High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
Mediaeval
Feudalism
BY
CARL STEPHEXSON
Cornell Paperbacks
Cornell University Press 4
ITHACA,
NEW YORK
Copyright 194* by Cornell University
VXIVERSITY PRESS
First printing,
Great Seal Books, 1956
printing, 1951
Second
Third
printing, 19 59
fourth printing, 1960
Fifth printing,
t$.6i
Sixth printing, 1962
Seventh printing, 1963
Eighth printing, Cornell Paperbacks, 196$
Ninth
printing, 1965
PRIKTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
jr2ote
printing in 1942 the late Carl Mediaeval Feudalism has enjoyed Stephenson's
its
SINCE
first
a distinguished
career.
Eminent
historians
of
America and Europe have reviewed it with high praise in the most respected historical journals. To the college freshman it has been a vade mecum in the awesome task of mastering such complicated feudal principles as subinfeudation and
liege
homage. The omniscient graduate student has at first reading whisked through it with disdain, casting it aside for the imaginative hypotheses of a Marc Bloch or for the impressive tomes
of
to
German
it
historians,
only to come meekly back
to obtain his bearings and a sense of proportion. Seasoned scholars and teachers have
read the book with discrimination, realizing that behind each page stood years of research and
thought devoted to the study of feudalism in mediaeval Europe; they in turn have recom-
mended
itJto their students.
its
In this book, deceptively simple in
iii
ease of
explication, Professor Stephenson has digested
iv
\
J
rciatory
Xote
feudalism, supple-
the vast
body of writings on
it
mented
\vith his
own
research,
and then pre-
sented the subject with conclusions, observations, and suggestions that must be read through by
anyone
hopes to understand mediaeval feudalism. Upon reading the book Carl Becker
who
penned a note to his good friend Carl Stephenson which the latter proudly acknowledged as the
highest compliment to his scholarship. After praising the style, Becker, himself an unsurpassed
stylist,
wrote that such a simple and straightforafter its subject
ward book could be written only
had been completely mastered. By reprinting Mediaeval feudalism as a Great Seal Book the
Cornell University Press has added a small classic to its series in a form readily available to a large
body of nonacademic
prehension
it lies.
readers within
whose com-
Regarded
as
one of America's foremost meditime of
his
aevalists at the
death in 1954, Carl
Stephenson had a long and
career.
A
significant scholarly student of Charles Gross and Charles
Homer Haskins at Harvard, he later studied with
the
renowned Henri Pirenne of Belgium and
eminent
established close scholarly ties with such
mediaevalists as Professors Ganshof, Galbraith,
Halphen, Prou, and Frolich. Most of his teach-
PrefMorv Xotc
ing was done at the University of Wisconsin and
at Cornell,
where he wrote
his
well-known books
and
articles.
Interested only in what the document said and bitterly opposed to easy theorizing and glib generalization, Carl Stephenson did his best work on
those institutions found in mediaeval Europe between the Loire and the Rhine; this area where
influences spilled back and forth over feudal itself to the comparative method
boundaries lent
wherein lay
his
strength and contribution to
mediaeval scholarship. Writing far removed from western Europe and its acrimonious academic
feuding, he dispassionately demolished much of the prejudiced nationalistic writing devoted to
praising or
tions.
damning Germanic or Latin instituHis greatest joy came from demonstrating
that a tax, a
commune, or
seignorialism
and feu-
dalism were not peculiar to one area but were common to all western Europe; they developed
not as products of racial genius but in response to
basic social, economic,
and
political
requirements
of the Middle
Ages.
For
fifteen years Carl
Stephenson regularly
published of America, England, Belgium, and France and established himself as an authority on taxation,
articles in the leading historical journals
vi
Prefatory Xote
representative assemblies, and the origin of urban
His most mature work, Borough and To~~n, appeared in 1933; here he combined his research with scholarly methods developed
institutions.
on
the Continent to
show
that the English bor-
ough was not an insular peculiarity but that it was like its continental counterpart in origin and
constitution.
seignorial
He
then turned his attention to
institutions,
this
and feudal
work
resulting
book. 1 Along with these scholarly achievements Carl Stephenson found time to write a mediaeval history that yet
in further articles
and
remains the foremost college text and to collaborate on a book containing translations of English
constitutional documents.
Those who but casually knew Carl Stephenson how such a skeptical and aloof man could write so vividly and sympaon historical subjects. This thetically seemingly
could never understand
improbable accomplishment appeared even more paradoxical when attained by one riveted to hard and demonstrable evidence, writing about a historical age that has been more romanticized than few who any other period. But to those
privileged
fuller appreciation of Carl Stephenson's scholarly career and for reprints of his most significant articles, see Mediaeval Institutions: Selected Essays, ed. Bryce D. Lyon
*For a
(Wiaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1954).
Prefatory Note
vii
were permitted to know the real man and to learn
how he
functioned, these contradictions transinto supporting buttresses.
formed themselves
A
belligerent opponent of romantic history and fine theories resting upon insufficient evidence, the
practical skeptic zestfully toppled such writing
and pored over the available records to determine
exactly
that he
what could be concluded about
or problem.
a his-
torical institution
When
satisfied
was working upon sound evidence and
the facts had been assembled, he turned
that
all
to the task of reconstruction.
At
this
moment
occurred the metamorphosis. With the enthusiasm and feeling of the artist and, yes, with the buoyancy of the boy with his kite on a fresh
and early April morning, he built his facts into the articles and books that have stimulated the
admiration and envy of
first-class historical
all
who
can appreciate
thinking presented in a style
that meets
its high demands. Carl Stephenson had too little patience Perhaps with those who differed with him, and perhaps
there
"grays" in his conclusions, but his predominant "blacks" and
historical
were not enough
"whites" were honestly supported by the facts
that he
wowMnto
many
a far
more
lively
and
realistic
history than
of his protagonists
the Vic-
VII!
Prefatory Xote
torian romantics
and the
scientific fence-sitters
could produce.
the pages that follow would be paraphrase an injustice to all who have not read this book and who are entitled to have the basic ingredients
To
a of mediaeval feudalism explained to them by the new master. With the wider distribution that
be lured format will give, many new readers will hisinto the Middle Ages and, like the English Contorian Maitland with respect to Stubbs's will be ready stitutional History of England, u were set victims of a book not because they
shelf to read it" but because they found it on a u and read it because it was interesting."
Untoersity of Illinois
BRYCE D. LYON
July
Ix THE FOLLOWING pages
as
I
hwe tried
to explain,
simply and concisely as possible, the historical significance of the feudal system. Despite the
obvious importance of the subject, there has been almost no general treatment of it in English to
supplement the brief statements of the ordinary textbook. This small volume is intended to provide such a treatment
OT// prove useful to
one which,
it
is
hoped,
many
college teachers.
purpose has not been to give a comprehensive description of Europe in the feudal age, or
My
even of feudal society. I have taken for granted that the reader will be familiar with the main
the political events of
Middle Ages: the barbarian
Eminvasions, the formation of the Carolingian the establisfonent of the later ?nonarchies,
pire,
the crusades, and the
like. I
have omitted
all
but
and cursory mention of the manorial system sketches of the revival of commerce, admirable
which have already been published.
I
have, in
other 'words, restricted the discussion to the few institutions ibatlmy be said to have constituted
IX
*
Preface
feudalism proper or to have been peculiarly associated irtffc it. Four of the six chapters, dealing
with feudal custom n-hen
enjoyed its greatest vigor, are designed to introduce not only the
it
fundamental principles but
also,
cases, the actual working of the system.
by citing specific A wide
variety
of other examples can, of course, be
readily found.
perbe inspired to look for some of them, or will haps accept the hints in the last chapter as a challenge
to farther study of feudal decadence.
More advanced students may
For many of the e^ery worker in the
ideas set forth
field,
below
/,
like
am largely
indebted to
the scholarship of other historians, both living and dead. Any one interested in an appreciation
of their writings
is
referred to
my
article,
"The
Origin and Significance of Feudalism? Amercan Historical Review, XLV1, 788-812. More
particularly,
however,
I
'wish
to
express
my
thanks to Professor Sidney Painter of Johns Hopkins University for the useful suggestions
made
manuscript and to Miss Julia E. Edmonson for her clever and
after his reading of
my
sympathetic drawing of figures in the Bayeux
Tapestry.
Cornell University
CARL SxEPHENSON
Jmutry, 1942
Contents
Page
PREFACE
ix
CHAPTER
i.
The
Original Feudalism
i
n.
in.
iv.
Principles of Feudal
Tenure
15
Chivalry
40
Nobility
The Feudal
56
75
v.
vi.
Feudalism and the Mediaeval State
The Decay
of Feudalism
97
109
113
SUGGESTED READINGS
INDEX
XI
Cfrapter
One
THE ORIGINAL FEUDALISM
NEITHER the English word "feudalism" nor its in French seems to have come into The tern equivalent
use until the later eighteenth century
after the
^
Revolution of 1789 had turned scholarly attention to certain
prominent features of the Old Regime. Since then "feudalism," "feudal system," and the like have become part of the historian's
ordinary vocabulary; for such expres-
sions are
very convenient
when we
refer to the
complicated relationships of past ages. But, unhappily
subject,
for a student
who
first
approaches
the
modern
writers
have by no means
call
adopted a consistent usage. Some
one group
of institutions essentially feudal, some another.
For many writers the adjective remains exceedingly vague
so vague that they have been led
to discover feudal stages in the history of various
peoples, beginning
with the ancient Egyptians
Mediaeval Feudalism
and coming down to the Japanese of a century
ago.
Sociological comparison
of this sort, however
valuable
sketch.
cisely
it may be, has no place in the following The present object is to explain, as pre-
as the sources
permit, the institutions for
which men of the Middle Ages coined the term
"feudal."
And
although
we
shall
eventually ar-
rive at certain conclusions
with regard to feudal-
ism and
its
historical significance,
all
we may profitaEven
be
left for dis-
bly avoid
preliminary generalization.
the matter of
cussion at the
terminology
may
appropriate time.
Without trying
to decide in advance
what was and what was
not feudal,
we can
of actual customs in the
forthwith begin our survey mediaeval period. early
In the second
The
comiratfls
historian Tacitus
century after Christ the Roman wrote an essay which he called
justly
Germania, and which has remained
famous.
He
into
declares that the
Germans, though divided
people
numerous
tribes, constitute a single
characterized
mode
of
life.
by common traits and a common The typical German is a warrior.
his
Leaving the management of
tillage
home and
the
of his
fields to slaves
and womenfolk, he
ctevotes himself to
war
or, in default of such ex-
The
Original Feudalism
citement, to loafing, drinking, and gambling. The rulers of the Germans are military leaders. Their
assemblies are military gatherings. Except when armed, they perform no business, either private
or public. But it is not their custom that any one should assume arms without the formal approval
of the tribe. Before the assemblv the * vouth re9
ceives a shield
other relative,
gift
and a spear from his father, some or one of the chief men, and this
virilis
corresponds to the toga
among
the
Romans making him a citizen rather than a member of a household. Such recognition may come to the youth on account of his noble birth or the renown of his ancestors. Even so, he is
likely to get his training in
arms among the com-
panions (comites) of a distinguished chieftain (princeps). Here birth counts for less than war-
prowess; for each companion emulates the other members of the band, and each chieftain
like
strives to excel his rivals
his followers.
On
the battlefield
through the loyalty of it is shameful
for the chieftain to be surpassed in bravery, or for the companions to be less brave than he. One
who
survives the leader in battle
is
doomed
to
lifelong disgrace; to defend
and support him,
is
glorifying him by valorous
obligation of
all his
deeds,
the sacred
companions. In return they
feudalism
expect military equipment, food, and a share of
whatever booty
tus
lies
may be won.
Taci-
The importance of this vivid account by
in the fact that within the next five
hun-
dred years Germanic peoples had overrun the western provinces of the Roman Empire and
there established a series of
kingdoms that were
long to dominate the European scene. Most of
these peoples, for all their intermixture with the native population and their of Roman
borrowing remained fundamentally barbarian. Much of their traditional custom, especially that which dictated the life of the warrior class, reinstitutions,
tained
its
ancient vigor. In that respect the testi-
mony of the Germania is confirmed and amplified by countless writings of the early Middle Ages.
For example, the warlike organization that Tacitus called the camitatus is heard of again and
Anglo-Saxons, and even the Vikings of Scandinavia. The brave
dies beside his princeps unquestionably reappears in the heroic gesith or
fights
1 thegn of the Anglo-Saxon epics. been conjectured that the actual
again in the later centuries the Franks, the Lombards, the
among the Goths,
comes who
and
It has,
indeed,
German word
translated
1
by Tacitus as comes was an older form
Sec especially Beowulf and die Song of Maldon.
The
of
gesith,
Original Feudalism
which
literally
means
a
companion on
a journey. However that may be, the personal thus found to have persisted among relationship
the Germanic conquerors of the
inces
Roman
prov-
was highly honorable to both
the free warrior, to
itself
parties.
When
whom
the bearing of
arms was
a
mark of
distinction,
became the
follower of a chieftain, he did so voluntarily and
with the expectation of maintenance befitting his Nor did he of rank. He suffered no
degradation.
for life. The tie could be necessity bind himself broken by mutual consent. The youth readily a band for the sake of adventure and who
joined
well hope on some future day experience might to have a following of his own; for any man of
adequate
wealth and fame would naturally at-
tract companions.
No
among
relationship
of this sort can be found
the later empire. In their Cowmcn-
the
Romans of
of arms, far from being the eyes the profession of gentility, was hardly respectable. equivalent Because most citizens had long avoided military
service, the legions
were recruited from among
territories, chiefly
the residents of frontier
men
of barbarian descent. The household troops with came to surround themwhom all
great persons
selves
were mercenaries of ignoble
origin,
if
not
6"*
Mediaeval Feudalism
actually senile.
custom, a
lesser
According to long-established freeman could become the client
of any wealthy
patron.
Roman who
agreed to be his
however, was essentially an economic dependant; in return for gifts of
client,
The
money, food, and clothing, he helped to swell his patron's retinue on public occasions. Clientage, involving
no military
service
and implying
anything but social equality, was utterly unlike
the
Germanic comitatus. And the
dissimilarity
remained even after the
spread
Roman
institution
had
the Prankish conquerors of GauL There, under the Merovingian kings, we often
among
hear of poor men who, in order to obtain the means of livelihood, commended themselves for
some powerful person. The one who commended himself thus became the man (Latin
life
to
2 homo, French homme) of a lord (Latin domimis or senior, French seigneur). But none of
these terms necessarily denoted a military relationship. Throughout the Middle Ages a lord's
included his serfs and peasants of as well as his armed retainers.
men
all
grades,
Meanwhile another
institution of the later
em-
2 Derived from the Anglo-Saxon klaford, or "loaf-keeper"; L e., the head of a household or other person in authority.
The
pire
Original Feudalism
had come to be widely extended by the barbarian rulers of the western Tke provinces. This
was the
premium or precma,
a
grant of land to
^?Se
benefice
"precarious" tenure could be terminated at any time. Later, in the Prankish especially kingdom, it became a
legal right
be held by some one during the pleasure of the donor. Under Roman law such a
or for
life,
of occupation for a period of years in return for the payment of rent or
the performance of a stipulated service.
