Sir Frederick Pollock & Frederic William Maitland

The History of English Law

Vol. I, pp. 298-300

The forms that have here been given are those of liege homage and of fealty sworn to a liege lord. The word liege seems to mean simple, unconditional, though very likely at a quite early time a false derivation from the Latin ligare (to bind) began to obscure this1. The man who has but one lord does unconditioned homage. If now he acquires a fee from another lord, his homage must be conditioned, he must save the faith that he owes to his first lord2. If tenements held of several lords descend to one heir, his liege homage seems due either to the lord from whom he claims his principal dwelling-place—cuius residens et ligius est3 [*299] the oldest of those feoffments under which he claims1. The person to whom liege homage is done is by no means necessarily the king; but the king has been insisting with ever greater success that there is a direct bond between him and every one of his subjects; the growth of national feeling has favoured this claim2. Not only has he insisted that in every expression of homage or fealty to another there shall be a saving for the faith that is due to him3, but he has insisted that every male of the age of twelve years shall take an oath of fealty to him and his heirs, an oath 'to bear faith and loyalty of life and limb, of body and chattels and of earthly honour,' an oath which of course makes no reference to any tenement, an oath which promises a fealty so unconditioned that it becomes known as the oath of ligeance or allegiance (ligeantia)4. William the Conqueror, it would seem, had exacted, not only an oath of fealty, but an act of homage from all the considerable tenants of his kingdom, no matter whose men they were, for so we may fairly construe the words of the chronicler, 'they bowed themselves and were this man's men'5. later kings as well as earlier had exacted the oath of fealty from their subjects in general. But this is a strong testimony to the force of vassalism. It suggests that an oath is necessary in order to constitute the relation between ruler and subject; it suggests that the mere omission of a saving clause might make it a man's duty to follow his lord even against the king; it makes [*300] the relation between king and subject look like a mere copy of the relation between lord and vassal. This we can see even if we look back to the first days of incipient feudalism: 'All shall swear in the name of the Lord fealty to King Edmund as a man ought to be faithful to his lord'1; the obligations of man to lord is better known, more strongly felt, than the obligation of subject to king. At the accession of Edward I. the danger seems past, at least for a while; the feudal force seems to have well-nigh spent itself; but obviously homage and fealty, liege homage and liege fealty, have meant a great deal.