PROTECTORATE, in international law, now a common term to describe the relation between two States, one of which exercises control, great or small, direct or indirect, over the other. It is significant of the rare use of the term until recent times that the word does not occur in Sir G. C. Lewis's book on The Govern ment of Dependencies. Yet the relation is very ancient. There have always been States which dominated their neighbours, but which did not think fit to annex them. Engelhardt (Les Protec torats anciens et modernes) and other writers on the subject have collected a large number of instances in antiquity in which a true protectorate existed, even though the name was not used. Thus the hegemony of Athens, as it existed about 467 B.C., was a form of protectorate; though the subject States were termed allies, the so-called "allies" in all important legal matters had to resort to Athens (Meyer, Geschichte des Alterthums, vol. iii. s. In dealing with dependent nations Rome used terms which veiled subjection (Gairal, Les Protectorats internationaux, p. 26). Thus the relationship of subject or dependent cities to the dominant power was described as that of clientes to the patronus (Marquardt, Romische Staatsverwaltung, and ed., vol. i. p. 8o). Such cities might also be described as civitates foederatae or civitates liberae. Another expression of the same fact was that certain communities had come under the power of the Roman people; in deditionem or in fidem populi romani venire (Mar quardt, Romische Staatsverwaltung, i. 73, 81). The kingdoms of Numidia, Macedonia, Syria and Pergamum were examples of pro tected States, their rulers being termed inservientes. The Romans drew a distinction between foedera aequa and foedera iniqua. The latter created a form of protectorate. But the protected State remained free.
In mediaeval times this relation existed, and the term "pro tection" was in use. But the relation of subordination of one State to another was generally expressed in terms of feudal law.
One State was deemed the vassal of another; the ruler of one did homage to the ruler of another. In his book De la Republique Bodin treats of ceux qui soot en protection (i. C. 7), or, as the Latin text has it, de patrocinio et clientele. In Bodin's view such States retain their sovereignty (1. C. 8). Discussing the question whether a prince who becomes a cliens of another loses his majes tas, he concludes that, unlike the true vassal, the cliens is not de prived of sovereignty. Elsewhere he remarks, "le mot de pro tection est special et n'emporte aucune subjection de celuy qui est en protection." He distinguishes the relation of seigneur and vas sal from that of protecteur and adherent (p. 549, ed. 158o). At times letters of protection were granted by a prince to a weak State, as e.g., by Louis XIII. in 1641 to the prince of Monaco (Gairal, p. 81).
Reverting to the distinction in Roman law, Grotius and Pufen dorf, with many others, treat protection as an instance of unequal treaties ; that is, "when either the promises are unequal, or when either of the parties is obliged to harder conditions" (De jure belli et pacis, I. c. 13. 21 De jure naturae, 8. c. 9).