The
term precma implied that the land had been obtained through the prayer (preces) of the recipient; but the grant
might
also
be styled a benefice,
because
it
of the grantoK
significance.
cal benefice
was a boon (beneficium) on the part The words, again, are of minor
The
important fact
is
that the typi-
was an agrarian
estate
a group of
lands organized for production, with the appur-
tenant buildings, tools, domestic animals, and
cultivators of the soil, both free
and servile^As
the result of an economic decline that had been
under way for at least five hundred years, commerce had ceased to be an important source of
wealth throughout most of the west. State and
society
were dominated by
agriculture.
The
two
population
tended to be sharply
divided into
8
classes:
Mediaeval feudalism
an aristocracy of landlords and an eco-
nomically dependent peasantry. The holder of a benefice belonged to the former.
When,
Giro-
in the eighth century, the Austrasian
first
mayors of the palace acquired
the control
vusdage
and then the sovereignty of the Prankish kingdom, these various customs, Roman or Germanic, had long been recognized as established
law. Charles Martel, Pepin, and Charlemagne,
faced with the need of defending and administering an enlarged kingdom, developed whatever
usages they found advantageous.
their official enactments that
And
it
is
in
vassalage first ap-
pears
as a
and
all
Since the name prominent that it denoted remain matters of coninstitution.
troversy,
subject.
one should not be too dogmatic on the
following explanation is merely what, to the author at least, seeirs best to agree with the sources.
In the earlier Middle Ages
The
we
find
numerous
words for "boy" that might be used to designate
either a slave, a free servant, or a military retainer:
Germanic degan (Anglo-Saxon thegn); the Germanic knecht (Anglo-Saxon cniht, later knight) \ and the Celgwas (French
vassal, Latinized as vassus
is
the Latin puer; the
tic
or
vassahts).
And
it
a remarkable fact that in
The
three cases
Qriainal feudalism
thegn, knight, and vassal
the hon-
orable implication became exclusive.
Among
the
Anglo-Saxons thegn entirely superseded
gesith;
among the Franks vassal entirely superseded the old German expressions, one of which seems to
have been gasind. Whatever the reason for the change in terminology and complete lack of
evidence makes
it
idle to indulge in speculation
centuries
sals.
the Prankish sources of the eighth and ninth are filled with references to vas-
Those of the king enjoyed
special
honor
throughout the Carolingian Empire. They were
frequently employed on governmental missions. Most important, they constituted the elite of
the army, serving as heavy-armed cavalry and often leading contingents of their own vassals into battle. To enable them to bear the ex-
pense of such obligations, they were usually
endowed with
benefices
estates
which were
carved out of the royal domain, or out of confiscated property of the church, and which
were held on condition of providing the desired
service. Vassals of persons other than the king,
though often poor and less highly privileged, seem always to have been fighting-men par excellence and, as such, to have ranked far above
ordinary peasants.
10
Mediaeval Feudalism
various customs of the Carolin-
By examining
TV;
gian period
selves
we
have necessarily concerned our-
with the development of the institutions
called feudal. Before
we proceed further, it might
be well to summarize the problem of that dea series of questions and sugvelopment through
gested
(1)
Vassalage
answers.
What was
the origin of vassalage? Since
under the Carolingians, as in the later period, was an honorable relationship between vassalage
members of the warrior
the
all
class,
to derive
it
from
Romans seems
the Latin
In spite of quite impossible.
that
words
came to be adopted by
the Franks in Gaul, mediaeval vassalage remained
essentially
a barbarian custom, strikingly akin to
that described
inally
this
by Tacitus as the comitatus? Origcustom was shared by various Ger-
manic peoples, notably the Anglo-Saxons.
peculiarity
The
of Prankish vassalage resulted, in the
main, from the governmental policy of the Carolingian kings.
(2)
What was
at
the Carolingian policy with
regard to vassalage?
The Merovingian kingdom
had been
end of the seventh century
tegrated.
*
most a pseudo-Roman sham. By the it had utterly disinCarolingian kingdom was a
The
new
See below, pp. 21-22,51.
The
unit created
Original Feudalism
ll
by
the
military genius of Charles
Martel, Pepin, and Charlemagne. To preserve and strengthen their authority, these rulers de-
pended less on their theoretical sovereignty than on die fidelity of their personal retainers, now
styled vassals.
as well as
So the key positions in the army, the more important offices in church
royal vassals. Even-
and
state,
came to be held by
the rule was adopted that every great ofcually
iiciaL if
?
not already a roval vassal had to bewill
come one. The Carolingian policy, as
tablished legal precedents that
be seen
it
in the following pages, utterly failed; yet
es-
were observed for
many
(3)
centuries.
What was the origin 0f the fief? In
Prank-
beneficium remained a vague The fief term. Various kinds of persons were said to hold benefices, and in return for various kinds of
ish times, as later,
service or rent. Since the benefice of a vassal
was
held on condition of
call it a
military service,
we may
no
military benefice.
At
first
there was
technical Latin
in the
word
for such a benefice, though
it
Romance
vernacular
became known
as a f eos
or fief* This name, Latinized as feodum
* Derived from a Germanic word meaning cattle or property. M w Cf. the English fee, which may denote any payment for service more technically, a fief (as in the expression "knight's fee"). or,
12
Mediaeval Feudalism
or feudum, ultimately came into official use and so provided the root for our adjective "feudal"
(French feodal). Whether or not the military
benefice existed before the eighth century is still disputed. In any case, it was the Carolingians
who made
that
form of tenure
and the
into a
common
Prankish institution,
their policy
is
best explanation of
the one presented by Heinrich Brunner. According to his famous thesis, the old
Prankish army had been largely
fantry
of ordinary freemen
made up of
in-
who provided their
own weapons and
eighth century, as the experience
served without pay. In the of warfare
proved the insufficiency of the traditional system, the Carolingians anxiously sought to enAnd to do large their force of expert
cavalry.
so they developed
what we know as feudal tenure
by
associating vassalage with benefice-holding. (4) What 120$ the nature of the fief? In its
say, a military benefice or fief special remuneration paid to a vassal for
essence,
we may
was the
the rendering of special service. If the rulers had been able to hire mounted troops for cash, re-
course to feudal tenure would have been unnecessary; for the Carolingian fief was .primarily a unit of agrarian income. To call a fief a piece
of land
is
inaccurate.
What
value
would bare
The
Original Feudalism
13
acres have for a professional warrior
who
con-
sidered the
work of agriculture
degrading? Being
the possession of a gentleman, the fief included organized manors, worked by the native peas5 antry according to a customary routine of labor. Xor was this all. To hold a fief was also to enjoy the important privilege that the Carolingians
knew
as
immunitv. Within
his
own territory
*
the
royal vassal, like the clerical immunists of an
earlier time, administered justice, collected fines
and and
local taxes, raised military forces,
and exhe
acted services for the upkeep of roads, bridges,
fortifications.
To some
extent, therefore,
was a public official, a member of the hierarchy whose upper ranks included dukes, marquises,
and the greater ecclesiastics* As all these magnates came to be royal vassals, their offices, together with the attached estates, naturally apcounts,
jm
peared to be their fiefs. And as rojai yassals passed to subvassals, feudal bits of their own privilege
tenure became inseparable from the exercise of
political authority.
was the original feudalism? In this connection we can do no better than quote
(5)
What,
then,
5
Economy,
Sec Miss Ncilson's admirable sketch, Medieval Agrarian in the Berkshire Studies in European History (New
York, 1936).
14
a
Mediaeval Feudalism
Feudalism
shrewd observation by Ferdinand Lot: "It has become accepted usage to speak of 'feudalism,' rather than of 'vassalage/ from that point in hiswith rare exceptions, there were tory when,
actually
no
vassals
without
fiefs."
6
By
"feudal-
ism," in other words,
we
properly refer to the
association of vassalage with peculiar fief-holding
that
was developed in the Carolingian Empire and
thence spread to other parts of Europe. Insofar
as this association
was
effected for governmental
essentially political. It
purposes, feudalism
was
should not be thought of as a necessary, or even
usual, stage in
economic
history.
Although feudal
institutions
ments, the latter
presupposed certain agrarian arrangewere not themselves feudal. The
manorial system could prevail for centuries in
a
particular country,
as
it
did in Britain, without
leading
to the feudalization of
any
local state.
Nor
should feudalism be described as a sort of
its
anarchical force because
growth coincided
with the disintegration of the Carolingian EmFor reasons now to be considered, the more pire.
accurate statement
basis of a
is
that feudalism
became the
that
new
political
organizations-one
fell
naturally
emerged
as
an older system
in ruins.
In the scries edited
by G. Glotz,
Historre generate: Histoire
du Moyen Age,
I (Paris,
192^-34), 676, n. 188.
Chapter Ctoo
PRINCIPLES OF FEUDAL TEN'URE
8
FROM
the troubled history of the ninth and *
Political
tenth centuries one truth clearly emerges: that
the economic conditions which had
come
it
to
J^^ji
the ninth
western Europe made prevail throughout
possible
im-
for
any but a small
state to survive.
The
on
too big to be effecCaroiingian Empire proved
tively administered, especially * j
all
when
assailed
sides
by Vikings,
Saracens, and Hungarians.
The
partition
of 843 failed to bring a permanent
was first improvement. Lothair's central kingdom and then, despite the broken into three parts
persistence
of several royal
titles,
To
kingdom of was resolved into a group of autonomous duchies,
the east the
many more. Louis the German
into
which continued to defy the ambitions of the Saxon and Franconian emperors. To the west the
kingdom of Charles the Bald became a mere tradition as
ail
real
authority passed
15
to the local
16
Mediaeval Feudalism
princes, lay and ecclesiastical. The Capetian accession made no essential change in the
political
structure of the country. Hugh Capet and his immediate successors attempted to govern
only
their hereditary principality
the march of Neus-
tria, now virtually reduced to the He de France. The rest of their theoretical kingdom was divided
into a large
the
number of similar units, among which more important were Toulouse, Gascony,
Champagne,
Aquitaine, Brittany, Anjou, Blois,
Burgundy, Flanders, and Normandy. Some of these principalities were of Carolingian, some
of more recent, creation. Whatever their legal origin, force had played a large part in their
development; and force continued to govern their
destinies.
The most
successful
rulers maintained the best armies
est administrations.
were those whose and the strong-
In such an environment feudal institutions continued to thrive because they provided a very and practical means of government. For simple
the same reason they eventually spread across the continent of Europe, from the British Isles
to Syria.
It is
cal interest to discover
therefore a matter of great historihow feudal institutions
actually
worked in the various regions where they were adopted, and how they were trans-
Principles o* feudal
Tenure
17
formed by
political
developments in the subseparticular states,
quent age. Before
we examine
have a clear understanding of feudal custom in general. This understanding, in
however,
we must
spite
of
all local variation, is
not hard to obtain.
By
disregarding the legal compromises and dis-
tinctions of later centuries,
ceive a substratum of
we may readily percommon usage a set of
principles that, being traceable to Carolingian
times,
we recognize as fundamental *The original feudalism, as we have
from the
association of
already
seen, arose
fief-holding
The
with vassalage. Of these two the latter was the basic element; The Carolingian capitularies frequently refer to unbeneficed vassals
in their lords' households;
sals
it
ter of
who
lived
v**** ge
and although such vas-
became exceptional
in the following period,
was always
for a possible
man
to
become
a
without receiving a fief. On the other hand, a fief could legally exist only when held by a vassal. This fact, too often overlooked, devassal
mands
a fe\v
it
benefice,
words of explanation. Not every should be remembered, was a fief;
at
nor
\vas
every free tenant a vassal Land held *
rent, like the old precaria> the
French
called a
cemive, and to
it
the law of feudal tenure did
agricultural
not apply.
A
man who performed
i8
Mediaeval Feudalism
whatever
his
service,
ancestry,
was doomed to
be a peasant rather than a vassal because he was not of the military class. Besides, as will be more
clearly
did not
shown below, the fief of a deceased vassal come into the lawful possession of his
fiefs
heir until the latter had himself acquired the status
of
vassal.
Although
might be declared he-
a reditary, vassalage, remaining
wholly personal
Homage
** y
could never be inherited. relationship, To become a vassal, a man (B) had to appear before his future lord (A) and render to him the
service
technically called
homage (Latin horn-
agiwn, from homo) and
fealty (Latin fidelitas).
B
knelt, placed his
hands between those of A,
and acknowledged himself A's man, pledging
entire faith as a vassal to his lord against all
men
who might
live
or
die.
1
In
equally formal words
feet,
A
accepted B's homage, raised him to his
and, as a rule, kissed him. Finally,
on the Gospels
oath to con-
or on sacred
relics,
B took a solemn
firm his earlier
promise. There was never, of
course, an absolute uniformity of usage, and with
the elaboration of feudal tenure
ferences
1
numerous
dif-
were introduced
in the
spoken formulas.
See the examples published by E, P. Cheyney in Translations aid Reprints from the Ori&nal Sources of European History (Dept. of History, U. of Pennsylvania, 1898), IV, no. j,
pp.
1 8-2 1.
Principles of Feudal Tenure
19
But the act of homage remained essentially the *ame, and it was always followed, never preceded,
by the oath of fealty.
it
Here,
should be remarked,
we
with two phases of a single ceremony with two ceremonies. At most the oath of fealty gave Christian sanction to an obligation implicit
in
are dealing rather than
homage; for nobody could become
a vassal
without promising to be have positive evidence that,
faithful to his lord.
We
as early as the eighth
century, homage was a well-known Prankish custom. Presumably it was much older. The kernel of the
ceremony,
we may
suspect,
was bar-
barian and heathen, originally a form of admission into the chieftain's band of companions;
ecclesiastical influence
must have added the oath
of fealty The latter, in any case, could not of itself create the bond of vassalage. During the
Carolingian age, as at a later time, the free subjects of a ruler could be required to swear fealty to him without the slightest thought of their be-
coming
his vassals.
Our
conclusion must there-
fore be that fealty did not imply homage, but that homage did imply fealty. may, indeed, follow the example set by numerous official docu-
We
ments and, speaking of homage alone, take
regular sequel for granted.
its
20
Mediaeval Feudalism
The
preceding argument
fact that,
supported by the lord took no oath of although the
is
himself to a great deal feaky, he pledged
by
ac-
hrdsand
cepting
j
a man's
homage. The
Prankish capituto the vassal's
aj.j es ^
^jch
in
re fer
on j v
indirectly
obligation
of keeping faith, carefully specify the
his lord.
2
ways
which he may be wronged by
According to an edict of Charlemagne, a vassal his lord for in is any one of justified deserting
the following reasons:
if
the lord seeks to reduce
life,
him to
if
servitude,
if
the lord plots against his
if
the lord commits adultery with his wife,
the
lord attacks
fails
him with drawn sword, or if the lord
to
protect
him when
able to
do
so.
Two
centuries later Fulbert, bishop of Chartres, stated
the same principle in a famous letter to the duke
of Aquitaine.
3
Fulbert declares that one
who
swears fealty to his lord should, in order to deserve his benefice, faithfully give aid and counsel
so that in every
as to
person,
way the lord may be safeguarded and belongings. The lord, rights,
what he owes the
similarly,
ful
has a reciprocal duty towards his faithIf either defaults in
man.
other, he
may
justly
of course, language,
p. 5. p. 23.
is
be accused of perfidy XThe that of an eminent school-
Principles of Feudal Tenure
21
11
man with
and
"fief"
a taste for classical study.
