Le comparatisme ne peut constimer une obligation de resultat, mais le moyen d'estimer sa propre culture confrontee a d'autres. (Poly and Bournazel 514) [Comparison cannot constitute a resulting obligation, but the means to evaluate one's own culture as confronted by others.] THE MOST BROADLY encompassing political system of medieval western Europe was without doubt feudalism in one or another its various forms. (1) At the foundation of feudal society, we find the institutions of feud and vassalage. These institutions were developed around the ceremony of hominium (homage), which represents the beginning of the liens d'hommes a hommes (ties from men to men), i.e. between the overlord and his vassals (Poly and Bournazel 106-54). homage ritual is principally composed of the oath of fidelity, known also as the oath of personal allegiance. Recent work by historians has shown that the study of the oaths of fidelity has changed our conception of aspects of feudalism that were not thought to be well accommodated within the classical concept. (2) In her study of the Trencavel family codex, Helene Debax integrated the Languedoc among other feudal societies of France. In their collaborative volume, Poly and Bournazel endeavored to define feudalism and apply it to other geographic areas such as the Middle East and Japan, but they remained careful in the use of the term feudalism: Bien des societes, malgre l'existence de telles ou telles imtitutions a peu pres identiques au fief ou au vasselage des XIe--XIIIe siecles ouest-europeens, ne peuvent etre consideres comme feodales parce que la place qu'y tiennent ces elements feodaux est secondaire dans le fonctionnement du systeme global. Et cela meme quand ces elements, inexistants ou marginaux dans la plupart des secteurs sociaux ou geographiques, sont deja essentiels dans l'un d'eux, ou l'on pourra parler de proto-feodalite. (Poly and Bournazel 12) (A good many societies, in spite of the existence of this or that institution more or less identical to the fief or the vassalage of western Europe during the eleventh to the thirteen centuries, cannot be considered feudal because the place that contains these feudal elements is secondary in the function of the global system. And this is the case even when these elements, absent or marginal in most social or geographic sectors, are essential in one of them, allowing one to speak of proto-feudalism.) Nevertheless, without going too far afield, a study of the oath of fidelity in medieval Iceland can well be undertaken as demonstrated in the works of Jon Vidar Sigurdsson who was the first to propose an analysis of the relationship between godar (chieftains) and bondr (householders) within the context of feudal practices: The relationship between chieftains and trusted men differed from that between chieftains and friends in that trusted men were bound to the chieftains by both the ties of friendship and the ties of feudal allegiance; in other words, the latter relationship was more institutionalized (Sigurdsson, Chieftains 128-9). Since his main thesis was not to establish a parallel between feudal Europe and Iceland, there remain questions that need to be asked again and, if possible, answered. Following the lead of historians studying feudalism such as Barthelemy or Debax, original texts will form the basis of this study. Then an attempt to contextualize and interpret the texts with the view of arriving at new concepts regarding feudal practices will be made. This article will thus illustrate how the oath of fidelity was construed in Iceland and in so doing determine whether Sigurdsson's conclusions are warranted. But before turning to the Icelandic oath of fidelity, its place within continental Europe must be examined. Only then can the court practices of Norway that act as a bridge between western Europe and Iceland be interrogated. Finally, using the same procedure, the case of Iceland during the Sturlunga Age can be investigated. …