[Illustration:  A Norman Castle in England]

Each baron had under him a strong body of fighting men, “men-at-arms,” as they were called, or “retainers,” who in return for their “keep,” that is, their food and lodging, and a chance to share the plunder gained in war, swore to be faithful to him, became his men, and gave him the service called homage. (This word comes from homo, the Latin for “man.”) The lesser baron, in turn, swore homage to, and was the “man” of the great baron or earl.  Whenever the earl called on these lesser chiefs to gather their fighting men and report to him, they had to obey, serving him as unquestioningly as their squires and retainers obeyed them.  The earl or duke swore homage to the king, from whom he had received his land.

This, then, was the feudal system (so named from the word feudum, which, in Latin, meant a piece of land the use of which was given to a man in return for his services in war), a system which reversed the natural laws of society, and stood it on its apex, like a cone balanced on its point.  For instead of saying that the land was the property of the people of the tribe or nation, it started by taking for granted that the land all belonged to the king.  The idea was that the king did not give the land, outright, to his dukes and earls, but that he gave them, in return for their faithful support and service in war, the use of the land during their lifetime, or so long as they remained true to him.  In Macbeth, we read how, for his treason, the lands of the thane (earl) of Cawdor were taken from him by the Scottish king and given to the thane of Glamis.  The lands thus lent were called fiefs.  Upon the death of the tenant, they went back to the king or duke who had given them in the first place, and he at once gave them to some other one of his followers upon the same terms.  It often happened that upon the death of an earl or baron his son was granted the lands which his father had held, Finally, in many counties, it grew into a custom, and the oldest son took possession of his father’s fief, but not without first going to the king and swearing homage and fidelity to him.

Two things must be kept in mind if we are to understand the system fully.  In the first place, in the division of the lands among the barons of the conquering nation, no account was taken of the peasants.  As they were of the defeated people, their rights to the land were not once considered.  In many countries, the victors thought of them as part and parcel of the conquered territory.  They “went with” the land and were considered by the lord of the county as merely his servants.  When one lord turned over a farm to another, the farmers were part of the bargain.  If any of them tried to run away, they were brought back and whipped.  They tilled the land and raised live stock, giving a certain share of their yearly crop and a certain number of beeves, hogs, sheep, etc., to the lord, as rent for the land, much as the free farmers in other countries paid tribute to the robber chieftains.  Thus the one class of people who really earned their right to live, by producing wealth, were oppressed and robbed by all the others.  Note this point, for there are wrongs existing today that are due to the fact that the feudal system is not wholly stamped out in some countries.