For
"vassal
he wrote
fidelis
and beneficium.
And
to expound the vassal's obligations he composed a sort of philosophical exercise* His information,
welcome; for the official documents of the eleventh and twelfth centuries denevertheless,
is
scribe the technicalities of fief-holding rather than
the traditional ideals of vassalage. influential these ideals remained in feudal
How
eloquently shown by the vernacular poetry of mediaeval France. Almost invariably the action in the chansons de geste turns upon
society
is
the mutual faith of lord and vassal or, conversely, upon the failure of one to do all that he should
for the other.
Thus
in the
Song of Roland, the
oldest and finest of the French epics, the rearguard of Charlemagne's army is exposed to
Saracen attack through the treachery of Ganelon. Roland, the hero, is the personification of courage
and loyalty. Refusing to summon help by sounding his horn, he urges the French knights to
charge the enemy without considering the odds against them. To his friend Oliver he declares
that they
must have only one thought, to 4 to the death on behalf of their emperor.
* Stanza LXXTVIII; cf. LXXDL
fight
22
For
his
McJjjcva! "Feudalism
lord
man
should suffer great hardships,
should endure extremes of heat and cold, should lose his blood and his flesh. Strike with thy lance! And
I
will strike
with Durendal,
my
the king gave me. If I die, may he who has to say that it belonged to a noble vassal!
good sword which it be able
Vassalage, indeed,
is
the theme of the entire poem.
The word
be
is repeated time and again, and always to imply everything that a true knight ought to
was embraced by the
ing that
its
whatever, as will be seen in the next chapter, original code of chivalry.
spirit carries
Who can read this glorious chanson without findhim back to the Gerall
manic custom pictured by Tacitus?
possible excepthat a vassal was pre-eminently say a gentleman and a warrior, pledged as such to support his lord on the battlefield and in other
tions,
Ignoring for the
moment
we may
honorable ways. This was a personal obligation
which feudal tenure could modify but never
aside.
set
by the eleventh century, a vassal normally lived on his own estate meant only that his attendance upon his lord was refact that,
The
stricted to particular occasions
when, thanks
to his enhanced position, his service would be especially valuable. Nor did the concession of a
fief relieve
the lord of personal responsibility
Principles of Feudal Tenure
23
towards
his vassal.
The
faithless lord, as well as
the faithless vassal, was
known
as a felon,
and
felony of one sort 01 another remained prominent in all systems of feudal law. Before pursuing
that subject, however,
we must know something
and tenure of fiefs.^
fief
more about the
acquisition
In mediaeval France a
was sharply
dis-
tinguished from allodial property. The latter a man really owned, by virtue of an absolute title
^
secured through inheritance,
gift,
The former, on the contrary,
a
man
or purchase. held of some
one else, enjoying at most what lawyers called the usufruct a right to possession under certain
conditions.
that
To
take a simple case, let us suppose
A gives the land of X to be held of him by
E
in return for
his vassal
specified
service agreed
on between the two.
indefinitely,
as
E's possession continues
long
as
he proves himself a faith-
ful vassal
is
and performs his owed service. When A succeeded by a son B, E likewise becomes his
vassal
by rendering him homage. Even
if,
as
was
anciently possible,
E
could easily terminate his
he would not wish to do so; for he vassalage, would then have to give up his fief, and he wants
his
son
F
to hold
to B,
X
on the same terms. That
is
agreeable
whose
interest in maintaining a
good
vassal remains
unchanged. But on E's death
24
Mediaeval Feudalism
F
cannot legally obtain his father's fief until he in turn has rendered homage to B. Thereupon he receives investiture: the lord hands him a
stick, a turf, a knife,
or some other symbolic object to mark his formal possession of the fief. In actual practice we know that, even before
the close of the ninth century, it was customary for fiefs to pass from father to son; and that,
within another hundred years or so, a fief was regularly described as hereditary. For reasons
stated above, however, such inheritance
is
found
to have been merely the renewal of a feudal contract, to which each of the parties, the lord and
the vassal, had to give personal assent. When a vassal died, his fief reverted to the lord and really
ceased to be a
fief at all until
it.
another vassal had
been invested with
heir, the reversion
In case the vassal had
called escheat,
was
no and the
lord
was
free to
regrant
vassal
it
to
keep the dead man's estate or to whomsoever he pleased. In case the
heir, the lord
had an
was
legally obliged
him as the new holder. Yet even then a regrant was necessary through formal investito accept
ture;
and in recognition of
paid the lord a
this fact the heir
very
commonly
relief.^
sum
of
money
called
Another
striking peculiarity of feudal tenure
Principles of Feudal Tenure
^
25
was primogeniture, the
pass
rule that a fief should
intact to the eldest son.
No
such form of Prmo-
inheritance
was known
either to
Roman
or to
Germanic law, and
to be shared
by
allodial property continued the children of a deceased owner.
The
fact that a fief
it
was
legally
indivisible
seems
,
to prove that
rather than a piece of land/ This
was considered a public office was obviously
true in the case of a
duchy or county. But
it
was no
less true, at least originally, in
fief,
the case
of an ordinary
agrarian estates
where the income from
territorial
combined with a
im-
munity provided remuneration for the service, military and political, of a vassal It was greatly to the interest of a princely donor that responsibility
for the needed service should be concen-
trated.
To
allow a
fief
to be indefinitely parti-
tioned
would
nullify
its
value
would, in
fact,
contravene the very purpose of its establishment. On the other hand, the recipient of a fief might
well be
rassals,
permitted to assign parts of
for their default
it
to his
own
as a
would remain
his liabil-
ty^Primogemture thus came to be adopted
:
;ery practical regulation for the continuance of
eudal tenure, and with the latter spread widely mediaeval Europe. The only signifihroughout
cant modification of the rule for the benefit of
26
Mediae--^! Feudalism
younger children was the custom called parage. Under it a fief could be divided among a number
of co-heirs
all
if
one of them rendered homage for
in a
of
it
and so
way
guaranteed
its
integrity,'
To
Wrdit
introduce the subject of feudal inheritance
necessary
to
has been
re-emphasize the fact
personal.
A. related fact
l ^ at
vassa ' a e
g was always
also
had important consequences
restricted to
that
vassalage
was properly
fighting-menMVhen
a vassal died leaving an infant son as heir, the
lord
commonly enjoyed
is
the right of wardship.
fief into his
That
to
he took the say,
own
hands and, enjoying its revenue, supported the heir until such time as the latter attained majorThen the youth, having been knighted and ity.
declared of
age,
performed homage to the lord
and from him received investiture.*This procedure logically solved the problem of a minority. But suppose the holder of a fief had a
only
daughter. If a girl could not be a vassal,
how
could she be recognized as an heiress? The answer, of course, was provided by the institution of marriage: a husband could render the necessary
fief.
homage and acquire legal possession of the Such a marriage required the lord's consent
girl's
even during the lifetime of the When he was dead, the lord as
father.
guardian took
Principles of Feudal Tenure
complete charge of the matter and, very generawarded the lady's hand to the noble suitor ally,
who
bid the highest. True, the relatives of a
heir or heiress often objected to the lord's
young
pretensions,
and he was sometimes compelled to recognize one of them as guardian on condition, however, that the latter became the lord's
vassal for the duration of the
minority.
it
V
\ Thus, by
a series of legal devices,
fief
was
ar-
ranged that a
man
should pass from one mature to another: for the holder was normally re-
dequired to perform military service. Although rendered tailed records of the sen-ice actually
date only
from the
later
Middle Ages,
we may
were
be sure that the principles then
set forth
much
older. Since at least the ninth century vas-
salage had implied a personal obligation to fight
for the lord as a heavy-armed cavalryman, or
knight. But, in addition, a royal vassal
5
who had
to bring
received a valuable
fief
was expected
with him a mounted troop of his own vassals, and the same requirement would apply to most men who held of a duke, a count, or some other magnate. It
was
in this
way
that the
armv of every
*
r
feudal prince
was regularly made up. At
first,
apparently,
6
the size of each vassal's contingent
.
See below, pp. 40 f
28
Mediaeval Feudalism
his service
and the length of
determined
in
were not precisely
advance.
By
the twelfth century,
however, such determination had become usual
in the better-organized states, especially those
by the Normans. According to the the vassal took with him into perfected scheme,
controlled
the field enough knights to complete whatever
quota
was charged against
his fief,
but he was
cost for
obliged
to furnish the service at his
own
no more than forty days once
in the
year.
To
Submfeudatton
illustrate
the working of feudal arrangetake the following example,
ments,
^^ ^^
jt
we may
be remembered
that so exact
a system
was by no means
universal.
After con-
quering England,
we
shall
suppose, William of
Normandy
knights.
gives
A,
his vassal, twenty-five
man-
ors as a fief to be held for the service of ten
A
then has a choice of procedures.
He
may, to use the technical phrases, keep all twentyfive manors in demesne or he may subinfeudate
some of them to meet any part of his owed service. In the first case he will take from each manor
whatever
is
there
produced through the labor
of the attached peasants and,
when summoned to
the royal army, will have to induce nine other
knights to
vassals
accompany him. The nine may be
to ancient fashion, he
whom, according
Principles of Feudal Tenure
2Q
maintains in his household, or they
knights
may be
his
whom
it
he
is
able to hire. But, let us say,
he finds
difficult to
keep these
men under
own
roof and he lacks the cash for paying wages; he therefore adopts the alternate plan. He grants
a fief of eight
manors to
his cousin
(B),
promises him the
service of four knights.
who And
agree
five landless adventurers (C,
D, E, F,
G)
to
become
his vassals in return
for one
good
fief
is
manor
each.
The
will
service due
from A's
now
provided
for.
In response to the king's
summons
six vassals
A
go himself, together with his (B C, D, E, F, G) and the three addi-
tional knights furnished
still
by
B.
A,
it
will
be noted,
has twelve manors in
demesne, from which
family. B, to take care
to support himself
and
his
of his
owed
service, has the
same choice that
A
originally had.
C
D, E, F, and
G
in
live
on
their
serve respective manors and
A
person.
No
matter
how many
all
stages
of subinfeudation there
may
be,
are
made
possible
by
a
pre-existing
manorial organization.
That heavy expense was
service of this kind
it
is
entailed
by
military
fact that Aidtmd
apparent from the
involved the finding, not only of trained men,
but also of very superior horses, costly equipment, numerous servants, and enough food to
30
Mediaeval Feudalism
supply the whole troop throughout the campaign.
And
the vassal's responsibility
military
service.
was by no
means
restricted to
On
certain
occasions he was required to pay his lord a contribution called aid.
The
northern French cus-
tom, taken by the Normans to England, specified three such occasions: the knighting of the lord's
eldest son, the marriage of the lord's eldest
ter,
daughand ransom of the lord when captured. In many regions, however, an aid could be exacted
for the knighting of any son or the marriage
of any daughter, and sometimes, as well, for a
crusade, a journey to the royal court, or
some
other extraordinary
furthermore,
undertaking.
The
vassal,
owed
his lord
hospitality.
That
is
to say, whenever the lord
vassal
came
for a
visit,
the
was expected to provide free entertainment. And since every great lord was constantly
moving about with a small army of mounted attendants, one could not afford to be too generous a host.
consequence, the vassal's obligation in this respect often came to be strictly defined aftj was sometimes commuted into a money
As
a
Every
Suit to
vassal, finally,
was responsible for the
iipportant service called suit to court.
When
tourt
summoned
to attend his lord, the vassal had to
Principles of Feudal
in
Tenure
31
reasons
go
person and at his
own
expense.
The
for the service were as varied as the meanings
of the
word
"court."
The
occasion might be
as in the case of a festival or largely ceremonial,
the celebration of a wedding. Perhaps the lord
wished to consult
or a
treat)'.
his
men with
regard to a war
Very
approve some
in a trial.
to frequently they were asked act of government or to take part
if
For example,
the lord needed military
specifi-
service or financial aid
cally
beyond what was
owed by
them
his vassals, his
only recourse was
to ask
right
for a voluntary grant.
He
had no
to tax or assess
them
arbitrarily,
for his au-
such matters thority in
contract.
was determined by feudal
Nor
did he have a discretional)'
power
it
of legislation.
the country.
Law was
the unwritten custom of
To change
or even to define
was
It
the function, not of the lord, but of his court.
was the
vassals themselves
who
declared the law
under which they lived; and when one of them was accused of a misdeed, he was entitled to the
judgment of
his
peers,
i.
e^ his fellow vassals.
We
are thus introduced to the subject of feudal
justice,
dispute.
concerning which there has been much itself has often been the The
phrase
cause of disagreement.
By
feudal justice
do we
mean
all
the judicial rights enjoyed
by
a lord as
32
his part of
Mediaeval Feudalism
fief,
who
held
fiefs
or only those exercised over men of him? Either usage is defensible,
but to avoid ambiguity we may adopt the latter and apply the adjective "seignorial" to justice
administered over non-vassals as well as vassals.
Feudal justice can then be understood as merely one aspect of seignorial justice, and this understanding helps us to explain the development of
both. Charlemagne's capitularies definitely prove that vassals, no matter what lords they had, re-
courts.
of the public held that a lord generally obtained the right to administer justice, not through his personal control over vassals, but
mained subject to the
jurisdiction
So
it is
now
through
his
acquisition of a
fief.
And
for reasons
already noted the fief brought him political auit constituted a territorial thority only because
immunity. In other words, seignorial government
originated as a delegation of
power by the mon-
archy and retained its essential character even under the enormously extended system of feudal
tenures.
Although the variety of fiefs in eleventh-century France is at first glance bewildering, they
resembled one another in being to some extent units of judicial, military, and fiscal administration.
The
simple knight, being a vassal at the
Principles of Feudal Tenure
33
bottom of the
scale,
would enjoy
little
more than
the petty rights pertaining to a manorial court.
On
the other hand, the greater lord whose
as a
6
fief
ranked
a large
barony
would have authority over
and servile.
number of
feudal tenpeople, including
ants as well as rustics, both free
When
subsidy, he merely ordered an assessment of the non-noble popula-
such a lord chose to
raise a
tion; but his vassals, as
we
have seen, could not
be forced to contribute unless the occasion was
one on which aid could lawfully be demanded of them. For the defense of his territory, likewise, the lord could require his vassals to per-
form onlv whatever --**,
service they /
owed
for their
fiefs, while ordinary men of the countryside might have to dig ditches, repair fortifications,
cart supplies, or fight
on foot with
inferior
wea-
pons.
What we
From
call
feudal justice
was
a similar
differentiation for the benefit of the military
class.
the system of judicial extortion that
bore so heavily on the defenseless peasantry the vassal was exempt; his law was that declared by
a truly feudal court, one
made up of
his
peers.
highly complicated subject of feudal law must here be passed over, except for brief mention of
The
two
characteristic features: trial
i.
by
battle
4 Sec below, p. 60, n.
34
Mediaeval Feudalism
and condemnation for felony. In any important
for instance, a disputed claim to land or an accusation of unjustifiable homicide a
case
as,
feudal court normally left the issue to be determined by judicial combat between the principals
or their legally appointed champions. Then, in full knightly array, the two fought it out and
the vanquished, if still alive, suffered whatever 7 penalty the law prescribed. Very generally any action unbefitting a feudal gentleman might be
called
felonious;
felonv was
technically, however, the disloyal refusal of a vassal to
more
perform
his
owed
service. If, for example,
he
rehis
absented himself from his lord's
peatedly ignored a
army and consequent summons to
f
lord's court, this court
could declare that, as a felon, he had forfeited his fief. But to such the-
oretical forfeiture a
powerful vassal might well with a formal act of defiance (diffidatio) reply the renunciation of fealty towards the lord on
the ground that the latter had first broken faith with him. The result would of course be war,
which to contemporaries was an extra-legal rather
than an
7
illegal
mode
of procedure.
