Despite recognizing lifestyle variation among Mediterranean peoples, Pitt-Rivers strongly emphasizes the negative effect of integrated states; similarly, it underlines the importance of collective rights over those of the individual. Such negativity is a direct correlation to his focus on the economy. Pitt-River's analysis is based primarily on the economic instability of two opposing regions of Spain: the Anadalusian plain and the foothills of the Pyrenees. Although his argument is similar to Persitiany in that it incorporates the importance of inheritance and the difficulties associated with the absence of social mobility in a poor community, Pitt-Rivers fails to discuss in detail the social hierarchy of both villages. This oversight weakens his argument as it fails to take into account the significance of interpersonal relationships; his uneconomic conclusion that “the stability of a society depends on maintaining the continuity of… family heritage” (24) therefore seems devoid of depth. The paucity of social analysis in the introduction is the main point of contrast with his subsequent essay, which places greater significance on interpersonal relationships. While this omission may be due to the terse nature of the introductions, it makes his approach lackluster; that of Persitianty, which addresses both economic and socio-cultural factors in its ethnography, is therefore more