107257

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