A very early and very graphic illustration is provided by the Song of Roland (ccucxi-ocuucax) the duel between Thierry and Pinabel to decide the fate of Ganelon.
Principles of Feudal Tenure
35
The
che standard
foregoing discussion has dealt only with form of feudal tenure. Under it fiefs Second
held of a lord
would bring him the following
(
i
income, tangible or intangible:
)
homage and
fealty; (2) knight sen-ice; (3) feudal aids; (4)
entertainment; (5) suit to his court and the resulting profits of justice; (6) the so-called feudal
incidents,
wardship, marriage, escheat, and forfeiture. But other forms of
relief
which included
feudal tenure
were not uncommon. From an
early time castle-guard must have been the peculiar
responsibility
of certain
fiefs.
Instead of
providing knights in the usual
way, they sent
contingents to a particular castle for a definite
period in each year, so that
among them
a
permanent garrison was maintained. Also, by a of tenure known to the variety English law as
serjeanty, feudal contracts often required service
other than that of knights.
A fief might thus be
made
to furnish auxiliary troops, horses, arms,
or other useful objects; members of a princely household might receive fiefs in return for the
performance of their
in free alms, a church
official
dudes.
Finally,
through the establishment of an alleged tenure
might be endowed with
the service of prayer.
a fief that
owed merely
Such a tenure, however, was hardly more than
36
a
legal
Mediaeval Feudalism
fiction
and was by no means the universal
privilege
of ecclesiastics.
last
In this
tion
j
reader:
holding
may f how from an
"t
connection a very pertinent quesalready have been suggested to the
i
early time vassalage, an
essentially military relationship,
could be assumed
many clergymen, legally forbidden to take life or to shed blood. The answer
by
is
so
who were
really quite simple.
tenth centuries
Throughout the ninth and such prohibition by the canon
was
generally
law, in spite of occasional protest,
not Only acmiiied fiefs and ngrfArmi^ hAm*m> ^ ^^*.igtt'J-ifl* I^PPMIMPIM HMlHiia^., * nim butjilso iought like other vassals. The Song of Roland glorified an ancient tradition by having Archbishop Turpin die a hero's death on the
ll
l
i
field
of battle.
By
the time that
poem was
writ-
ten,
however, the reinvigorated
papacy had
oj secular cpngpl
And although the idealistic of the reformers could not be program wholly
prac-
carried out, they compelled the reluctant princes to accept important modifications of feudal
ticed
The
violent
dispute pv<er^lay Jnvestiture thus
1
resulted in a
compromise by which feudal lords
fiefs"
kept the right of investing ecclesiastics with
Principles of FcxJjl Tcxzre
37
and surrendered to the church merely the right
of investing them with the symbols of holy office. In some countries, notably England and Nor-
mandy, the newly form homage for
elected prelate
still
had to per-
his fief, "saving the rights of
his order"; elsewhere a special
arrangement per-
mitted him merely to swear fealty. On all sides the rale was now generally enforced that a
clergyman should personally abstain from warfare; whatever military service was due from his
tion.
lay fief could be provided through subinfeudaLike other vassals, he continued to owe the
customary aids, hospitality, and suit to court, although he came to be excused from any judg-
ment involving the death penalty or maiming. So, with only a few practical readjustments,
feudal tenure retained
its
usefulness for
all
parties
concerned.
From
a
fief
held
by an
ecclesiastical
vassal the lord obtained
very much the same service as from one held by a layman. The chief dif*
ference between the
two was
that the former
relief,
produced no incidental revenue by way of
wardship, or marriage; but, to make up for that loss, the lord commonly took the income of such
a
fief
during the interval between the death of a
prelate
and the
installation of his successor.
One
further modification of early feudal cus-
38
Mediaeval Feudalism
torn will serve to conclude the present discussion
Liege
and, in a way, to introduce that
originally,
which follows,
we
have even- reason to believe, a
man's vassalage was supposed to be exclusive.
Even
if
a vassal
could divide
his
loyalty between
live in
two
lords,
how
could he simultaneously
two households or follow two leaders in bade?
was obviously the practice of granting fiefs to vassals that relieved them of constant attendance
It
upon the
lord,
permitted their service to be
often strictly defined, and,
enough, caused vas-
be regarded as salage to
formality.
little
more than
a legal
As
the older forms of
proprietary
grant were rapidly superseded by feudal tenure, became virtually impossible to acquire wealth l
*
except
a,
by accumulating
fiefs,
and
this
compelled
fortunate recipient to be the vassal of
numerous
grantors.
The
logical
consequence was tReT ap-
pearance by
the twelfth century of a distinction
bttween
liege
homage and ordinary homage. The
former was rendered only to the principal lord and established the vassal's paramount obligations; the latter, as a
mere poceipiagJoijEef-
could be repeated for any number of holding,
Accordingly, despite the growing comof and economic plexity political
lords.
relationships,
much
of the original vassalage persisted well into
Principles of Feudal Tenure
39
the later Middle Ages. As long, indeed, as society continued to be dominated bv the old warrior *
class, its traditional institutions,
among them
vas-
retained their vigor. The truth of this salage, statement will be better appreciated when we
come
to examine the system of belief and conduct that is called chivalrv.
Chapter
CHIVALRY
FROM the preceding chapter it should be
Knight-
apparent
that the
was
next
at
t}^kal_member of the feudal aristocracy the same time a orcl and a vassa l- These
j
two
chapters are intended to
show how,
in
addition, he would normally be a knight and a nobleman. Whatever have been the earlier
meaning of the English
Saxon cmhi),
it
may word
"knight" (Anglo-
came
to be used after the
Nor-
man Conquest as the equivalent of chevalier. One might therefore
mous
the French
think
that
"knighthood" and chevderie would be synonyterms, and so they are to the extent that both the status of The French
signify
knight.
word, however, has a broader connotation;
it
may
refer to the habits
and
ideals
of the whole
knightly order, and on that account has been
introduced into our
1
language as "chivalry/
call
Today, when
we
a
man chivalrous, we are
Chivalry
41
evidently thinking of a moral quality rather than
a horse. But the fact remains, and
portant
it
is
an im- Mediaeval
social of Europe, that history without a ckeval nobody could be a cbevjlier, From the military point of view this matter of
one
in the
the horse
first
is
by no means
so
simple as
it
might
at
appear.
To
obtain
cavalry (cab&lmi) the
mediaeval prince had to do more than put
men
on horses
(caballi)\ he had, in particular, to consider the strength of the mounts together with
the training and equipment of the riders.
What
late as
kind of horses were then available? As
1066
foot;
we know
that the Anglo-Saxons fought
on
even the thegns
who
rode to the battlefield
it.
dismounted when they reached
The
reason,
apparently, was that the native breed of horse was at best a sort of pony, useful merely for
brief transportation.
The
as
troops of
King Harold
had no such chargers
of
Duke William. And
bore the mailed knights yet the horse of preso valu-
Norman England was a valuable animal
able that in tenth-century
better grade
six
London one of
the
was
rated at four oxen, officially
pigs,
cows, twelve
doom
or twenty-four sheep.
which provides the
1
*
See the
(vi ^ethelstan. 6),
fol-
lowing indemnities for the theft of livestock: a horse, half a potmd (i2<xf.); an ox, 30*.; a cow, iod.\ a pig, \od.\ a sheep, 5**.
42
Since the
peasant
Mediaeval feudalism
maximum
possession of the ordinary
was a yoke of oxen, only a quite superior was expected to ride a horse at all. How person
much
worth
greater
the distinction in
being a twelfth2
century knight, whose destrier
several
might well be
hundred sheep!
The
Knight
like
Franks seem to have fought on foot early the Anglo-Saxons, and for the same reason.
*mdhs
fodal
*c*nce
v ^-
t 'ie
m
^
e
f t 'ie
n*nt h century,
<>
n the con-
trary,
the typical Prankish soldier had
come
to
horseback, being equipped for that purwith shirt of mail, helmet, shield, lance, and pose sword. Although the subject remains ob-
%^t on
very
scure for lack of investigation, the
new
military
system was probably learned from the Byzantine Empire, where the use of heavy-armed
cavalry
8
(catapbracti)
as distinguished
from the
light
cavalry of the Huns, Goths, and other barbarians
had been perfected long before the reign of Charlemagne. However introduced, the employment of such troops in the west, as in the east, must have been made possible the
by
improved
Translated in F.
L
Attenborough, The Laws of the Earliest
English Kings (Cambridge, 1922), p. 161. * Latin dextrar'ms; so called, it is said, because the right hand was used for leading the horse.
1
On
war-horse see VV.
the use of these troops and the related problem of the W. Tarn, Hellenistic Military and Naval Def.
velopments (Cambridge, 1930) , pp. 73
Ckn-j/ry
43
breed of war-horses which, our best authorities
declare,
was
first
frontier in Asia.
We
developed across the Roman may also be sure that a great
horse of this kind was far beyond the means of 4 the average Frank; and that, even if the king
found him
a
mount and
the appropriate equip-
ment, he could hardly know what to do with them. So it happened that the Carolingians, desiring trained cavalry
and lacking funds where-
with to hire mercenaries, adopted the expedient
of granting
fiefs
to their vassals on condition that
they would
furnish the needed service.
kingdom the military revolution thus begun had been completed by the opening of the tenth century. Thenceforward the Latin records of France use miles, the classic word for the Roman legionary,
least in
At
the western Prankish
as the perfect equivalent of chevalier.
The man
who
fought on foot came to be disregarded; he could be no more than a miserable rustic, poorly
armed,
ill
disciplined,
and
true soldier was the feudal
4
The only gentleman, the memspiritless.
Prankish compilation of the early eighth century, the Law of the Rtpuaria*. Franks (xxxvi, u), gives the following valuations: a horse, 125.; a shirt of mail, 121*; a sword with a sheath,
7;.;
is
A
a helmet,
6>.; leggings, 6s.\ a shield
and a lance,
21.
The
total
which, according to the same source, was the equivalent of more than twenty-two oxen. These laws have not been trans451.
lated into English.
44
Mediaeval Feudalism
ber of an aristocratic family whose wealth provided not only the material equipment but also
the leisure for a knightly upbringing.
The
gulf
between the warrior
and the peasant class had never been easy to cross; it now became
class
virtually impassable.
In the time of
Charlemagne
we
hear of serfs "honored with vassalage" so
that they had horses
in the later
and bore arms. Similarly,
Middle Ages, various princely courts
retainers
included
ministeridesstrvik
who,
thanks to their lord's patronage, acquired estates
But such cases were always exceptional and the taint of base blood was not soon forgotten. More significant is the fact that
and
lived like barons.
a
person, could not hope to enter the military profession, simply because he had no chance of obtaining a chivalrous education.
in
plowman's son, however free
Perhaps the best
is
way
to explain knighthood
rous education
compare it with other professional attainTo become a priest, the youth had to reach a mature age, acquire a certain proficiency
to
ments.
in Latin letters,
fitness for
and otherwise demonstrate
office;
his
holy
then he was solemnly or-
dained by a bishop. So too, in any craft, no one could become a master without serving his apprenticeship and pasang
numerous
tests.
And
in
Chivalry
45
the later university a degree was conferred on a candidate only after he had successfully prepared himself by years of specialized study.
person could no more be born a knight than he could be born a priest, a master of a or a doctor gild,
A
of medicine.
was necessary for him to earn the rank through long and arduous training. This
It
training began in infancy.
family, except possibly church, would be set to learning horsemanship and the use of arms almost as soon as he could
The boy of aristocratic when destined for the
walk.
Very
he would
often, at the age of seven or eight, be sent away from home to be brought
up
at the court of his father's lord or of
some
distinguished relative. There he would be expected not only to develop skill in all martial
exercises but also to
become
familiar with the
halls
ways of
life
in
and about the
of the great.
Though never treated as a menial, he would have to make himself useful in a variety of tasks, from
running errands for ladies to assisting knights with their horses and harness. And many of his
lessons, like those of a modern would be learned in the rough game schoolboy, of give and take with his fellows. ^Jlroughout thg whole term of his apprenticeship in arms the youth was commonly known
most valuable
46
Mediaeval feudalism
i.
in French as a valet or damoiseau
vassal
e.,
is
a
little
or a
little
lord; for the first
word
derived
from the diminutive of
vassalus, the
second from
that of domimis. Sometimes, particularly in England, he was called a page during his younger
years. In
reached the age of about fourteen, he acquired a new title, that of (French ecuyer, or shield-bearer). Hence-
any
case,
when he
squire forth he
was regularly attached to an individual to accompany and knight, whom it was his \iuty
In the event of battle, the squire carried the knight's reserve of arms, led his <extra horse if he had one, laced oft his defensive annor,
assist.
rescued him
when dismounted or wojinded, and took charge of any prisoners he might capture. Through such activity the squire learned the
brutal business of
as
he grew in
size
Meanwhile, and strength, he became more
war
at first hand.
adept in the use of a man's weapons, as in fencing
with a sword and
with a lance. Squires fought sham battles with one another or charged at a quintaih, a dummy or other target set on a
tilting
post in such a
striking
it
way
as to test the rider's skill in
his lance. Finally,
fairly
with
when the
squire had proved himself a true warrior, espehis conduct in actual battle, he was cially by
rewarded with knighthood.
C/iftM/rr
47
Tacitus,
it
will be
remembered, describes the
ancient
German custom by which
presented with a shield and a
youth was mcnc his spear to mark
a
Adnubc-
attainment of man's estate.
What
seems to be
the same ceremony reappears under the CaroIn 791, we are told, lingians. Charlemagne caused
Prince Louis to be girded with a sword in celebration of his adolescence; and forty-seven years
later
Louis in turn decorated
his
fifteen-year-old
i.
son Charles "with the arms of manhood,
e.,
a
sword." Here, obviously, we may see the origin of the later adoubement, which long remained a
formal investiture with arms, or with some one
of them as a symbol. Thus the Bayeux Tapestry
represents
the knighting of Earl Harold
the legend:
liam of
Normandy under
dedit
by WilHie ir/7-
lelmm
Haroldo anna (Here William gave
earl,
arms to Harold). The
in already dressed
left
armor, holds a lance in his
hand and with
his right has apparently just placed a
sword
at his
waist; the
ting a
duke completes the armament by put5 helmet on his head. Scores of other ex-
chronicles amples are to be found in the French and chansons de geste which, despite much variation of detail, agree
on the
essentials.
And
what-
ever the derivation of the words, the English exSee Figure
i
(from the Bayeux Tapestry) and below, p.
61.
Mediaeval Feudalism
to knighthood" must have pression "dubbing been closely related to the French adoubement.
