. 36. 35. 35.86 revenge. political.63. th e o ry : th eo rizatio n Phidias. 14-15.. see left rite (ritual). 107. 3. 90. 156. 39. 225 n. and subjective aspira­ tions. political. 36.103. see a^ tempo so Riegl. 225 n. 171 Proust. 36. 94. see also labour resurrection.98. 138-9.61 ruh. 10. A. 132.i 12. 64-5. 91. 156. 235 n. female.37. 4-5. strategy: successional. of the element. 98 Rosenfield. 38.i 11. 121. 178 . 164-6. 4. 201 n.60-1. 207 n.32. 93. child. 233 n.208-9 n-8°* 211 n. 127. 224 n. 23. 89. and epistemology. 58. realism . see also collectivization. universe of. 135. 38. 233 n. 15. economic.46.. 137. 168.49. 158. 216 n. upkeep of. 196. R. 29. 237 n.99. 239 n. 120-3. 188 regionalism. 104.9 power relations. 205 n. 132ff. and see accumulation. 155. simple. see also logic: prac­ tical ritualization. 96. H. see also indeter­ minacy polythesis. 194. see magic representations. prophylactic and prop­ itiatory. 93-5. 115 g. see official. 94-5. 27. l^e intelligible. see also title Quine. B. 21. 218 n.30. 114. 203 n. 124 qabel. 60. see mastery practice. 114. 54. 72. 132. 59. 166. 136. 182.44. 177 regularization.64. 187-8.. prognosti­ cation. !37» *75. 36. of passage. 82-3. 110-11.33. 162 present. 114. 134-5. 2I3 n. 211 n-94. H. of the structure. 129.51 Radcliffe-Brown. 135-6.29 reciprocity.. sanctioning. 184-5. 39. 202 n. ii. 84-5.113 Plato. 73-4. 165 . R. 201 nn. 182-3. 189. 222 n. see conformity reification of abstractions. 224 n-4^ ploughing.137. 196-7. fertility. 1-2. 194 pottery. 95. 124. objectivism politeness. social. see official.74 roots. 15. 82 potlatch. ploughshare.54. 201 n.28. and see brothers. 162. 55. see personification. 148.44. 45^6. 61. 100. legally defined. in family. domestic.50 point of view.47. 220n.75. 9 recording. 171. 105.. rules of. 176. 207 n.84 position.87. 95.128. 69. 46. 81 Pythagoreans. social. 168. 146-8 power. 129. 122. 187-8. 231 n.30. 60. 210 n. 153-4. academic. 3. 31. 101. 218 n.53. official and practical. 102. see also anthropologist. 135-6. 130. 178-9. 231 n. genealogical. 122-3 prayer. see logic practical mastery. of violence. 90. 187-8. 8. 40.48. naive. 218 n. 204 n. 235 n.26-7. 10-11. 114-20. 187. 200 n. 218 n. 231 n. 207 n.46. 127. 96-7. 20.74. 212 n. 43.. cycle of. objective. 45. sheaf ritual practice. of interac­ tions.113 Prieto. 111-13. of crises. as "art”. V. 145. 220 n. 175 qanun.94 revolution. in social structure. and sexual division of labour. 189 politics. 86.75. theory of. 45.

as constructed object and preconstructed datum. 113. see justice. of circumcision.Index sacred (haram). 193.iio -n . status of.38. 89-91. directions in. 62-3. J. linguistic. 138. 124.31. A. see also body: socially informed taxonomy. 109. 44 style. 114. 92. crisis and. house. 104.16 speech. 160-1.i 11 sorcerer. 140. 223 nn. E. body. and practice. 120\ see also functionalism. 97. see also bureau­ cracy. 156 scholars. 133. Saussure structure. 204 n. P. domination.i symbolic violence. 185-6 specialists. 86. 6.62. and habitus.48 Sapir. 236. categories of. and market. 106. 184. 89.86. 135 sexes. and ritual. 221 n. of justice. and individual. 200 n. 176-7. strategy . 1 swelling. n.97 Servier. 98 separation. and conjuncture. see also doxa semiology. 127. 111-12. 219 n. 97.24. 25. 89-90. 62. of limits. and situation. labour. geometrical. J. see education. 112-13. 233 n. ritual of last. 3-4. see also space synchronization. 24-5. 26. no. 198 n. geographical. see form symbolic stimulation. 15. 217 n. 229 n. 137. 21. male and female relations to.15. 237 n. 163. see self-evidence.31.75.24 & 28 succession.31. 52.19 Saussure. 1..49. 218 n. 38. 21. reproduction. 183-4. 89. type a:b: :b.18. 23 247 spiced/bland. 116. and jurisprudence. 188. 222 n. and musical form.. see also conjuncture situational analysis. Abbot. 59. 232 n.25. 86. point of honour. 214 n. and func­ tion. 3-9. and situation. 44. 114.4. 218 n. practical. 115. 164. 3. 185. of interaction. 