Vassal Homage for Fealtyperverts; Introductory Excerpts from M. Bloch
Imagine two men face to face; one wishing to serve, the other willing or anxious to be served. The former puts his hands together and places them, just joined, between the hands of the other man—a plain symbol of submission, the significance of which was sometimes further emphasized by a kneeling posture. At the same time, the person proffering his hands utters a few words—a very short declaration—whereby he acknowledges himself to be the "man" of the person facing him. Then chief and subordinate kiss each other on the mouth, symbolising accord and friendship.
[...]
the subordinate was often simply called the "man" of his lord; or sometimes, more precisely, his "man of mouth and hands" (homme de bouche et de mains).
[...]
The tie thus formed lasted, in theory, as long as the two lives which it bound together.
[...]
The social bond seemed to be truly inseparable from the almost physical contact which the formal act created between the two men.
[...]
To seek a protector, or to find satisfaction in being one—these things are common to all ages.
[...]
in Merovingian Gaul, as at Rome, one continued to day of the chief that he "took charge" (suscipere) of the subordinate whose "patron" he thereby became; and of the subordinate that he "commended" himself—that is to say "entrusted" himself—to his protector. The obligations thus accepted were generally called "service" (servitium).
[...]
the young man of a good family who wished to get on in the world "entrusted" himself to a powerful man—if his future had not already in his childhood been assured in this way by a far-sighted father.
From 'Chapter XI, Vassal Homage,' in Feudal Society, by Marc Bloch (Société Féodale, Bloch 1939) trans. L.A. Manyon 1964, pp. 156-160 Routledge digital edition.
The relationships of personal dependence had made their entry into history as a sort of substitute for, or compliment to, the solidarity of the family.
[...]
[The exchange of members of the vassal's household with that of the lord] enabled each generation of vassals to enjoy anew something of that participation in the overlord's intimate domestic life whence early vassalage had derived its deepest human value.
[...]
In a society where the individual was so little his own master, marriage (which, as we already know, was bound up with a great variety of interests) was very far from being considered an act of personal choice. This decision was first and foremost a matter for the father.
[...]
Whatever the inequalities between the obligations of the respective parties, those obligations were none the less mutual: the obedience of the vassal was conditional upon the scrupulous fulfilment of his engagements by the lord.
[...]
[The French form of homage] by the gesture of hands closing upon hands and by the kiss on the mouth, made the lord no mere master with the sole function of receiving whatever was due to him, but a partner in a genuine contract. "As much", writes Beaumanoir, "as the vassal owes his lord of fealty and loyalty by reason of his homage, so much the lord owes his vassal."
From 'Chapter XVI, Vassal and Lord', in ibid, pp. 234-8.
[Vassalage] is extolled as the most cherished of bonds. A common synonym for "vassal" was "friend" (ami), and commoner still was the old word dru (probably of Celtic origin) which had almost the same meaning, but with a more definite suggestion of choice; for if it was sometimes applied to amorous relationships, it seems never (unlike ami) to have been extended to those of the family.
[...]
Needless to say, as affection flows upward from the vassal to the lord, so it descends from the lord to the vassal.
[...]
And how can we ignore the evidence of the following lines from the Doon de Mayence which express with such frank simplicity that true union of hearts in which life is inconceivable for one without the other?
[...]
If my dear lord is slain, his fate I'll share.
If he is hanged, then hang me by his side.
If to the stake he goes, with him I'll burn;
And if he's drowned, then let me drown with him.
[...]
"I will love what thou lovest: I will hate what thou hatest,” so ran the Anglo-Saxon oath of commendation. For the continent we have other texts: “Thy friends will be my friends, thy enemies my enemies.” The first and obvious duty of the good vassal is to know how to die for his chief, sword in hand—a fate to be envied above all others
[...]
This bond was felt to be so strong that the idea of it dominated all other human ties.
[...]
When the Provençal poets invented courtly love, the devotion of the vassal to his lord was the model on which they based their conception of the fealty of the perfect lover. This fitted the fact that the lover was often of lower social rank than the lady of his dreams. The assimilation was carried so far that by a strange turn of speech, the name or surname of the beloved was apt to be assigned to the masculine gender, as is appropriate to the name of a chief. Bel Senhor, “my beautiful lord”—one of the ladies to whom Bertrand de Born pledged his fickle heart is known to us only by this pseudonym. Occasionally a knight would have engraved on his shield the clasped hands of his Dulcinea with his own between them. Moreover, does not the memory of this symbolism, so typically feudal in its tenderness—a symbolism which doubtless owed its resuscitation in the early days of the romantic revival to antiquarian interests—still survive in our own day in the rules of politeness which, in French, enjoin a virtually one- sided use of the sadly- faded word hommages?
From 'Chapter XVII, The Paradox of Vassalage' in ibid, pp. 241-3.
In particular the humble attitude of the lover was a new thing. We have seen that it was apt to express itself in terms borrowed from the vocabulary of vassal homage; and this was not merely a matter of words. The identification of the loved one and the lord corresponded to an aspect of social morality entirely characteristic of feudal society.
From 'Chapter XXII, The Life of the Nobility', in ibid, p. 325.
Compiled for fun and so you all can examine the precise origins of what is wrong with me when it comes to reading a homoerotic, quasi-marital element into fealty-bonds. Further posts may follow with extracts from Bloch on the thornier nature of power, youth, and manhood as aspects of the feudal bond, or from David Clark in Between Medieval Men for a more current view on homosociality and homoeroticism in the Middle Ages.
My entry to the Scuttle Cove Cake Competition! A basque sourdough cheesecake! 😆 She may look modest but her custardy texture and roasted marshmallow flavor is nothing to sneeze at. One could say luck is on her side, in both victory and surviving seagulls. 😉 And if you happen to be helplessly intrigued as to what this fabulous Scuttle Cove Cake Competition is and why seagulls are involved, go read Alexandra Rowland’s Running Close to the Wind!😆
i'm BEYOND pleased to present the second installment of pre-lyctor trials gideon trying really hard not to fall for harrow's ploys to start an exciting ego boosting gideon torture discipline regimen (unfortunately it's impossible for gideon to avoid them effectively when she doesn't know what they are)
fealty, or, the sick, outrageous, and totally gratuitous torture of gideon nav
