Visible light is an essential life resource for. Internal resources and their significance for a person. Human life resources
What is "blood feud"? This concept has been known to us since very ancient times, when people were little familiar with the law and had very vague morals. They believed that revenge was a great way to restore justice. And sometimes they carried out this revenge against an innocent person who only turned out to be a close relative of the one against whom they had claims. Quite a stupid and cruel custom. But theoretically, he should have stopped the criminal - after all, no one in their right mind would want to sacrifice their loved ones because of some principles or hostility towards someone. Alas, criminals rarely have common sense. Therefore, many of their loved ones had to suffer and endure the strict morals of the people who invented and implemented this principle of blood feud.
For example, in the work of L.N. Gumilyov “From Rus' to Russia” such an episode from the life of our ancestors was presented.
Our experts can check your essay according to the Unified State Exam criteria
Experts from the site Kritika24.ru
Teachers of leading schools and current experts of the Ministry of Education Russian Federation.
The ruler of one state decides to execute his wards because of accepting bribes and, therefore, the reason for the impoverishment of the country, and first of all the sovereign. But the wards turned out to be intelligent people - they began to bury chests of gold in secluded places and report their location to relatives. The Emperor was not ashamed and began to kill his relatives at the same time in order to destroy the desire of the attackers to outwit him. (Not a completely accurate example for revealing the concept of blood feud, but partly true.)
Another example is Lermontov’s work “Hero of Our Time”. Pechorin steals Bela with the help of her brother, to whom he promises someone else's horse in return. The horse, unfortunately, belonged to the cruel man Kazbich, who immediately decided to take revenge for Pechorin’s unacceptable prank - the kidnapping of Kazbich’s horse. He kills Bela, believing that by doing so he is taking away what is most precious from Pechorin. This is how blood feud is carried out when a loved one of the one who offended the person dies.
Thus, blood feud is one of the most disgusting and terrible vices of man. There is no justice here, only cruelty and indifference to the plight of people.
Updated: 2018-09-29
Attention!
Thank you for your attention.
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and click Ctrl+Enter.
By doing so, you will provide invaluable benefits to the project and other readers.
Concept of blood feud
Definition 1
Blood feud (vendetta, from the Italian “vendetta” - “revenge”) is an ancient custom, characteristic of the tribal system, according to which the person who committed the murder, or one of the members of his family, tribe, clan, clan, group, must subject to death as retribution.
Blood feud is carried out, accordingly, by one of the members of the clan, family, clan, tribe, group, etc., to which the murdered person belonged. In some cases, blood feud could be replaced by a ransom or the transfer to the injured party of the person who committed the murder to replace the killed. Here a person was perceived as part of a tribal “blood” union, and the concept of personal honor is combined with the understanding of the honor of an entire blood union.
Origin of blood feud
The custom of blood feud is an element of legal systems where statehood either does not exist, or the state itself is unable to ensure law and order, which means that the state does not have a monopoly on violence. In this situation, for committing a murder, the family of the victim punishes the family of the criminal in order to restore the honor of the family. Depending on customs, not only biological relatives, but also an entire clan or an entire group can act as a family. Blood feud was formed during the period of primitive society, where there were no other means of legal settlement.
Blood feud reflected the principle of equal retribution for a crime, which in the Old Testament is formulated as “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”: for causing property damage, the perpetrators must be responsible with appropriate property, for causing harm to health - with appropriate material compensation, for murder - with death or exile , which corresponds to the simplest human understanding of justice. Placing responsibility on a family or clan, on the one hand, can make revenge easier to carry out, on the other hand, it puts the killer in a position of responsibility to his own family, because he will be able to avoid revenge, it will simply be carried out in relation to someone else in the family.
Blood feud can be fraught with dangerous consequences, revenge often becomes even more fierce than the crime that preceded it, it carries with it a retaliatory “revenge for revenge”, and as a result results in long-term bloody conflicts, often leading to the bleeding of two warring factions or complete destruction one of them. On the one hand, this can serve as some kind of deterrent; this is associated, for example, with the Arab custom of predatory raids on neighbors, in which the best course of action was to seize valuables, but without killing anyone, so as not to provoke blood feud. On the other hand, as has been understood for a very, very long time, Negative consequences too big; cases became known when entire clans carried out revenge for events long past, ultimately completely destroying each other. As a result, already ancient peoples there were customs that made it possible to stop or prevent blood feuds. Thus, among these same nomadic Arabs, the clan who committed an unintentional murder had the opportunity to pay off with a fairly large ransom.
Among the Kumyks, the adat of blood feud was called “dushmankavlav” (“pursuit of the enemy”), “kang’akan” (“blood for blood”). Clan solidarity was generally reflected in the defense by all members of the clan of common interests against external encroachment. The clan's means of self-defense was blood feud. “The blood feud of certain families,” wrote A.V. Komarov, “went from generation to generation; sometimes bloodshed occurred between villages and lasted for centuries. Residents of some villages, fearing bloodshed, went to other places and formed new villages in foreign societies.” “Despite the judicial punishment,” noted P.F. Svidersky about the southern Kumyks, “the relatives of the murdered person considered it their sacred duty to shed the blood of the killer or his relatives; a new murder or injury occurs, which entails again blood feud on the other side, others say families have been fighting this way for generations.”
Historical and geographical distribution of blood feud
In Europe during the medieval period, the custom of blood feud was widespread.
