THE TUAREGS 215 Ihaggaren and the imradSy corresponding to the old feudal chiefs and vassals.

What originally caused this broad line of demarcation between the two ? Many different things, no doubt. Certain conquered tribes became the imrads of those who had defeated them. Or again, some tribes may have submitted for the sake of being allowed to settle peacefully down on lands belonging to Ihaggaren. Whatever may have been the reason, however, as time went on the Ihaggaren became the owners of flocks and herds, whilst the imrads never possessed any property of their own, but looked after that of their masters.

The former had to fight and to protect their imrads ownership of property giving them the right to demand tribute ; the latter could originally only hold their fiefs at the will of their suzerains, but after many generations had passed away their tenure became so established a thing that rent was all which could be demanded. At the present day it sometimes happens that the imi-ads are richer, better dressed, and even more influential than the Ihaggarens.

Wlien a whole tribe is seriously threatened, and the nobles are not sufficiently strong to defend themselves, the tenants are armed just as they used to be in olden times in Europe, and these tenants fight marvellously well. At the same time, except in such emergencies, it is the business of the Ihaggarens to defend the imrads.

In the service of the imrads are a class of negro slaves known as the Belle or Bellates, who have as a rule been attached to the same family for many generations. The attachment these slaves have for their Tuareg masters is really wonderful, and a positive proof that they are well treated by them. In the struggle which took place round * The singular oi Ihaggaren \s Ahaggar and o{ Imrad Amrtd,