To make someone a challenge is to credit him with the dignity of a man of honour, since the challenge, as such, requires a riposte and therefore is addressed to a man deemed capable of playing the game of honour, and of playing it well. From the principle of mutual recognition of equality in honour there follows a first corollary: the challenge confers honour. "The man who has no enemies", say the Kabyles, "is a donkey" (the symbol of passivity). There is nothing worse than to pass unnoticed: thus, not to salute someone is to treat him like a thing, and animal, or a woman. The challenge, conversely, is "a high point in the life of the man who receives it". It is the chance to prove one's manliness (thirugza) to others and to oneself. A second corollary is this: he who challenges a man incapable of taking up the challenge, that is, incapable of pursuing the exchange, dishonours himself. [...] Hence the man who finds himself in a strong position must refrain from pushing his advantage too far, and should temper his accusation with a certain moderation, so as to let his adversary put himself to shame. "Better that he should strip himself", says the proverb, "than that I should unclothe him." His opponent, for his part, can always try to turn the tables by leading him on to overstep the permitted limits. This is done in the hope of rallying public opinion, which cannot but disapprove of the accuser's lack of moderation. The third corollary is that only a challenge (or offence) coming from an equal in honour deserves to be taken up; in other words, for there to be a challenge, the man who receives it must consider the man who makes it worthy of making it. [...] It is therefore the nature of the riposte which makes the challenge a challenge, as opposed to mere aggression.