ioo The Norman Conquest
theory where it might help the king, and work out de-
tails. In the reign of William II., there was a deliberate
attempt to exploit the feudal relations in the interest
of the king, which resulted in elaborating and defining
the feudal obligations. Erelong, as far as feudal law
was concerned, especially feudal land-law, England was
leading Europe. It may be remarked in conclusion that
the Salisbury oath, which is likely to strike one as a
marked assumption of power upon the Conqueror's part,
was not a new kind of oath. There is evidence that such
an oath had been required at other times during his
reign, and he and his ancestors seem to have habitually
required the same in Normandy. It established in Eng-
land the important principle that every man's oath to
his lord was taken saving his allegiance to his king. x
In this account of the classes of men and the introduc-
tion of feudalism, the three leading land tenures of post-
Conquest England are presented, those whose leading
traits were to remain unchanged for about three centur-
ies. Land tenure was now determining status more than
status land tenure; it is possible to speak of rights in land,
to find the better or possibly the best right, but out-and-
out ownership is an idea not appropriate to the time—
everybody held land of somebody for some kind of serv-
ice, even the king sometimes being spoken of as holding
it of God; and much in the way of public duty or func-
tion is exacted on the basis of land holding. For these
reasons a subject which seems one of propriety rights
cannot be left wholly to the field of private law or to eco-
nomic history. It is " impossible to speak of our medieval
constitution except in terms of our medieval land law/'2
For the purpose of summary and in connection with the
foregoing discussion, the following diagram presents the
three tenures from the three points of view of the pur-
1 Though William I. did not consciously modify feudalism, it must not
be supposed that he was neglectful of his own interests; but he cared for
these in an eleventh century manner and not in the manner which some
modern writers have ascribed to him. See below, pp. 114-116.
2 Maitland, C, H. £., p. 24,