That the clientship of which we have spoken was not peculiar to Rome, but was an old established Italian institution, is a truth reflected in the legend of the _gens Claudia_ which moved from Regillum to Rome with a vast multitude of dependants.[23] It is separated by but a thin line from slavery. While the latter was based on conquest in war, the former was probably the result of voluntarily-sought protection in the turmoil of a migratory life, or perhaps at times the consequence of the suzerainty of a powerful village being extended over its weaker neighbours. In the developed state the principal object of this relation is legal representation by the _patronus_, for the client possesses no legal personality of his own. For the condition of the client we can but appeal to that of the slave and the son of the family. Such property as he possessed may have been merely a _peculium_, the small accumulation of cattle and means of husbandry which his master allowed him to form; had the client wronged a citizen, we may assume that his body might be surrendered in reparation of the damage (_noxae deditio_); the origin of Roman occupation of land on sufferance (_precario_) may perhaps be traced to the permission by the patron to till a little plot of land which might be resumed at will;[24] in default of direct heirs (_sui heredes_) such personal belongings as the client possessed may have fallen to the members of the protecting clan (_gentiles_), for it was to the clan rather than to the family that he was attached.