117. see also cooking Spinoza. 53. 225 n. 124.i.22 scheme (scheme). 126. and cosmic. 82. 10. 104.m -12. see outsider strategy. 117. 185. 26. M. divisions of. 27. and see negotiation. 8-9.14. 92-3 shame. 142-3. 214 n n . 76 symbolic system. 156. 141 symbolic activities. 175-6. see also delay. 119-20. 78. 217 n. 48. 83. 42-6. 80. 24. 133. 227 n. 199 n. 216 nn. 36. 26. 16. 142-3 scheme transfer. 110. 20. 112. 171 space. 231 nn. of cooking. 227 n. 215 n.7 taken for granted. 222 n. 124-30. 92-3. 222 n. and see officialization. 226 n. 164. 123. 198 n. 153 series. 135. pedagogy technical. 160. 123.15. 163.70-1. doxa taste. 186. 117-18. and model. 84.8-9.56.i. 97. 90-1. of body. 233 n-!7 soft. 6. see east/west. 226 n. 231 n. construction of. educative. 201 nn.165. 36-7. 27.33. 228n..77 Sahlins.. of reality. B. 222n.8. 76. 206-7 nn.73. 84. interval. see also honour. of analogy. 154-5. specialists Schutz. 231 nn. 200 n. 10-15. woman sheaf. anthropological. 218 n . 203 n. 91. 89-90. of honour. realism of the. 7. 40. see crooked stranger. G. rite structural functionalism. 32. de. 164. second-order. male and female. hon­ our. 181. successional.io. and see honour. village. 113. 207 n. 91. 26 smith. 82-4.:b2. 23! 6.22 situation. 231 n . 116. see also habitus.82. see classificatory system teaching. and Teilhardism. 216 n. 163. 79-80. fertility.40. 64 Suger. 182-3. 233 n. 190. of roots. and succession. see also manner subjectivism. 1.33 & 4c symbol. 25-6. 81. D . 23. 59. literacy. 227 n. 127. 116.32 Teilhard de Chardin. 193 Steiner.-P. village. 108.102. 26 sense. 199 n. 198 n. 52. oppositions sexuality. 87. 105. 163. opposition between. 217 n. 134-5. 216 n. 37. and habitus.11. 58-71 passim. F. 21. 32. matrimonial. 138. 182. 232 n.28-9. 22. 40.23 self-evidence. 72.. see hard Sophists. 167-71.181. 83 structuralism. coherence of. 119.20. 48. movements in.4. ami see know­ ledge (connaissance): practical. 119 sar.8.. see also technical symbolic capital. 89.74. 160. 229 ” •93 tempo. 227 n. 61. apprehension of. 152.95 Sartre. social.88 sociology. 23-5. 84. 9.2.81 simultaneity. see capital symbolic forms.49. and symbolic. 73— 170. 145. 121-2. see functionalism structural lag.123. 188-9. 15.m -1 2 . 122-3.54. collective. 117. 95 spokesman. 140.83. objective. 47. 20. see also female.20c n. A . 26-7. 228 n. 130. 221 n. see violence symbolism. 18.33 straight.. spontaneous. 102. 222 n.20. 143-5. 137. 23.71 snake. 120 tempering. 200 n. 107. 91. 227 n. linguistics.38. 124. prac­ tice. 24. 10. of honour. 237 n. 91. 211 n. 62. 143. and see succession. 2230.

136 th a jm a th . 1 0 1 . 29. le g itim a te . 224 n . see su b je c tiv ism W a h l. e p is te m o lo g ic a l. 36. A . fe m a le w o o l. b rea k u p o f . a n d p lo u g h in g .. 114. la w .3 9 . . 215 n . 130. 6 0 .8 . see a sse m b ly ^ th a m g h a rth . 21. 217 n n .2 . 6 8 . I . 209 11. 220 n .1 1 3 -1 4 ..2 4 th r e sh o ld .1 6 . 106. . N . see la b o u r w r itin g .1 0 4 th iw iz i.1 2 6 . 180. . 1 1 2 . 179-80. 1 2 7 -8 . 33.4 7 v ir ility . m a ste ry th islith . see r e v e n g e v io le n c e . se e a ls o in v e r s io n t im e .4 0 . see a lso e x c h a n g e . 41. 44. 170.8 . 221 n .1 4 8 . 171. i o i v o lu n ta r is m . 106-9. k a iro s. 1 4 0 -1 . f a n n in g . 9 2 -3 . 219 n . 216 n . 146.6 te n d e r . 1 0 5 -6 . 1 2 3 .8 9 w e t /d r y . 45. 173.5 3 .4 1 . s e e a ls o d e la y . 55. 212 n .248 Index u n th in k a b le . 176.6 . 1 7 7 . 233 n . 223 n .1 2 8 .8 3 W h ite . 133. see b o tto m to ta liz a tio n .2 8 . L . 179. H . 6 4 . 202 n n . 6 8 . p ra ctic e. 229 n . 3 6 -7 J. 80 . o f so c ia l u n its 1 0 8 -9 . 133. 9 . 6 6 .6 2 V an V e ls e n . M . 6 3 . P . 203 n . 230 n . 1 4 6 -8 w o rk . 1 2 5 -6 . see a ^ ° k in sh ip th a d ja d ith . 232 n . 16. 115. 48. te m p o . 119 T u r n e r . . 18. 140. 234 n . s im u lta n e ity . 6 4 . 165. 193. 235 n .3 4 w o m a n ..5 1 . 