A Latin historian states that Henry, son of William the Conqueror, "assumed arms
by
gift of
FIGURE
i.
WILLIAM KNIGHTS HAROLD
his father"
(sumpsit anna a patre), while the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle reports that the king
dubbade
his
sunu Henric to
ridere.* In the feudal
age, to be sure,
poned
I. e.,
until a
adoubement was usually postyouth was twenty or twenty-one;
German
ritter.
rider or knight; cf. the
Chivalry
49
but the postponement clearly resulted from the increasing difficulty of learning the military profession,
turity
combined with the need of greater maon the part of a prospective fief-holder.
a
Although any knight could thus create
knight, the honor, like that described by Tacitus, was usually conferred bv the bov's father, an*
other of his relatives, or one of the chief
men
in
the locality; and it was the more highly prized when received at the hands of a distinguished
was the squire whose bravery was summarily rewarded on the field of battle* In that case the ceremony would undoubtwarrior. Especially proud
at edly retain its ancient simplicity, including of a sword, a few words most the presentation
of admonition, and the accolade. This
originally
last
was
no
a sturdy polite tap, but
blow de-
livered
on the nape of the neck (French col) means of impressing evidently the traditional
enupon the youth the solemnity of his new were still prominent gagement. These elements celebrated the knightin the great festivals which
son or other prince in the twelfth ing of a king's we have seen, often occentury, and which, as casioned the levy of a feudal aid. In such a courtly the adoubement was preatmosphere, however,
50
Mediaeval Feudalism
ceded by an elaborate ritual and followed by an exhibition of skill on the part of the initiate and
his
Of
Chivdrous virtues
high-born companions. the many formulas that might be spoken
while delivering the accolade, the most eloquent
was was
also the briefest: Sois preux!
To
be preux
to conduct oneself as a true knight; nothing
to be said.
more had
But for the modern reader,
who
lacks a chivalrous education, the
word
some
has
lost its force.
"Prowess" (prouesse) can mean to
sort.
him only
a vague accomplishment of
In order to regain the understanding of the feudal
age he must study examples, and of these the
Roland, whose glory was approached by no other character of mediaeval epic. The qualifinest is
ties
pre-eminently displayed by that great hero
quite
are
unmistakable. First of
all,
Roland
is
brave
ness.
brave to the point of absolute reckless-
and the best part of Charlemagne's army are slain because he scorns the advice of Oliver; he will not sound his horn until no more
can be gained than revenge for his death. "Oli-
He
ver," declares the poet, "is sensible;
Roland
is
preux" Gallantly he charges straight against the enemy, expressing the proud hope that, should he
fall,
he
may be remembered
tells
as a
us,
"noble vassal."
betrothed to
Roland, the chanson
is
Chivalry
51
Aude and we
ishes her as
are allowed to guess that he cherhis
he should. For Oliver,
companion-
in-arms, Roland has deep
affection.
And
is
he
is
always a devoted son of the church. It
not,
however, love or friendship or religion that makes Roland's conduct heroic; it is vassalage.
At
his loyalty is undivided; in simple faith to his lord he blithely offers up
the critical
moment
everything he has. From the Song of Roland, as well as from many other sources, we may conclude that the
ancient virtues of the barbarian warrior remained
i-M.
fundamental to the chivalry of the eleventh centurv. Prowess, above all else, implied valoTahd -_ -A.
.J-UT'~
-
I
...
rr
r
.
.fidelity.
No gentleman
could afford to incur the
merest suspicion of cowardice or treachery. Because it was braver to attack boldly, the true
knight disdained all tricks in combat; he would not strike an unarmed or unprepared foe. His pledge of faith must be kept at all costs. The
knight who yielded himself to another would never attempt to escape; he could regain his
freedom only through rescue by a friend or payment of ransom. But loyalty to the plighted
word,
should be remembered, was only one side of a mutual obligation. The honor that
it
52
respected
his
Mediaeval. Feudalism
by honorable treatment on the part of
captor.
A
faithful vassal
must be deserved
by a faithful lord. To brook insult and neglect was no duty of the chivalrous; the proper reply
to
any
sort of injury
was formal
defiance.
Proud
gentlemen were quick to take offense and plunge
bloody feuds so often dethe chronicles and chansons de geste. picted by
their families in the
In such action contemporaries
saw no
violation
of the knightly code.
Every society tends to have a system of
Tbe
eti-
eti-
quette,
tfr*11
whicF is obeyed mucfi mVfe^crupulously
the dictates of law positive
of what a respectable
today. So
it
man
will
merely and will not do
think
was
in the
Middle Ages.
The
eti-
of chivalry was recognized wherever feuquette
.dal institutions
prevailed because
it
spelled
honor
to the feudal aristocracy. In opposition to this
statement
describe
it
may be
said that mediaeval
writings
all sorts
of atrocities committed
by men
of the highest birth. But whose opinion are we to consider? Latin histories, being written for
learned ecclesiastics, might condemn much that seemed innocent to ordinary laymen. The views of the latter are rather to be found in the chan-
sons de geste, which were written in the vernacular to
please
an
aristocratic audience. If
we take
Chivalry
for granted that no such
53
work would approve
conclusions.
anything that most knights considered disgraceful,
we may draw some
it
interesting
would appear, had no anto violence and the actipathy cruelty; within cepted rules of combat they were expected to
Gallant gentlemen,
be bloodthirsty and ruthless.
And whatever courmembers of
live
tesy they displayed was reserved for
their
own order. For a knight to
by war and
rapine, pillaging churches and slaughtering peasants on the lands of an enemy, was quite normal
Women he properly regarded as at most a valuawife's commodity. duty was to rear dren and maintain domestic peace; one
ble
A
chil-
who
talked too
earned a slap in the face. The modern reader who is shocked by the conduct
much
of the hero in a feudal epic has failed to understand the primitive chivalry to realize that it
of one warrior implied no more than the respect
for another.
<3u.talry, therefore,
*.^.4fc
was
originally
-'-
non-Chris-
But as the purified church extended its in<MII *">.*. r jtafi&e over all phases of life in the twelfth centian.
-
at least a tinge of religion, encet tury, chivalry acquired
Clerical participation in the
ceremony of adoubethe Logically, then,
ment seems
to have
begun with the blessing of
initiate.
the arms given to the
54
latter
Mediaeval Feudalism
might be required to prepare himself for the honor by fasting, prayer, and attendance at
mass; before receiving the accolade he might hear a sermon on the duties of the Christian soldier.
In the great pageants that celebrated the knighting of princes such ecclesiastical features became
especially prominent.
ever essential
Yet no one of them was to adoubement, and that any of
them
seriously affected the chivalrous tradition
may well be doubted. Generation after generation, the aristocracy gave little heed to the
preachers who denounced fighting for the sake of glory and booty as sheer murder and robbery. And who, aside from pious schoolmen, read the books that explained knighthood in terms
of Christian symbolism? To secure the unqualified service of a knight the church had to enroll
that
him in one of the crusading orders and made him into a sort of monk instead of 2
feudal gentleman.
chivalry with which we are here concerned was no structure of the clerical imagina-
The
tion;
nor was
it
a story-teller's fancy.
As long
as
the society of western Europe was dominated by the knightly class a class whose traditions
were
essentially those of the barbarian
warrior
chivalry continued to be a very real institution.
Chivalry
It
55
was already old when the first chansons de geste were written; they merely accepted and somewhat idealized it. For the ingrained habits and prejudices of most knights defied all literary influence, whether religious or secular. Throughout the twelfth century the original chivalry seems on the whole to have persisted. The growing luxury of the age, to be sure, encouraged new standards of politeness, which were largely
dictated
by women. At
least in a
few princely
courts romantic poetry attained great vogue. Fine gentlemen now composed lyrics in honor of their
ladies
and sighed over tales of love and adventure
can hardly escape the fashion was little more than
in far-off lands. But
we
feeling that the new affectation. The average knight, we must believe, went about his business of warfare in the
same old way, untroubled by the thought that, to be truly chivalrous, he must be chronically
amorous.
Chapter JFour
THE FEUDAL NOBILITY
TIME and
again
in the
preceding pages
we
age
have
had occasion to remark that the feudal
intensely
nobility*
aristocratic.
was
The
ruling
class
was
niacle
up of
fief-holders
who,
as such,
enjoyed a virtual*
monopoly of wealth, of
of political authority..
necessarily
military prestige,
and
A member of this class was
from
the vassal of the lord
whom
he
held his
fief;
with respect to
his
own
tenants he
was himself a
case of a
lord; professionally, except in the
clergyman, he had to be a knight; by
birth he ranked as a nobleman. Since the feudal
nobility
their
was thus composed of fief-holders and families, it eventually became possible in
some countries to acquire a noble tide by the purchase of a noble estate. But this amounted to
a reversal of the old law. dalism
nobility
Under the
original
feu-
was a matter of personal
status.
Fief-holding, as
we
have seen, presupposed vas-
56
The Feudal Nobility
salage;
57
and vassalage presupposed a warlike aristocracy. The Franks, both before and after their conquest of Gaul, were distinguished as a nation
fullest
of fighting-men. To be a Frank in the sense of the word i. e., a man who was
"free"
really
one had to belong to the warrior
is
class.
every reason to believe that, even in the Merovingian kingdom, the typical warrior
ant. Thejatter, although he was at most an economic
There
was sharply distinguished from the typical peasmight be legally free,
dependant; the former,
on the contrary, was to some extent a landed proprietor and was thus enabled to maintain the
standard of a barbarian gentleman. He might, in fact, be officially styled gentilis, or perhaps noexpressions remained synonymous throughout the early Middle Ages. Yet, however superior he might be to the ordinary
bilis;
for the
two
peasant, the primitive noble could hardly equip
himself as a heavy-armed cavalryman. So the prince who wanted such service had to keep up
an expensive household enrich his vassals with
or, like the Carolingians,
fiefs.
The
result, as ex-
plained above, was the rapid development of an
exalted social order, the chivalrous class of the
feudal age. And for hundreds of years the members of this class, together with their wives and
58
Mediaeval Feudalism
of
children, constituted the
nobility
Europe.
To
be a nobleman was thus to be a knight, or at least a candidate for knighthood; originally, if a
youth of gentle birth abandoned the military he abandoned also his rank in profession,
society,
A woman, of course, enjoyed nothing in her own
name; since she could not be a knight, she could expect no greater honor than to be married to
one.
To
Tbe
hierarchy
bility,
appreciate the mediaeval concept of no-
we must
disregard such later creations as
*c British peerage. In our language the ancient
tradition
is
better retained
by "gentleman" than
no grades of
gentility;
by "nobleman." There
a gentleman
is
are
a gentleman, without regard to
wealth or political eminence. So it was in the case of a knight. To the extent that chivalry was
the essence of a man's true nobility,
worth could
field,
only be proved in
battle.
Except in the
however, nobility
possessions.
was
also a matter of feudal
vassals
Most knights were
fiefs.
and
as
such had obtained
fief
One who
held a greater
ranked as a greater vassal, and from that point of view as a greater noble. By the eleventh
century the French had thus come to recognize
a feudal
hierarchy which, despite
much variation
by
a
of local usage, was generally distinguished
The Feudal
series
Nobility
59
these titles
of characteristic
titles.
Some of
were of Carolingian, some of later, origin. By reviewing them we should learn something about
the composition of the noble
class, as
well as
something about
First of
all,
its
we
early development. have to consider the rulers of
fiefs that
the principalities, the great royal
had
become virtually independent. The model for such a principality was the Carolingian march, to constitute which a number of counties had
been placed under a military commander styled marquis or duke. In the feudal age Normandy,
Burgundy, Aquitaine, and Gascony were com-
monly known
as duchies,
but other
territories
of the same kind as counties. For example, the old march of Gothia was called the county of
Toulouse after it had been acquired by the count of that city; and similar usage prevailed in such
important states as Flanders and Champagne. Sometimes, on the other hand, the title of count
retained
its earlier
force, being given to the
head
of a small district included within a duchy. The viscount, as the word implies, was at first a
count's deputy. By the eleventh century he had sometimes, as in Aquitaine, made his office into a
sometimes, as in Normandy, he remained an administrative official appointed by the prince.
fief;
60
Mediaeval Feudalism
of the castellan or chdtelain was
The main duty
a vital function to keep one of his lord's castles in the defense of every large fief and one that, for example in Flanders, might be associated with
other governmental powers. Although any vasl sal could properly be referred to as a baron or
seigneur, those titles
were often used technically to distinguish noblemen of superior rank from mere chevaliers. The former were said to possess
baronies or seigneuries and were expected to have numerous vassals of their own, whereas the
latter would hold only enough property to permit knightly service in person. Two additional titles that were sometimes
borne by French nobles resulted from the ecclesiastical reform of the eleventh century. Clergy-
men,
as
we
part in warfare.
have seen, had earlier taken active Then, with the strict enforceit
ment of the canon law,
became usual for
local
churches to appoint lay protectors and to compensate them by the grant of fiefs. In the case
of a monastery the appointee was called an avou (advocatus)^ in that of a bishopric a vidame
(vicedbmmus)
.
And
all
too often,
if
we may
be-
lieve the complaints preserved in legal records, the hereditary possession of such an office by a
1
From
the late Latin baro, a man.
The Feudal
feudal house
Nobility
6l
was turned
into a pretext for rob-
bery and extortion; the church had to appeal to
the king for protection against its "protector." Meanwhile the exclusion of high-born prelates from the had inmilitary profession
necessarily
volved their exclusion from the chivalrous
aris-
tocracy. Yet, because they were great fief-holders, they continued to be recognized as
great
nobles; under the Capetian
monarchy some of them came to enjoy the official rank of duke or
count.
The
is
political significance of the nobility,
however,
a subject that will be
more
fully
treated in the
following chapter; for the
to such activities of
moment
life
wej^jurn
.as
everyday
more
directly interested the gentlemen of the
feudal age.
The
noble warrior of the eleventh century
is
most vividly depicted for us in the Bayeux Tap- Arms and a of linen with scenes worked in estry, strip
colored thread to describe the
Norman Conquest
of England.
As
there
represented, a jnan's or-
dinary clothing consisted primarily of a loose tunic belted at the waist and, below
fitting
JtTggfi^
hose.
When peacefully
engaged, he might
also
at the throat
wear a cape or mantle, fastened by a clasp* and sometimes provided witlTa
that could be
Hood
pulled over die head. hTcase
62
Mediaeval 'Feudalism
of a warlike expedition the mantle was replaced by a hauberk, a shin of mail that was constructed
by sewing metal
scales
on
a leather foundation
FIGURE
2.
HAROLD ABOUT TO RECEIVE THE CROWN
or
the
much more expensive process
by weld-
ing iron links to form a continuous fabric. Such a hauberk reached only to the knee and was
slashed at the
ride
on horseback.
bottom to enable the wearer to It had elbow-length sleeves
and a sort of hood that furnished a mailed covering for the back of the neck and, presumably, a padded lining for the helmet. The latter was
The Feudal Nobility
63
a conical iron cap with a frontal extension over the nose. Otherwise the knight's face was left
unprotected, as were his forearms and his lower legs, except for what would now be called put-
FIGURE
3.
ARMS ARE
CARRIED TO THE
NORMAN
SHIPS
tees.
