Segmentation: Reality or Myth?

By Gellner, Ernest; Munson Jr., Henry | Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, December 1995 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Segmentation: Reality or Myth?


Gellner, Ernest, Munson Jr., Henry, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute


A most determined and sustained critique of my use of the notion of segmentation has been made by Henry Munson Jr (Man (N.S.) 28, 267-80). Perhaps I should begin by saying that at a more general or methodological level, he and I are in agreement (at least I like to think so): we both believe that there is an objective ethnographic reality, available out there and accessible to investigation, and that our job is to say what it is. Objectivity is not a misguided aspiration, still less a form of domination, and subjectivism and obscurity are not forms of liberation.

In other words, where some other critics have argued on largely abstract grounds (and, no doubt, merit consideration at that level), Munson believes the segmentary theory to be false in fact, rather than being misguided in principle and politically incorrect. As far as I know, he does not consider it flawed on some a priori and/or political grounds. It could be true, but as it so happens, it is not.

The first point to make concerning Munson's criticism is that I wrote a book called 'Saints of the Atlas' (Gellner 1969) but never wrote one called 'Lay tribes of the Atlas'. Readers of his article might easily form the opposite impression: namely, that the organization of the lay tribes, who constituted and constitute the clientele of the saints of Ahansal, were at the centre of my attention, and that I was putting forward a thesis about them. This is not so. They were at the edge of my field of vision or attention, whilst I was actually focusing on the saints.

This does not mean, of course, that I did not make assertions concerning the lay tribes (I did), and that these were not an essential part of my argument (they were), and thus legitimate objects of criticism. But it endows those statements with a rather different status: the lay tribes and their organization was not under investigation; it was part of the background.

To put it concretely: I lived with the saints continuously for months on end (and the months so spent added up to well over a year), and I very frequently visited the surrounding tribes for a day and sometimes for weeks: but they were not, to repeat, under scrutiny. Their organization was observed but not investigated.

Now the standing of ethnographic observation which is in this sense at the edge rather than the centre of one's field of vision is interesting. In one very important sense, it is of course inferior: being at the edge of one's field of vision, one is passively observing, whereas at the centre, one is actively checking one's ideas. At the centre, one is under an obligation to worry persistently concerning any possible discrepancy between fact and idea; at the edge, one must note discrepancies, but they need to be at least moderately visible. One does not dig up the ground so as to find them, even if they should be well hidden. On the other hand, the fact that one has no intellectual investment in the backcloth, and least of all in its details, endows one's ideas in that area with a certain innocence and a claim to prima facie consideration (though not, of course, to authority).

I did develop a set of ideas concerning Berber and Maghrebin sanctity, and these ideas I checked with all the thoroughness I could muster. These ideas concern the services which the saints perform for the surrounding segmentary society, and the manner in which segmentation was, amongst them, distorted and overlaid by the practices of sanctity. Segmentation is connected with diffusion of power and with equality, it works just because the participants resemble each other and so are equal, whereas sanctity by contrast requires the concentration of the saintly potency.

To turu to the Ait cAtta, the tribe on which Munson has focused: I was indeed convinced (and remain fully convinced) that they are segmentary, but the additional and very interesting illustrations of this fact came my way not because I was systematically testing this idea, but because they as it were fell into my lap, without my seeking them out.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Segmentation: Reality or Myth?
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?