Term and Origins of the Feud
The feud (from Old High German fehida = enmity, dispute) refers to a historical legal institution that was widespread, especially during the Middle Ages, in the territory of the Holy Roman Empire. At its core, the feud is a privately conducted conflict, in which one party resorts to self-help—including the use of force—against another party in response to alleged or actual legal violations. The feud was regulated by specific legal and social norms, making it a form of institutionalized conflict with its own legal character.
Legal Basis and Development
The Feud as a Legal Institution
The feud was originally not an unlawful condition, but rather a form of legal pursuit recognized within the framework of medieval law. In feuding, nobles, cities, or other authorized parties attempted to remove a perceived injustice on their own, provided other avenues for obtaining justice—such as appealing to a court or mediation by a sovereign—were ineffective or unavailable. The ideas of compensation or revenge, for example in the context of blood vengeance, often played a significant role.
Lawful Feuds and Feud Regulations
To prevent the escalation of violence, feuds were subject to certain rules. In the 12th century, the practice was institutionalized by requiring a feud to be announced in advance via a feud letter (Latin: diffidatio, “renunciation”). Without this so-called diffidatio, any use of force was considered unlawful and could be sanctioned. Over time, regulations such as “Gottesfrieden” (Truce of God, Treuga Dei) sought to exclude certain persons, times, and places from feuding. The infamous “Acht” or Imperial Ban, a form of legal punishment, also played a central role in connection with feuding activities.
Forms and Types of Feuds
Private and Status Feuds
- Private feud: The form of feud between individuals, families, or small groups to seek retribution or redress for an action perceived as unjust.
- Status feud: Especially among noble families or cities, the feud was an instrument for settling power and property disputes. Here, the feud took on a collective, and at times even political, dimension.
City Feuds and Knightly Feuds
- City feud: Conflicts between alliances of cities or cities themselves in the context of economic and territorial disputes.
- Knightly feuds: Especially lower-ranking nobles used feuding to assert economic or political claims, often in the form of robbery, arson, or hostage-taking (“robber barony”).
Legal Framework for the Feud
Requirements for the Feud
Whoever intended to conduct a feud was subject to legal restrictions from the High Middle Ages onward:
- Obligation to give notice (Diffidatio): The declaring party had to threaten enmity to the opponent, usually in writing and publicly.
- Observance of the Truce of God: Periods during which feuds had to be suspended, especially Sundays and holidays as well as certain periods (for example, during the harvest).
- Exceptions and Protected Areas: Clergy, women, children, and certain economic sectors were exempt from feuding actions.
Legal Consequences of Unlawful Feud
A feud conducted without prior diffidatio or in violation of recognized peace periods was considered an ambush or murder and was subject to severe punishment. The sanctions available to imperial and territorial rulers ranged from fines and imprisonment to the imperial ban—that is, complete exclusion from the legal community and all rights.
Role of the Peace of the Land and Criminalization of the Feud
With the spread of the peace movement from the 12th century onwards, imperial and territorial rulers sought to replace vigilante justice with the rule of law. Most notable was the Eternal Peace of 1495 under Emperor Maximilian I, which banned all feuds in the Holy Roman Empire and imposed criminal sanctions. Law enforcement and conflict resolution henceforth became the exclusive domain of state courts.
The Feud in Modern Law
With the introduction of the peace of the land and the emergence of a modern state judiciary, the feud lost its legal basis. In today’s German law, the feud is explicitly prohibited, and self-help is generally not permitted (see § 227 BGB: self-defense, with narrow exceptions). Acts in the style of historical feuds would now be prosecuted as criminal offenses such as coercion, assault, property damage, or more serious crimes.
Legal Policy and Sociological Significance
From today’s perspective, the feud is regarded as a transitional phase between pre-modern self-administered justice and institutionalized forms of law enforcement. Its strict legal regulation reflects the need to limit and channel violence in societies with weak central authority. Through codification in peaces of the land and feud regulations, the feud is an important building block in European legal history.
Literature and Sources
- Bernd Schildt: Die Fehde im deutschen Mittelalter. Berlin 1985.
- Gerd Althoff: Fehde und Bündnis. Konfliktregelung und Friedensstiftung im Mittelalter. Darmstadt 1997.