Leggings of mail, according to the tapestry,
as
were
yet the mark of a distinguished person, more particularly the Norman duke. For additional defense the knight carried a long kiteattached to shaped shield by means of
thongs
its
under
side. Its outer side,
facing on a wooden
probably a metal base, might be decorated
with a picture or geometrical pattern. 2 For offense his customary weapons were a lance, about
2
ures,
See the cover figure, which, like all die accompanying is taken from the Bayeux Tapestry.
fig-
64
Mediaeval Feudalism
eight feet in length,
which was slung
Tfo
c
gffr
at
and a cross-hiked sword, his waist on the left side.
Like the contemporary feudal epic, the Ba-
yeux Tapestry
glorifies horses as well as knights.
The anonymous artist seems to have
delighted in
FIGURE
4.
A NORMAN
KNIGHT AND His CHARGER
drawing the great stallions of the Norman array, together with the smallest details of their harness.
We thus find accurate representations of bridles,
reins, stirrups,
and saddles
even of the girths
latter
and
on.
breast-straps
by which the
were bound
The
mediaeval saddle,
design, highly
we may
note,
was of
and
in
oriental
peaked in front
back, and probably, like the charger that bore it, had been introduced from the east. Whatever
their
origin, saddle
and
stirrups
were of prime
The Feudal
Nobility
65
importance to the knight. Dressed in cumbersome armor, with a shield on his left arm and
the reins in his left hand, he was supposed to ride at a and strike an gallop enemy with the lance couched in his hand while he warded
right
off a similar attack directed
against himself.
How
on
could he do
his horse?
all this
unless he
had a firm
seat
Hastings, of course, was not a battle
between mounted armies; but the Bayeux Tapestry gives a spirited portrayal of the
Norman
charge and shows how the knight, after hurling or breaking his lance, fell to with his sword at
close
quarters.
The
twelfth
in
change piece of armor continued to be the hauberk, now reguof link mail and of somewhat larly improved
design, to protect the forearms
century witnessed very military costume. The main
little
and the chin.
For a tournament the knight
occasionally donned a barrel-shaped helmet that entirely covered the face and had mere slits for eye-holes. But since
equipment of
this sort left
him
half-blind, he
commonly
a sword
preferred the old-fashioned helmet
for active war. His weapons
were still a lance and
sometimes
also a battle-axe, although
it
the Bayeux Tapestry shows
used only by the English. Shields, too, remained very much the
66
Mediaeval Feudalism
same, except that they tended to be smaller and came to bear recognized coats of arms. Such
devices
were not
solely
a matter of ornament.
A
knight was effectively disguised even by the more primitive armor; in a famous scene of the
Bayeux Tapestry Duke William has to
helmet to disprove the rumor that he has
lift his
fallen.
So
we may
imagine
that, as a design painted
on
a shield served to
identify the owner, it might become a permanent feature of his accoutrement and eventually a mark of pride for his descendants.
By
the close of the twelfth century, at any
rate, it
was already customary for every great
a peculiar bearing for the chief,
house to have a characteristic blazon
armorial
which could be
modified indefinitely to distinguish his relatives and vassals. Familiar examples are the fleurs de 8 of the lys of die Capetians and the leopards
Angevins.
The
Feudal
general character of feudal warfare
may
be
deduced from what has already been easily said about vassalage and chivalry. Although the
feudal
army sometimes included archers or other foot-soldiers, it was essentially a force of knights.
*
lion
In heraldry the only difference between a leopard and a is that the former shows his full face, the latter his profile.
so-called lions of
Hie
England are therefore leopards.
The Feudal
Nobility
67
Every knight was a gentleman warrior, devoted
above
all else
to a creed of personal gallantry,
which was hardly compatible with military discipline. His bravery was that of a reckless adventurer. His loyalty was primarily that of a
vassal to a
particular lord.
And
even the perfect
FIGURE
5.
"HERE
Is
DUKE WILLIAM"
his
vassal
was by no means blind to
own
interest
especially to the profit that arose
from the tak-
ing of booty and the holding of noble prisoners to ransom. Accordingly, when two feudal armies
met, each knightly participant was apt to conduct himself very much as he saw fit. The final
outcome would depend on a series of duels in which the determining factor was individual
prowess. But battles on a large scale were rare in feudal Europe. The characteristic warfare of
68
Mediaeval Feudalism
the age consisted rather of pillaging raids into
the enemy's territory, of skirmishes between
small bands of knights,
and of engagements
in-
cident to the siege of castles.
Early
1
complicated subject of military architecture in the early Middle Ages must here be reeva
The
{^fi
cation
duced to a
brief outline.
is
Our word
"castle," like
the French chdteau,
derived from the
Old
French cartel and so from the Latin castellum,
diminutive of castra. In the late
Roman Empire
the castra was a legionary camp, permanently
constructed of masonry to enclose about fifty acres, while the castellum was a little fort of
perhaps a
querors,
fifth that size.
The
barbarian con-
however, came to apply both Latin
names, together with the
fortified
German
city;
burg, to any
this
place,
even a walled
and
usage
local
persisted into the subsequent period,
rulers built a
when
variety of
new strongholds. Among
distinguish
the
latter, if
we
look beyond the words to the
things designated,
cipal types.
we may
two
is
prin-
The more
primitive,
which
found
England as well as on the continent, was a rude imitation of the Roman castra usually an
in
area of about thirty acres surrounded
by a
ditch,
an earthen embankment, and a wooden palisade. such a work might serve as headquarAlthough
The Feudal
ters for a
Nobility
69
primarily-
prince or his
official, it
was
designed as a refuge, to
be manned by the people
of the neighborhood
or Hungarian attack.
when threatened by Viking The other type of fortress
appears to have been a peculiarly French development of the tenth century. It was small,
relatively
normally of
less
than
six acres in extent,
and was
parts
characterized
called the
by
internal division into
bailey.
two
motte and the
This
is
what we
properly
know as the feudal castle.
Through a somewhat conven- The we are shown how Duke William
Rennes, and Dinant;
castle
Once again the Bayeux Tapestry gives us valuable information.
tionalized art
took the
castles of Dol,
stopped at the castle of Bayeux; and, on landing in England, immediately ordered that a similar
castle
"be dug" at Hastings. This
last
scene
is
intended to represent the construction of a motte i. e., an artificial mound which, by artistic anticipation,
with a stockade. already provided The foregoing scenes furnish additional details of the contemporary castle: notably the cleated that rose over the moat to a gate in
is
drawbridge
the stockade and, inside the
latter,
the high
wooden
tower or keep. In each case the tapestry
leaves us to imagine a bailey, the extensive court-
likewise protected by a moat, yard which was
*
yo
Mediaeval Feudalism
drawbridge, and stockade and which enclosed
the indispensable barracks, stables, and barns.
During an attack the bailey served as an advanced
FIGURE
6.
CONSTRUCTION OF A CASTLE AT HASTINGS
position whence,
if
necessary,
the defenders could
its
withdraw to the motte with
fortifications
stronger line of
and its central tower. That the main
purpose of the keep
orate proof, but
it
was
military
needs no elab-
also constituted the
perma-
nent residence of whatever lord commanded the
and his family lived in the upper which were accordingly partitioned to storeys, form a great hall, a chapel, and a series of private
castle.
He
chambers. Above, the roof or garret would be
specially designed for observation
and the hurlstorey
ing of missiles. 'Below, the
first
would
The Feudal
Nobility
71
house the arms that were kept in reserve and the soldiers who guarded the entrance. An under-
ground basement would contain a well and rooms
FIGURE
7.
THE CASTLE
OF RENNES
for the storage of food, though cooking be done in an outside kitchen.
would
its
normally
The
reflected motte-and-bailey castle thus
feudal origin. Although it might sometimes shelter a good many refugees, such a fortress was
intended for continuous occupation by a military that is to chieftain and a garrison of his vassals
say,
by
type
Defenses of this professional warriors. were thought so essential to feudal organiza-
tion that the expansion of the latter can be acthe ruins of the former. curately traced from The progress of the Normans in the British Isles,
72
for example,
less
Mediaeval Feudalism
was marked by the erection of no than five hundred motte-and-bailey castles.
as elsewhere,
There,
the individual plans varied
place.
somewhat from place to
sible the
Wherever pos-
conquerors very naturally saved time and labor by incorporating remnants of previous fortification or to by adapting a natural
height serve as a motte. Nevertheless, the fundamental
outline of the castle
was very much the same
in
unchanged even after the original timber had been replaced by stone. Romantic fiction still fosters the notion
that a castle had to be a tremendous
pile of
every feudal country and remained
ma-
a matter of fact, stone sonry. keeps were until the later twelfth and exceptional
As
century
the old
first
to be raised
were mere
replicas of the
rectangular towers that stood apart from the round encircling walls. or an integrated castle with rounded bastions keep
wooden
structures
A
can
positively
be attributed to the period after
1200.
By no means
castle.
every feudal noble possessed a
little
Simple knights, the
*
vassals at the
&efaudd
noble
bottom
^e
scale,
could expect to have no
more man stockaded manor houses. Indeed, many
a greater person lived in a similar
way and even
the most glorious princes spent a good portion
The Feudal Nobility
73
of each year on their rural estates. The reason, of course, was not that they delighted in agrarian much of their income superintendence, but that
consisted of produce which it was easier to consume than to transport. Under the traditional
economy of the early Middle Ages was considered a necessary means of
agriculture subsistence
rather than a profitable business. The enforcement of its customary routine could well be left
to local stewards or
bailiffs.
And so
far as
domes-
tic management was concerned, what else did a wife have to occupy her time? The feudal gentle-
man, in other words, believed in maintaining the barbarian standard of gentility. His true vocation
was
fighting.
Between campaigns he might
for a time enjoy hunting, feasting, drinking, Sooner or later, howgambling, and love-making.
he became intensely bored with peace. Then he could do no better than ride to a tournaever,
ment.
favorite sport of the aristocracy was a battle in every sense of the word originally was formally proclaimed and was except that it
That
agreed fought according to particular Under the patronage of a chivalrous in advance. lord and generous sponsors were never lackwould be set for an encounter being a day
rules
on
74
Mediaeval Feudalism
tween two groups of knights, often representing
two
rival houses
or
localities*
Dressed in
full
panoply of war, the contestants would align their mounts on either side of a field and then, at a
given signal, charge. After lances had been broken, the combat would be continued with swords until one of the parties had been driven
off or disarmed. Needless to say, it was a dangerous game in which blood was spilled and lives might be lost. But there was great honor to be won as well as booty; for a victor could claim
the horse and arms of a vanquished opponent unless the latter ransomed them for a sum of
eants. Men of the feudal age fought for the love of fighting, not with blunted weapons for love of the ladies.
money. general affray of this sort, the tournament proper, was often accompanied by prearranged contests between pairs of knights; and with the passage of time such jousts, as they were called, became increasingly popular and increasingly showy. It was only at a much later time, however, that they degenerated into mere pag-
A
Cfmpter
jftoe
FEUDALISM AND THE MEDIAEVAL STATE
FEUDALISM,
it is
often asserted,
disintejTra-
tiaiM^l in tdat
ft
mcfflmfr fr* m -ft c
The
tion ofj^e^sttte.
But this opinion seems to have with Originated hisr^rumg iy{in rpfitrirf^ fhfiir
state
major kingdoira
large states,
as
^
we
have seen, tended to die
their through internal weakness, not because
rulers tried to hold
feudal tenure. If
them together by means of we turn from them to the
French duchies of the tenth and eleventh centuries,
little
different impression. gain a very In^ state, evidently, feudalism was not incom-""
efficient
*
we
paSBle'with
government, and thejdeter*
mims ^ P
.S^.
factor,
|
we may
' ,
_
|
^r-M^M*-*
"suspect, *
was
\t
<"''
vassalagej
'
"
V
for the strenejb of that personal bond, on which ^^O "~.. ^..^.*^-*"~'^^"~
!
the whole feudal structure depended, was in-
7?
76
Mediaeval Feudalism
evitably affected
by
i
local conditions.
Experience
proved only too well that:trustworthy
fiefs
men might
^
tfiaF to endo w^ jassals was to give them the means of with^rich successful revolt, and that the loyait^oT3istantr
officials
could not be assured by compelling them
to perform homage. According to ancient tradition, lord and vassal were bound together by mutual faith; if either proved false, the other was
renouncing the original agreement. So delicately balanced an obligation could have
justified in
slight
permanence unless
it
was of
real
advantage
to both parties. a lord was so weak or so far-removed that he could furnish no effective
When
support to a
vassal,
the latter had every reason
to defy his authority. may therefore conclude that the feudal
We
jState,
one whose government largely depended on feudal tenure, had to be small because such
tenure presupposed a close personal relationship between a lord and his vassals. But territorial extent
not the only matter to be taken into account; the political tradition of the countryside
is
and the character of the ruling house might be
of equal importance. To take a familiar example, let us consider the dominions of the Angevin
Henry
II,
which in some fashion or another
in-
Feudalism and the Mediaeval State
eluded the British
Isles,
77
Normandy, Aquitaine,
Anjou, and Brittany. The last four he held as vassal of the French king. He was himself duke
of Aquitaine, and count of Anjou; the county of Brittany was held of him
of
Normandy, duke
by
his son Geoffrey. Henry, of course, was king of England in his own right. In addition he was
recognized us lord by various
Irish chiefs
and
Welsh
princes,
by
the
Normans who had con-
quered parts of Ireland and Wales, and by the king of the Scots. Though often misnamed Angevin Empire, this collection of lands had litde unity. Even the general acceptance throughout
them of feudal custom was
less;
practically meaningcannot deduce Henry's actual power in a particular region from the fact that he held
for
we
it
as a fief rather
it
than in
full
sovereignty, or
from
the fact that
each case
was held of him by a vassal. In we have to know what rights were
customarily enjoyed
tract
by the
parties
to the con-
and in what measure those
rights continued
to be enforced.
really
worked,
To understand how feudalism we must turn to the history of
is
individual countries.
So far
as
eleventh-century France
confranc*
cerned, we may disregard the royal authority The kingdom of the West Franks, altogether.
78
Mediaeval Feudalism
a political
which had never been more than
shift,
make-
now
The
seemed on the point of
final dissolu-
tion.
archy by be foreseen.
glorious reconstruction of the monthe later Capetians could not possibly
On
reign of Philip I little honor that yet clung to the kingly office. The ancient rights of the crown had long since
the contrary, the disgraceful (1060-1 108) served to erase the
passed to such
men
as
were
able,
with or with-
out legal authorization, to organize and defend a local territory. And although a territory of this
sort
might
still
be called a royal
fief,
the tradi-
tional language
was generally
belied
by the conwhether
duct of the holder.
alleged vassals
The
greater of the king's
his court,
never came near
to perform
ice.
What cal lord who was defied with officials on his own domain?
homage or to render any other servrespect could they have for a theoretiimpunity by petty
France, obviously, had ceased to be a state in any proper sense of the word. Rather, it had been split into a number of
states
whose
rulers,
no matter how they styled
themselves, enjoyed the substance of the regal
power.
The
early development of the
French duchies
remains very obscure through lack of contempo-
Feudalism and the Mediaeval State
rary records; yet
a
79
we may
facts. It
be certain of
at least
few important
was typical of the age The
set
that three
military
commands
up by Charles
the Bald for the defense of his northern frontiers
should be turned into
hereditary principalities.
