The book does, however, have some weak-nesses. The author's treatment of the socio-economic and particularly of the religiousbackground of the Southern Shona is dis-appointing. Instead of filling the southern gapin the ethnography of Shona religion, theauthor fuses his own observations of the Ka-ranga with studies of the Shona elsewhere andat times it is not clear which group of Shonahe is writing about. It seems strange, forexample, to write of 'mhondord spirits, a namewhich applies to a number of classes ofspirits in Korekore and Zezuru country, butwhich is rarely used among the Southern Shonaand not used at all in some areas.A second point of criticism is that Daneelsometimes presents us with a clear, over-systematic account of Shona beliefs, such asone might expect from an indigenous informant,but giving no indication of how the beliefswork themselves out in practice. Thus, forexample, the author states:At one stage or another the Njuz.upossesses its host (hardly ever a male)and leads her to the 'city of the Njuzuspirits' (Guta reNjuzu) under the nearestdam or river, where she stavs for severaldays (p. 129).Some explanation is needed and none is given.In this section of the book certain Europeanconcepts such as 'magic' and 'worship' receiveanalytical attention which would perhaps haveUniversity of Rhodesiabeen better spent on African concepts and be-liefs.The section on the missionary backgroundto the rise of Independent Churches is a morevaluable contribution. Of particular interest isthe comparison between the Roman CatholicChurch and the Dutch Reformed Church asthey operate among the Southern Shona: theirremarkable similarities appear to beliefundamental doctrinal differences. The author'sdiscussion of the greater defection from thelatter body to the new Independent Churchessuggests the lack of elaborate ritual in theDutch Reformed Church to be more funda-mental than the doctrinal, political or ad-ministrative differences between the two bodies.For a full discussion, however, of the masspopularity of Independent Churches we mustwait for the next volume in the series: in thisvolume, reasons for independency are con-sidered at the level of leadership rather thanof popular support.The book contains a wealth of material forthose who are interested in religion in Rhodesiaor in independent religious movements in Afri-ca; and the emphasis on the particular and thedetailed case studies complement the moregeneralized studies of Sundkler and Barrett.It is unfortunate that the price will keep thiswork confined on the whole to institutionallibraries.M. F. C. BOURDILLONBlack and White Elites In Rural Rhodesia. Bv A. K. H. Weinrich. Manchester, Manchester Uni-versity Press, 1973, 244 pp. £4,00.Empirical studies of racial attitudes in Rho-desia are conspicuously rare; consequently,racial views in the political arena achieve mostvisibility, resulting in the portrayal of suchattitudes as essentially uniform and static. Anotable exception, of course, is the work byC. A. Rogers and C. Frantz (Racial Themes inSouthern Rhodesia, New Haven, Yale Univ.Press, 1962); however, their study is subjectto a number of distinct limitations Š it isdated, restricted to a small sample, and pro-vides little, if any, insight into rural attitudes.Dr Weinrich's recent work, within the con-text of this 'empirical vacuum', provides valua-ble insight into the heterogeneity of racialviews among Rhodesia's rural black and whiteelites. Written in conjunction with her previousstudy (Chiefs and Councils in Rhodesia, Lon-don, Heinemann, 1971) this work focuses onthe 'interaction of Europeans who stand in in-fluential and authoritative positions in Africancommunities, and with the emergent Africanelite' (p.9). Her European sample consisted offourteen district commissioners, fourteen ex-tension officers, an equal number of mission-aries, and eight farmers, while her data on the105African elite included the church, medicine,education, agriculture, and commerce. Apply-ing Banton's hypothesis concerning the influ-ence of initial racial contact, the inequality ofsubsequent race relations and the duplicationof elite structures among subordinate groups,she proceeds to give a descriptive account ofboth European and African elites. Among theformer, farmers and district commissionerstend to reveal high levels of racial paternalismand rejection of African political advancementwhile extension officers and missionaries, on theother hand, demonstrate more positive viewsof the African's character and in general favourhis economic and social development.Examination of the African elite reveals theextent to which the religious, medical, andagricultural elites are integrated with the Afri-can community in general, demonstrating lowinterest in modern politics, while the educa-tional and commercial elites, subject to higherlevels of 'westernization' and direct discrimina-tions also, reveal great interest in the issue oftheir participation in Rhodcsian politics. Fromthese and other results, Weinrich concludes thatBanton's principles have been confirmed, sub-ject to their expansion to include the 'mar-ginality' of missionaries, and the radicalizingeffects of simultaneous westernization and racialdiscrimination. Finally, racism is seen as pre-venting the above differences from producingaccurate and objective inter-racial perceptions.The contribution of this particular workincludes insight into racial attitudes within therural context, the complexity of social strati-fication in a plural or racially heterogeneoussociety, variation in intra-racial attitudes, andthe operation of social-psychological factors inrace relations (i.e., the effects of economicposition and occupational socialization onracial attitudes). However, the book as a wholemay be criticized on a number of accounts.Firstly, the author's application of Banton's'hypothesis' is rather simplistic and is not clearlyreferenced. The 'contact approach' may also beviewed as essentially static and simplistic inits typological delineation of only two 'types'Florida State Universityof race relations. Furthermore, the applicationof western conceptual frameworks to colonialsituations must be viewed with caution, in viewof the potential problem of ethnocentric viewsof subordinate race groups, as J. W. Blas-singame has shown in his portrayal of Ameri-can slaves as active and with a culture of theirown in contrast to the predominantly passiveview of slaves in the work of white historians(The Slave Community, New York, OxfordUniv. Press, 1972).Secondly, her sample is extremely small andunder-documented with respect to distributionand levels of representation. The racial elitesalso lack comparability in the absence of whitedoctors and businessmen while the small num-bers in general make the examination of 'cor-relations' and comparison with the data ofRogers and Frantz highly problematic.Thirdly, methodology and measurement arealso issues. While Dr Weinrich describes hermethods as 'intensive interviewing (p.xii), nodetails concerning their structure or indices usedto measure items such as 'attitudes towardsAfrican social advancement' are provided. Themethodological problem implicit in a memberof the dominant elite interviewing subordinateAfricans also represents a central issue in astudy such as this.Fourthly, her ready use of concepts whichhave proven to be theoretically and empiricallyproblematic in the past, such as 'marginality',without explication also raises some concern.Lastly, her portraits of the white elites in parti-cular are poorly organized, oscillating betweenbackground and attitudinal characteristics.Such problems in theory and method high-light the need to apply more dynamic andmulti-level frameworks to the analysis of struc-tural and social-psychological factors in Rho-desian society in reference to urban and ruralelites as well as non-elites among all majorrace groups. A variety of methodologies isalso needed. Such efforts, however, v/ould con-tribute to greater understanding of thisheterogeneous society on a number of levels.It is in such a context that Dr Weinrich's analy-sis represents a stimulating starting-point asan exploratory case study.G. C. KINLOCH106