ABSTRACT
The final centuries of the Middle Ages were marked by the slow decline of the importance of feudal links. Historians such as Marc Bloch have suggested that from the fourteenth century onwards the feudal system no longer dominated relations between men, despite the survival of many the system’s structures. It is obvious that by the start of the fifteenth century relations between noblemen were not as clearly defined or as rigid as they had been at the height of feudality.1 A more flexible system known loosely as clientage emerged to complement existing ties between lord and vassal. Clientage was characterised by its informality – there were no written contracts; it was not dependent on the geographic location of lands and was not codified in law. The intangible nature of the relationships thus created has led to difficulties in finding an agreed conceptual model, at least when set alongside the comparative formality of the feudal system. Roland Mousnier described the relations between a patron and a client by contrasting them with fidelity, the latter implying that a servant would be exclusively attached to a master that he had chosen freely. In such a situation the role of private affection took first place and any failings were tantamount to treason.2 The American historian Sharon Kettering accepted this definition but chose to emphasise the remarkable continuity of such links. For her, material reciprocity was particularly important, suggesting that when a patron fell on hard times or was disgraced, then clients would quickly abandon him.3 In contrast, in a study of the nobility of Picardy, Kirsten Neuschel concluded that nobles had
1 Bloch, M., La société féodale (Paris, 1968) p. 613. Fourquin, G., Seigneurie et féodalité au Moyen Age (Paris, 1970) pp. 233-234, and Charbonnier, P., Une autre France. La seigneurie rurale en Basse-Auvergne du XIVe au XVIe siècle (Clermont-Ferrand, 1980) I, 547-550.