One of them we know as the county of Flanders, another as the duchy of Burgundy. The third
was the march of Neustria, which became the
royal
domain when
its
rulers,
beginning with
title
Hugh
Capet, obtained permanent
to the
crown of France. By
that time, however, their
had been reduced to little more than principality the He de France; for the counts of Anjou, Blois,
and Champagne had made themselves virtually independent, and the Norman conquests along
the Channel had been formally recognized as a
separate duchy.
is
The
case of the last-named state
particularly interesting.
The Viking
invaders
of the ninth century had assuredly been quite custom. If their descendants ignorant of feudal were able to construct a duchy that was based on
such custom,
it
must have been by virtue of
in France.
knowledge acquired
We
should not
for all their suppose that the Norman dukes, could have done more than imgenius,
political
and prove on a French model;
this
supposition
8o
is
Mediaeval Feudalism
borne out by the fact that their principality was not fundamentally different from the neighboring ones. In Flanders the
Fhmders
Normans could
find a
particu-
useful example. larly
lier
Whatever powers had earbeen wielded by the king had there fallen
into the hands of the count.
Of
the numer-
ous royal vassals
who had
once been scattered
throughout the Flemish territory he alone was
left.
The
others had transferred their
allegiance
to him, to serve as ministers of his household, as
officials
for local administration, as prelates of
the church, or as knights in his army.
The
count,
being thus the supreme military commander of Flanders, could muster for its defense all able-
bodied inhabitants, as well as the mounted contingents
owed by
his feudal tenants.
On
every
side important roads
and waterways were domi-
nated by his fortifications, to maintain which he
had extensive rights of conscripting labor and requisitioning materials. No castle could be raised
without
orders.
self
his license
or held in opposition to his
The
count, furthermore, declared him-
guardian of the general peace. Ordinary cases might be disposed of in the courts of his vassals,
but
his
justice
was paramount. All Flemish
churches were under his special protection; only
Feudalism and the Mediaeval State
8l
he could enjoy the avouerie* of monasteries.
Within the economic sphere
or
it
was the count,
persons
authorized
by him, who coined
money, regulated commerce, and levied indirect taxes. Precisely when and how he had come to
exercise these various functions of
we do
not know.
We
government
however,
re-
may be
sure,
that they
were derived from the Carolingian
galia. In other words, eleventh-century Flanders was actually a miniature kingdom; for its ruler,
although he wore no royal crown, was able to enforce such rights as had been abandoned by
Charles the Bald and his successors.
Enforcement, inevitably, was the crucial problem, and in Flanders it was solved through a territorial organization that had apparently been
perfected during the tenth century. For both civil and military purposes the county was
divided into chdtellenies
districts
constructed
about
castles,
such
as those of
Ypres, Saint-Omer, Lille, was entrusted to a chfaelain, who in all respects acted as the count's deputy and for
these districts
that reason
Ghent, Bruges, and Arras. Each of
was often
styled vicomte (viscount).
He thus commanded the garrison of knights supplied
1
by the surrounding
fiefs
and saw to
it
that
See above, p. 60.
82
Mediaeval Feudalism
the castle was stocked with food and other necessities.
In the event of
war he attended to the
summoning
lenie
of troops from within the chdteltheir activities.
and directed
By way
of
also superintended the colordinary routine he
lection of
whatever revenues the count obtained
district:
from the
tolls,
manorial income, subsidies,
and the
like.
Upon
the chfoelain, finally,
devolved the important duty of holding the territorial court that met inside the castle to administer the count's justice.
Although the
hereditary,
office
it
of
cMtelm was
become
not at
first
had
usually
so
by
the middle of the twelfth
century.
fiefs
The
holders, being
rewarded with rich
adjacent to their respective castles, ranked
high in the feudal aristocracy. If they had been chronically disobedient, Flanders would have
lacked
all
political stability.
That they remained
generally faithful
was due, not to any theory
of vassalage, but to effective control
by the count.
To
4njou
the south of
Normandy Anjou provided
another example of a well-knit feudal state under
the remarkable Fulk Nerra and Geoffrey Martel
(987-1060). That county, too, was defended and governed by means of castles among them
the earliest
known
to have had stone towers
which were regularly placed in the keeping of
Feudalism and the Mediaeval State
important
thdtelains
It
83
And, as in Flanders, such were usually held to a strict loyalty.
until the later eleventh
vassals.
was not
disputed succession allowed get out of hand; then, under
century that a many of them to
Geoffrey Plantagenet (i 129-51), the count's authority was again enforced. From reading various standard sternly
books one .might suppose that feudalism was no more than a form of anarchy. But feudal anarchy
was neither constant nor
pends xaltogether on what
universal in~eleventh-
cenfuiy France; the validity of the expression destate! is
being consid-
So ered;
far as centralized administration
was
concemed^Aquitaine was rather a loose union than a single one. Toulouse had jpf principalities
a very turbulent history throughout the Middle Ages. Blois and Champagge^never attained the
political strength
of Flanders and Anjou. Yet
none of these
territories experienced the disor-
der that generally characterized the duchy of Burgundy, whigji, in tffe absence of all ducal"
control,
was continually fought over by
..........
a
K,
horde
of local barons. Similar conditions prevailed in """^HIIMi l>mm|i|ifcHM~ >'-' " "*
Jjg.d
and wherever_fi]S-jL.theoretical ruler ceased to jnle even in the royal domain be..
fore the accession of the vigorous Louis VI. greatly the Normans profited by the ex-
How
Mediaeval Feudalism
perience of their neighbors appears
from the
Nor-
structures they
had erected by the end of the
It is
eleventh century.
well
known
that
Eng-
land, under William the Conqueror and his sons (1066-1135), was not only the strongest but
also the
most thoroughly feudalized
state
of west-
ern Europe.
early
And
the
more we
learn about the
realize that
government of Normandy the better we English feudalism was by no means
as has often
so
peculiar
been alleged.
The
fact
that William's duchy, as well as his
kingdom, was
a conquered territory helps to explain
why Nor-
man
institutions
were somewhat more uniform
to exist in most, of the French
in-
than had
come
principalities.
Throughout Normandy, for
stance, the substitution oTIeudal tenure for other
forms of landholding seems to have been
j;e-
^maAa^^comfJgtey
ancftKe' definition of feudal
service in precise quotas of knights to have
been
especially early. In general, however, the ducal rights jvere very
much
the same_as^ those en-
joyed by
the count
oOprnders. Tlie 'duke nomihis
nat3#.prelates, received their homage, and actecl
aTffieir
lay protector. Except
by
special au-
thorization, pp one in Normandy could build a castle, coin money, regulate sea trade, or hold
trials
jn more serious
<x^Jtg^
Feudalism and the Mediaeval State
distinguished
local feuds
85
from the customary prosecution of was a monopoly of the duke, who
epxi'.z.-.vas-i:
i.
.i,
/.
'
_
in time of
need could summon
all
able-bodied
men of the duchy by proclaiming the arriere ban.
His authority,
ficials called
finally,
was enforced through of-
viscounts as in Flanders, although
they were really ducal agents prominent vassals who had charge of the duke's castles and
acted as his deputies for military, judicial, and fiscal administration in the districts
surrounding
(vicomtes).
Feudalism, according to the definition given
previous chapter, was before the Norman
in a
it is
unknown
in
England
Conquest The An^io-Saxons,
tnieTTiaH l)een familiar with grants of im- England
munity and with various forms of conditional landholding and personal lordship; but they had
never
^or a plan
.
fices.
a class of developed professional knights of vassals with rewarding military beneIf we leave out of account the few Nor-
man adventurers who had
Edward the
Confessor,
it
was
been brought over by and QukeJ^^
in Britain
Jhisjc^ov^rs
feudal custom
who
.first
established
feudal tenure, feudal warfare, feudal, casks, and
generally.
Thus suddenly Englmd
the reason for the
was turned
into a feudal state patterned after
die duchy of
Normandy; and
86
Mediaeval Feudalism
is
transformation
tuted
clear.
The Conqueror
form of
substipoliti-
what he regarded
as the best
cal organization for
ficient.
institutions as
Although he thought might be useful, they were fitted into a new and essentially feudal
one that had proved inefhe preserved such native
structure.
To
him, at any
rate,
feudalism seemed
quite
compatible
opinion whose
with strong monarchy an justification is surely to be found
in the history of the
kingdom for the next two
established the legal
hundred
years.
The Norman Conquest
principle that every bit of England, if not retained in the king's hands, was held of him as part of some fief by knight service, by ser-
a consequence, the throughout the kingdom became a ruling feudal aristocracy which, almost to a man, was
class
jeanty, or in free alms.
2
As
Norman-French. The holders of royal
fiefs
were
of course the king's vassals or, as they were technically styled, barons. Thanks to the famous
inquest of 1086, we have a virtually complete catalogue of William's tenants-in-chief, together with a detailed description of their prop-
Domesday
erties.
tively
8
At the bottom of the list we find the relainsignificant men who possessed only a
35.
See above, p.
Feudalism and the Mediaeval State
87
manor or two;
top the bishops, abbots, and nobles who, after lay endowing numerous vassals of their own, were left with scores of manors
at the
in demesne.
clesiastics,
3
Most of
these barons, even the ec-
owed the king quotas of knights which
their fiefs immediately
had been assessed against
after the
Conquest. But feudal grants could also be made to remunerate persons who
Norman
served the king in other ways, notably the chief
members of
his household.
A remarkable
docu-
ment from the
of Stephen (1135early reign
54) shows that the heart of the royal court was a group of domestic
their fiefs
officials
many of whom held
by
the record tells serjeanty. Besides,
us, the chancellor, the treasurer, the steward, the
butler, the constable,
and
their
principal
sub-
ordinates
were
entitled to regular meals at the
as well as to liveries of bread,
king's expense,
wine, and candles, which of an evening they
might take to their
own quarters.4
To safeguard his frontiers, the Conqueror followed a Norman precedent by entrusting them
to powerful vassals styled counts.
Upon
the
polcy
See above, p. 28. Excerpts from Domesday Book, as well as various documents illustrative of feudalism in England, will be and F. G. Marcham, Sources found translated in
Stephenson of English Constitutional History
,
C
(New
York, 1937), Sect. n.
no. 29.
Mediaeval Feudalism
Welsh border, for
such counts
instance, he established three
called earls
by the
native English
and delegated to them whatever authority he would otherwise have had in the regions about
Chester, Shrewsbury, and Hereford. Although of this sort remained exceptional
principalities
in England, scores of other fiefs carried
with them
the right of erecting castles and so could be regarded by the king as important units for the
defense of his realm. Indeed, according to recognized feudal custom, every fief-holder enjoyed a
considerable
amount of
political privilege.
As
a
minimum, he had limited powers of justice, economic control over the peasants police, and his estates; and if he had vassals of his own, he on could summon them to court for the settlement of disputes affecting their tenures. In one way or
another the king thus allowed his barons and their vassals to exercise numerous functions of
goyejpraient.
Yet throughout both England and
.
Normandy
-J.
.
-
liem asserted .^.._ ._
>
.
^f.'
a broad claim to w ,/^. judicial -..,.. ,^
'.
..,
.~r*,*,- r
and military supremacy. Certain cases were norJ^* ^
<'
,
*
*,,,.*,*. <.<..,
+... jfc|
,
|>|
f
ft
*i*nf''
mally reserved for his jurisdiction known as pleas of the sword in Normandy, as pleas of the crown in England. Any landholder, whether the
king's vassal or not, could be required to
swear
for fealty to him;
war could be lawfully waged
Feudalism and the Mediaeval State
89
only in his name, and whenever necessary he could demand service from all able-bodied men
(Anglo-Saxon fyrd, French arriere ban). In both countries, too, William employed
the same means to enforce his rights. The English kingdom had anciently been divided into
shires,
sheriff,
much
each of which was administered
by
a
the subordinate of a provincial governor styled ealdorman or earl. After the Norman Conquest the earls ceased to have important functions of
on
certain frontiers.
government except, as already remarked, Most of the shires, hence-
were placed under new officials appointed by the king and directly responsible to him. While the English called these officials sheriffs, the French called them visforth also
as counties,
known
who man
counts, for they decidedly resembled the men bore that title on the continent. The Norsheriff,
member
whose
unlike his Saxon predecessor, was a of the feudal aristocracy, a great baron
office,
though not formally hereditary,
his son.
might be passed on to
Within
his district
the sheriff acted as the king's military lieutenant and normally as the custodian, or constable, of a royal castle
one whose construction he had per-
the haps supervised. In addition he presided over county court, attended to various matters of
90
police,
Mediaeval Feudalism
collected the royal revenues,
and carried
out the king's orders generally. It is thus obvious that after 1066 the local government of England was brought into close agreement with that
of
as
Normandy and
might
still
Flanders.
Such
peculiarities
be displayed by the English ter-
ritorial
courts or
by
the English
fiscal
system
were of only minor
significance.
Anybody who
Tbe kmg
tional
studies the legal
and constitu-
development of England must realize at
is
the outset that one of his principal concerns
feudalism; for whatever institution of the
Nor-
man monarchy he
It
examines
is
found to have dehis barons.
pended on the king's relationship to
was, of course, from the
fiefs
of his vassals
that the king got practically his entire
in the
army and
It
form of
a
aids,
feudal incidents, and
his
hospitality
good portion of
income.
was
his vassals
who made up
his central courts,
acted as his permanent ministers, defined his
and, in
kw,
one
way
or another, controlled the local
administration
of his kingdom.
Without the
vigorous support of his barons the Conqueror's government could have had no permanence. In England, as in Normandy, he was faced with
occasional revolts
minorities; but
on the
part
of discontented
he was always strong enough to
Feudalism and the Mediaeval State
re-establish
91
order, because
loyal.
most of
II
his vassals
continued to be
likewise ruled
son.
William
effectively,
and Henry I and for the same reathe logical
The anarchy under Stephen was
king's incompetence.
result of the
finally,
Henry
II,
was able to
restore the system of his
grandfather and on the basis of that restoration
to
make the experiments and improvements
illustrious.
for
which he has remained
In France, meanwhile, the great revival of the
monarchy had been begun by Louis VI (110837). His
realized,
first task, as
Resto-
he seems clearly to have
his
?
e
was to enforce
authority through- Capettm
out the royal domain.
tian
At
his accession
the Capeking-
principality,
itself,
like the
West Prankish
dom
was hardly more than a
tradition.
Following the example of the great barons, the king's petty vassals in and about the lie de France
generally ignored or defied him.
his prevots
On
all sides
and chdtelaim conducted
their offices
to suit themselves, usurping his functions of
government, appropriating him admittance to fusing
his revenues, his
and
re-
own
castles.
To
remedy
the situation the corpulent but energetic
ecclesiastics
Louis rallied a number of
and other
field at
local vassals to his support
and took the
the head of a small army. Eventually the rebels
Q2
Mediaeval Feudalism
castles
were beaten, unauthorized
were torn
down, and disobedient
officials
were replaced.
the solid
As
a consequence, Louis bequeathed to his suc-
cessors a
firmly organized
feudal state
nucleus of the
built
new French kingdom which they
by gradually taking over the neighboring from this point of view, principalities. Regarded
feudalism
is
seen to have been fundamental to
it
the French, as
was to the English,
constitution.