90.6 3 t w is te d . 1 3 0 .7 4 .ic . S .4 0 w e a v in g . t ^ o l s o s im u lta n e ity . 120. 128-^. te m p o r a l r h y th m s.8 1 .. 213 n .3 3 . re la tio n to . see s w e llin g u n c o n s c io u s .. 204 n . 47 u n d iv id e d o w n e r s h ip . s e x u a lity V o g e l.2 1 9 n . . 212 n . 62.1 6 8 -7 0 . 162. a n d n e u tr a liz a tio n o f f u n c tio n s . 7 5 .9 7 .1 2 7 . te m p o r a l r h y th m s t id e .9 . 112. E . 209 n . see a lso u n th in k a b le V endryfes. 236 n .1 0 4 .5 2 W o lf. 45. str a te g y : s u c c e s s io n a l. se e tham gharth-. 100. 178.3 9 u n d iv id e d h o n o u r . a n d so c ia l o r d e r . 18. n o .4 8 . 237 n . 228 n . 7 7 .' 6 . 89.2 . a n d c o m m u n it y o f h a b itu s . 23 u n c o n s c io u s fin a lity .4 . tr a n sm issio n o f. 51. 119. 227 n .1 2 6 . 2 7 -8 . 55. see cr o o k ed u fth yen . . 234 n .1 9 6 . 136. 224 n .7 . s y m b o lic . a n d p r a c tic e . 4 5 . see a lso la n d . 21. 103. W . T . see lite ra cy y ea r. 120.1 2 8 . 35. 114. 4 0 -1 . 225 n . i i 2 W a tt. see also n a m e . 223 n . in te r v a l. 23 W h itin g . J. 1 0 9 .6 o th a y m a ts. la b o u r . see a lso p o in t o f h o n o u r . see a lso g r a m m a r. 29. 190-7 p a ssim . see c r o o k e d u r b a n iz a tio n . 233 n .1 4 W ittg e n s te in . 239 n . see also ca len d a r Z iff. H . 36. 49. 62 . 7 6 . 1. 62. 239 n .82 t h e o r y . 203 n . an d rela tio n to la n d . 203 n . 227 n . A . 31.4 T r u b e t z k o y . J.1 9 W 'esterm arck. 40 . 236 n . 9 0 . 85 W a llo n . 192. .2 6 . 115. 215 n . 123 v e n g e a n c e . th e o r y T o u r a in e . 184.io o .. 129. 184. L . F . th e o r iz a tio n e ffe c t o f. see b o tto m u p r ig h t. 25. E . 177. z i . 146. see h ard te r m in o lo g y .e v id e n c e u p /d o w n .. M . s u c c e s s io n u n n a m e a b le .1 7 .3 7 . 66..38 J. r itu a liz e d .9 4 W 'eber.. see a lso s e lf. 207 n . 7 8 .9 . q u a lific a tio n t o p . W a lla c e. 46.8 3 . 188. 30. 160-** 213 n . o ld . . A .

and few reach so keenly to the heart of so many analytic issues/ A m erican J o u rn a l o f S ocio log y Pierre Bourdieu is Director of Studies at the Ecole des Hautcs Etudes en Sciences Sociales. The author draws on his fieldwork in Kabylia (Algeria) to illustrate his theoretical propositions. Pierre Bourdieu. Paris. the principle which negotiates between objective structures and practices. '[O u tlin e o f a th e o ry o f p ra c tic e ] can be highly recommended as a complex and often beautifully written piece of philosophical literature/ The Times H ig h e r Education S u pp lem e nt 'Few bodies of work are so systematic. consistent materialist approach lays the foun­ dations for a theory of sym bolic capital and. A rigorous. develops a theory of practice which is simultaneously a critique of the methods and postures of social science and a general account of how human action should be understood. a distinguished French anthropologist. With his central concept of the habitus. whereby social formations tend to reproduce themselves. Bourdieu is able to transcend the dichotomies which have shaped theoretical thinking about the social world.5 2 1 . so comprehensive. so creative. With detailed study of matrimonial strategies and the role of rite and myth. Cover design by Margaret Downing ISBN 0 . through analysis of the different modes of domination.2 9 1 64-X C a m b r id g e UNIVERSITY PRESS 780521 291644 . Few theorists glide so adroitly between levels and styles of analysis.O utline o f a th e o ry o f practice is recognized as a major theoreti­ cal text on the foundations of anthropology and sociology. a theory of symbolic power. he analyses the dialectical process of the Incorporation of structures' and the objectification of h abitus. so fertile as Bourdieu's. and Director of the Centre de Sociologie Europeenne.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.