- Tilman Struve: Recht und Friede: Studien zur Geschichte und Typologie der Fehde in Europa. Munich 2003.
Web links
Note: The feud is a historical legal institution and is today neither recognized nor legal in Germany and most European countries. The present account refers exclusively to its historical legal significance.
Frequently Asked Questions
What legal conditions applied to the conduct of a feud in the Middle Ages?
In the Middle Ages, the feud was subject to certain legal conditions, which, particularly in the Holy Roman Empire, were governed by so-called “feud regulations.” One of the central provisions was the requirement of the “announcement of the feud” (feud letter), which made it necessary to formally announce the conflict to the opponent with proper notice before hostile actions could begin. The aim was to distinguish secret attacks and murder from regulated, at least theoretically controlled, confrontations. In addition, special protective rules applied to specific places and times (such as markets, churches, transport routes during imperial or territorial peace), which explicitly prohibited feuding activities. Violations of these conditions could have serious legal consequences, including the imperial ban or banishment from the land, depending on the area and the authority that had granted the peace.
To what extent was the feud a legitimate legal remedy?
The feud was indeed recognized in medieval law as a legitimate means of asserting private legal claims, especially as long as state monopoly on the use of force was weak. It was regarded as a form of self-help and was intended for nobles, cities, and occasionally other entitled parties who had suffered an infringement of their rights or honor. However, the legitimacy of a feud increasingly depended on certain legal prerequisites, such as proper announcement and observance of the peace of the land. With the advent of modern criminal and civil courts, the feud was gradually reclassified as impermissible vigilante justice and eventually became a criminal offense. Particularly from the 12th century onward, institutional authorities—especially emperors and kings—repeatedly endeavored to curb the feudal feud system and enforce the so-called peace of the land.
What were the legal consequences of an unlawful feud?
Anyone conducting a feud without complying with legal provisions or failing to announce it properly violated both secular and ecclesiastical regulations. The most severe legal consequence was the imperial ban, which resulted in exclusion from the protection of imperial law and loss of all legal rights. The affected individual lost all civil rights and was declared an outlaw. In addition, further secular and ecclesiastical penalties could be imposed, such as excommunication, confiscation of assets, banishment, or even expropriation of entire estates. Cities and territorial rulers could also assert claims for damages or take military countermeasures. Particularly repeated or especially brutal feuding actions led to the escalation of sanctions.
What role did the law of the peace of the land play in curbing feuds?
The law of the peace of the land was one of the decisive factors in curbing feuding practices in the medieval legal system. Even in the Early Middle Ages, the first peace of the land laws were enacted to prohibit armed conflict at certain times or in certain regions. The peace of the land law prohibited unauthorized violent conflict and required affected parties to seek judicial recourse. Of particular significance was the Eternal Peace of 1495, which fundamentally banned all feuding activities in the Holy Roman Empire. From that point on, the system of feuding was definitively regarded as illegal, and judicial dispute resolution became universally enforced. Violations of the peace of the land law usually carried very severe legal consequences.
Which legal institutions were responsible for feud matters?
Jurisdiction over feud matters varied depending on region and period. In the early and high Middle Ages, feuds were mostly subject to local lords or city authorities, often mediated by feudal or manorial courts. With the development of the law of the peace of the land and the strengthening of central authority, imperial courts (such as the Imperial Chamber Court from 1495 onwards) and regional courts became responsible for prosecuting feuding offenses. These courts were responsible for examining the legality of the feud, mediating in advance, and imposing sanctions in the case of unlawful feuding. In parallel, ecclesiastical institutions played a role, for example by imposing church bans or excommunication on feuding parties.
Were there legal ways to resolve a feud through negotiation?
Yes, the medieval legal system offered various means for negotiating and resolving feuds without resorting to violence. These included, in particular, arbitration courts, settlement negotiations (compromises or atonement agreements), and mediation by third, neutral parties such as territorial princes or ecclesiastical dignitaries. The aim of these proceedings was to settle claims for damages, resolve issues of honor, and conclude peace agreements that were legally binding. Successful mediation was often confirmed through public documents and sworn by both parties. The development of these mechanisms played a key role in the decline of the feud as a violent legal remedy.