During the tenth and eleventh centuries, while
feudalism the
kingdom of the West Franks was broken into
states, that
JJjJj^j^
Italy
a series of local
of the East Franks
seemed to
kings of the Saxon-Franconian house checked the
increasing solidarity.
attain
The
tendency of the German duchies to become feudal principalities after the French model and
successfully
enforced the principle that a duke
held his office at the royal pleasure, not as a the king prehereditary fief. Within each duchy served the right to have numerous vassals of his
own
especially
the great
ecclesiastics,
whose
power was constantly enhanced
of the secular baronage.
to offset that
And
in various other
ways
the rulers of
Germany sought
~
to
-"
jnaintajn
t
the Carolingian tradition of ..a ~+*~ grandiose mon-/- ^ ^ v
'
'
r
jKQhy.
made
revived the imperial tide and brave efforts to reign on both sides of the
They even
Feudalism and the Mediaeval State
93
Alps. But the task was an impossible one. The Holy Roman Empire became a mere sham; and
prolonged contest between the royal and princely authority ended in the complete victory of the latter, Germany, like the France of an earlier day, was resolved into a group of feudal
the
as the
Although the culmination of this development came only in the later Middle Ages, the German territories had been generally feudalized
states.
before the close of the twelfth century. From the Rhinelands to the Slavic frontier armies were
made up of
^
knights, society
was dominated by
countryside
_was
_
a
chivalroM^
the
S?^
'"'" ~
--
organized on the hack nf "'""" u n^i. *
""'
l
J
In the case of Germany,
it
may be noted, there
wasjio royal domain to serve as the^ nucleus of a reconsixuaed'monarch^ Wifily riyJn'^ |
Roman
emperors, the successors of
or Suabian dukes; the kingship, as
tion to be borne
first
it
became
purely elective, degenerated into a son of decora-
then by another. quite understandable
by one local prince and Under such conditions it is
why
reuoausm
coulcl furt
be turned, as in France, to the advantage of the
94
crown.
Mediaeval Feudalism
And
less
the other
component kingdoms of
For the
the HnlvJ^lP^ri Fjnpjfr&j. ftpfgrm(ty
had even
solidarity.
practical
work-
ing of feudalism in those regions one must like-
wise examine the political organizations perfected by royal vassals. In southern Italy, on the contrary,
the twelfth-century
kingdom of Sicily was
as well-knit a state as
The
reason, of course,
was
contemporary England. that both countries
had been conquered by talented Normans who were able to establish strong governments by
shrewdly combining their own feudal custom with whatever native institutions they found useful.
The Sicilian kingdom thus owed much to Greek and Saracen precedent; yet its military
central administration,
system, together with various other features of
its
was squarely based on
feudal tenure.
Additional examples of feudal practice can be
Feudalism discovered in
Harderlands of
t^ie
^^ ak^y
large
number along
mentioned
the borders of
Spain, the
as in
British Isles, Scandinavia,
and the kingdoms of
such
as a
eastern
tion, it
Europe. need only be remarked that in
To
avoid wearisome enumeraall
regions feudalism
was generally adopted
means of
political integration.
Through
the es-
tablishment of feudal bonds the
German
kings
Feudalism and the Mediaeval State
95
continuously sought to extend their control over the semi-barbarous rulers of frontier territories;
and those
lordship,
rulers, for all their dislike
of
German
might well adopt a
smiliar
method for
strengthening their authority over their
jects.
own sub-
The
complicated relationships of the Eng-
lish
kings to their neighbors in Scotland, Wales,
and Ireland were governed by very much the same considerations; on every side the introduction of feudal tenure
marked the advance of
Norman
influence, if not of
Norman
conquest.
So too in Spain each of the Christian princes built up his little state by enlisting vassals and
rewarding them with fiefs at the expense of the Moslems. And this was also the plan of Emperor
Alexius
when he
assembled a crusading host at
Constantinople in 1096. That his plan failed was due, not to its ^practicality, but to his own bad
management.
The kingdom jof
hailed
as_ the ideal
;
Jerusalem has often been
Feudalism
stateng^e consciously erected according to pure feudal theory and one therefore reduced in whicE^tEeTroyaT jpower was
tp^a
feudal
m Sym
minimum, t^rglity, however, Aat^khgdom
at
was
most an afterthought. The original states of the crusaders were those created by the various
leaders in the course of a rather haphazard oc-
96
Mediaeval feudalism
cuparion of the Syrian coast. After the general repudiation of Alexius, they recognized no com-
mon
lord and, under ecclesiastical pressure, only agreed to accept one on such terms as they dic-
tated themselves.
The
result, naturally
enough,
was the elevation of a titular king who could do little more than carry out the decisions of his greater vassals. But the latter held to no such
principle of honorary lordship within their
states,
own
some of which
notably the principality
of Antioch
long persisted as independent units. In other words, the kingdom of Jerusalem was weak because it was intended to be so, not because the crusaders were enamored of feudal
abstraction.
Wherever we encounter
feudal in-
stitutions, either in
Asia or in Europe, they ap-
pear to have been developed in response to actual needs. To regard feudalism as something apart
from
the
practical politics
is
utterly to misunderstand
life
of the MiddJoAges- 5
------
5 The author hopes to support at least some of the opinions expressed in this chapter by soon publishing a more specialized article, "Feudalism and Its Antecedents in England."
%uggegtet ReaDtngg
ON
THE
general nature of feudalism
little
has
recently appeared in English aside from sum-
maries in various textbooks:
Thompson, Economic Middle Ages (New York, 1928), chs. xxv-xxvi, and The Middle Ages (New York, 1932), ch. xxiv. The well-known accounts by G. B. Adams,
Civilization during the Middle Ages 1922), ch. ix, and C. Seignobos,
notably, J. W. and Social History of the
(New York,
The Feudal
Regime
(translated
Dow; New
from the French by E. W. York, 1902), were both written in
the nineteenth century and, though still useful, are somewhat out of date. The Cambridge
Medieval History y unfortunately, includes no
adequate discussion of feudalism. And for the moment there is no hope of seeing English translations of the excellent
little
book by
J.
Calmette,
La
soctit& feodale (Paris, 1938), or of the
two
admirable volumes on the same subject by M. Bloch (Paris, 1939-40). For an analysis of other
109
no
Mediaeval Feudalism
pertinent works, especially those by famous continental scholars, the reader is referred to C.
Stephenson,
"The Origin and
Significance of
Feudalism," American Historical Review, XLVI,
788-812.
libraries are, of course, plentifully supwith books on costume, arms and armor, plied castles, knighthood, and other aspects of mediae-
Our
val
life.
Yet few of these books can be expected
to pay much attention to early feudal custom, or even to distinguish it from what followed.
A
welcome exception
is
provided by S. Painter's
French Chivalry (Baltimore, 1940), which will be found entertaining as well as
historically
sound; older writers on chivalry commonly preferred the ideas of romantic or ecclesiastical writ-
conduct of actual knights. EllaJS. ^nnitage gives a fine description of the motteand-bailey castle, with scores of illustrative diaers to the
grams, in her Early
Isles
Norman Castles of the British
(London, 1912). For good introductions to military architecture and warfare in the Middle
Ages
vol.
generally,
JThompson
VI;
in
by A^JH. die<izgnWgg Medieval History,
bibliographies.
see
the chapters
also the attached
The
significance of feudalism in the constitutional history of the European monarchies is a subject
Suggested Readings
ill
that can hardly be understood without a good deal of specialized study, and no attempt to list
works in foreign languages can be made here. Any one who is at all familiar with Norman
England, however,
First
Century
profitably examine The of English Feudalism, a series of
may
lectures
by
So
a
far as
number
1932). sources are concerned, contemporary of recommendations have been made,
F.
M. Stenton (Oxford,
directly or indirectly, in the preceding chapters. The books cited above, p. 18, n. i, and p. 87,
n. 3, contain useful selections of
illustrate feudalism.
documents to
has
The Bayeux Tapestry
been reproduced in color and provided with a running commentary (not always accurate) by H. Belloc, The Book of the Bayeux Tapestry (London, 1914). The Song of Roland may be
read in several English versions, including one in K. Scott-Moncrieff (Lonspirited verse by C. don, 1920). splendid example of the more brutal chansons de geste is Raoul de Cambrai, which has been translated by J. Crosland (Lon-
A
don, 1926).
Accolade, 49, 54
Castle, 68-72, 80-82, 89-91, 93,
97. 103
Adoubement,
47-49, 53-54, 107
Aids, 30, 33, 37, 49, 90
Alexius, 95 Allodial property, 23, 25
Castle-guard, 35
Costra, 68
Angevin Empire, 77
41 Anglo-Saxons, 4, Anjou, 16, 77, 79, 82-83
xo,
Cataphracti, 42 Cavalry, 9, 12, 27, 40-43, 57, 97,
102
See also Knight service
Censive, 17
Antioch, 96
Aquitaine, 16, 77, 79, 82-83 Archers, 66, 100, 102
Champagne, 16, 59, 79 Chansons de geste, 21-22,
61-
47,
Arms and armor,
3, 42-48,
64, 74, 102-103 Arrifre ban, 85, 89
Charlemagne,
4*. 47 See also
8, 11, 20-21, 32,
Avoue, wouerie, 60, 81
Axe, 65
Bailey, 60-70
Carolingian Empire Charles the Bald, 15, 47, 79, 81 Charles Alartel, 8,
n
Chateau, 68, 103
Baron, barony, 33, 60, 86 Batde, trial by, 33-34
See also Castle Chfoelom, chfoelleme, 60, 8183,91
Chevalier, 40-43, 60
Bayeux Tapestry,
21,85
Blois, 16, 79
47, 61-71
7, 9, 11,
Benefice, beneficium,
Chivalry, 40-55, 58, 104-107 Clientage, 6
Bourgeoisie, 98, 101, 104 Brittany, 16, 77 Brunner, Heinrich, 12
Cmht,
8,
40
10,
CoTmtatus, 2-4,
22
Barg,68
Burgundy,
16, 59, 79, 83
Commendation, 5-6 Commerce, 7, 97-99, 104-105
Constable, 89 Costume, 61-62
Byzantine Empire, 42
Capetian dynasty,
16, 66,
See also
78
43,
Arms and Armor
13, 59,
Count, county,
Court, 30-31
87-89
Carolingian Empire, 8-21,
Castellan, 60
See also Justice
Crusades, 95-06
114
Damoiseau, 46
Defiance, 34, 52
Index
Gascony, 16 Gasind, 9
Gentilis, 57
28,
Degan, 8 Demesne,
87
Gentleman,
58, 106
Destrier, 42 Diffidatio, 34
Geoffrey Martel, 82 GermoTiM. See Tacitus
Domesday
inquest, 86
15, 59, 75-84,
Germany,
15, 92-94, 101
Dcrmrmis, 6, 46 Duchy, duke, 13,
Gesithy 4, 9 Goths, 4
9*
Gun,
103
Earl, 88-89
Ecclesiastics, as vassals, 13, 16, 36-37, 61, 87, 92
Harold, 41, 47
Ecuyer, 46
Hauberk, 42, 62, 65 Helmet, 42-43, 47, 62, 65-66
Edward Edward
III, 104 the Confessor, 85 England, 77, 84-91, 104-107 Escheat, 24, 35
Henry Henry Henry
I,
48, 91
76-77, 91, 99 VIII, 104
II,
Heraldry, 66
Esquire. See Squire
Fealty, 18-21, 34, 88
Homage, hvmagivm,
35.38 HoTftme, homo,
6,
18-24, 2^
18
Horses, 29, 41-46, 64
Hospitality, 30, 35, 37, 90
Felony, 23, 34 Feos, feodum, Feudalism, origin of
n
House of
word,
i,
lords, 100, 106
16,
Hugh
lie
Capet,
79 79
32
11-14
Feudvm,
n
de France,
16,
Fidelis, fidelitas, 18, 21
Immunity,
13, 25,
of word, 11-13 Flanders, 16, 59, 79-82, 85, 90
Fief, origin
Incidents, 35, 90
Flews de
lys,
66
Infantry, 12, 43, 66, 102 Inheritance, 23-27
Investiture, 24, 37
Forfeiture, 34-35
Fortification, 13, 33, 80 See also Castle
Ireland, 77, 95
Italy,
94
France, 58-61, 77-85, 91-92, 101,
104-105 Francis I, 104 Franks, 4, 6, 42
Jerusalem, John, 99
Jousts, 74
kingdom
of, 95-96
See also Carolingian Empire Free alms, 35, 86 Fulbert, 20 Fulk Nerra, 82
Fyrd, 89
Justice, 13, 30-34, 37, 80, 85-90,
99
Keep, 69-70, 72 Knecht, 8
Index
8 Knight, meaning of word,
Pepin, 8, 11 I, 78
Knight service, 27-29, 85-87 Knighthood, 27, 30, 40, 46, 58,
93, 106-107
Philip
Philip IV, 101
Philip VI, 104 Precaria, precarhnn, 7, 17
See also Chivalry
Lance, 42-43, 63 Leggings, 43 n., 63 Leopards, 66
Prevdt, 91 Primogeniture, 24-25
Prowess, 50
Puer,8
Quintain, 46
Liege homage, 38
Lombards, 4 Lord, origin of word, 6 n. Lot, Ferdinand, 14
Lothair, 15
Louis Louis Louis Louis Louis
VI, 83, 91-92 XI, 101
Ransom, 30, 51, 67 Relief, 24, 35 Rider, 48 n.
Roland,
21, 50-51
XIV, 105 the German,
the Pious, 47
Roman
15
Romantic
Empire, 5-7
literature, 55
Adagna Carta, 100 Mail. See Arms and
97, 104-105
Saddle, 64
armor
28, 72,
Manorial system, 13-14,
Scotland, 77, 95 Seigneur, 6, 60 Senior, 6
Serjeanty, 35, 86-87, I0^
Sheriff, 89,
Marcjuis, 13, 59 Marriage, 26-27, 30-31, 35, 58
99
Miles, 43
Shield, 42-43, 63-66 Shire, 89
Sicily,
Mimsterudes, 44 Motte, 69
Neustria, 16, 79
94
21, 36, 50-51
Song of Roland,
Spain, 04-95
Nobility, 56-61, 99-104
Squire, 46, 57, 107 Stephen, 87, 91
Stirrups, 64
Normandy,
85, 88-90
16, 59, 77, 79, 84-
Subinfeudation, 13, 25, 28-29, 8?
Oliver, 21, 50-51 Otto I, 93
Sword, 42-43,
47,
64
Page, 46 Parage, 26 Parliament, too, rod
Patronage, 6 Peerage, 58, 100-101, 106
Tacitus, 2, 22, 49 Taxation, 13, 30-33, 81, 99-100 Them, 4, 8, 41 Toulouse, 16, 59, 83
Tournaments, 73-74, 104 Turpin, 36
n6
Valet, 46 Vassal, origin of
Index
Viscornit, 59, 81, 85, 89
word, 8-9
17-38,
Vassalage, 8-13,
43-44,
50-52, 56-57, 66-67, 7i-72 75-
96
Vassus, 8
Wales, 76, 95 Wardship, 26, 35 William I, 28, 41, 47-48,
69-70, 84-90
66,
Vicomte, 81, 85 Vidame, 60 Vikings, 4
William
II,
91
Women,
See
53, 55 also Marriage
Add a Comment