Thus, blood feud was widely known in Ancient Rus': a mention of it exists in the Russian Truth of the 11th-12th centuries, where, in particular, there were reservations about who had the right to take revenge for the murder of a relative. Revenge for the murder of a relative could include:
- brothers for brothers;
- sons for father;
- father for sons;
- nephews for uncles and aunts.
Note 1
In other cases, as well as in cases where the avenger could not be found, the killer was obliged to pay a vira, that is, a fine in favor of the prince. The sons of Yaroslav the Wise in the 12th century at the legislative level established the prohibition of blood feud.
Revenge was also common in the medieval period of Italy, the Scandinavian states, among the Germanic peoples and in the states that were inhabited by representatives of these cultures. The term “vendetta” was used to describe blood feud mainly on the islands of Corsica and Sardinia, where it existed even at the beginning of the 20th century. In the 12th-19th centuries, the customs began to be practiced by the Maniot Greeks from the Mani Peninsula in Southern Greece.
To date, the principle of blood feud has retained its practical application:
- in the countries of the Middle East;
- among some Caucasian peoples;
- in Albania;
- in Southern Italy.
Blood feud in modern law
As of 2009, the legislative framework of the Russian Federation considered the motivation of blood feud when committing murders as a circumstance that aggravates guilt. For murders committed on the basis of blood feud, Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for punishment in the form of imprisonment for a term of eight to twenty years, or life imprisonment.
Good day, dear blog readers. Every nation has its own traditions and customs; we are accustomed to the fact that customs should, first of all, have an educational function for the younger generation. It often happens that some customs of certain nations seem absurd to us, and sometimes even cruel. Although, do we have the right to condemn the customs of those peoples without becoming closely acquainted with their culture? Of course, we have the right, but will our condemnation be objective? I don't think so.
Therefore, today I, as a native of the Caucasus, can take upon myself the responsibility to tell you about the customs blood feud and give your assessment of this phenomenon. The article was called “Blood feud in the Caucasus - restoration of honor or tribute to a wild custom” only because I view this custom from both the positive and negative sides. I’ll say right away that I have an ambivalent attitude towards the custom of blood feud and, thank God, I have not encountered this custom.
If you look at the reports of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Dagestan, you can see that in the mid-2000s, about 15% of all murders and attempts in the republic were in one way or another connected with blood feud. I think these numbers alone are enough to understand how relevant this issue is in the Caucasus. At the same time, law enforcement agencies of Dagestan emphasize that it is the institution of blood feud that blocks the rampant crime in mountainous regions. By the way, it should be noted that custom of blood feud more common in mountainous areas.
But why custom of blood feud turns out to be a deterrent on the path of those who intend to commit murder? I think you already guessed it yourself. A person understands that if he kills someone (or does something bad), the relatives of the murdered person will pursue him until the murderer's blood is shed. Believe me, this works much better on people than legal imprisonment. That is, the main postulate of the custom of blood feud: to avenge the murdered is the duty of every man of the clan. You won’t believe it, but in some mountain villages there is still a special place in the cemeteries where they bury those who died without fulfilling their “blood duty” or without aligning themselves with their enemies. By the way, look at a very interesting report about blood feud in Chechnya and how the authorities are fighting this phenomenon:
Yes, after all, custom of blood feud- Is this good or bad"? I don’t want to give such a harsh assessment, I’ll just give it to you real example, and you yourself will decide for yourself “good or bad”. In the summer of 1995, in the Dagestan village of Tlyarata there was a fight in which a young man was killed. Those responsible for the murder, understanding what it was, immediately surrendered to law enforcement agencies. The mother of the deceased refused to bury her son until she saw the killers dead. The relatives of the murdered man first destroyed the houses and burned the killers' cars (by the way, no one bore any responsibility for this). Then these same relatives burst into the police building where the perpetrators were located. And even then the police did not intervene in what was happening. The only thing that saved the culprits was that the sister of the murdered man, not wanting bloodshed, tore the scarf from her head and threw it in front of the attackers. By the way, this is another custom that women in the Caucasus often resorted to in order to stop the massacre. Subsequently, the elders managed to reconcile the two warring clans, but the families of the killers had to leave the village forever.
How to treat custom of blood feud- it’s up to each person, but the fact that this custom is still practiced in the Caucasus - known fact. The only good thing is that in last years Law enforcement agencies suppress such precedents quite harshly. To summarize this article, I want to express my opinion: this is not revenge for a murder, but the restoration of the honor of the family. But such “restoration of honor” is contrary to the laws of Russia, so I do not welcome this custom.
Friends, I will continue to reveal secrets to you customs and traditions peoples of the Caucasus. For example, I have 2 more customs coming up - these are custom of bride theft and stereotypes on the situation of women in the Caucasus. In order to be the first to know about these and many other interesting articles, I suggest you subscribe to my blog updates.
Today I watched one video and the following thoughts came to mind. How much blood feud is acceptable in our time? The video itself was posted at the bottom of the post. In the meantime, about the blood feud itself.
Blood feud(also vendetta, from Italian vendetta - revenge) - the oldest principle characteristic of the tribal system, according to which the person who committed the murder, or any of the members of his family (clan, tribe, clan, group) is necessarily subject to death in order of retribution. Blood feud is carried out, respectively, by one of the members of the family, clan, tribe, clan, group, etc., to which the murdered person belonged. In a number of cases, blood feud was replaced by a ransom or the transfer of the person who committed the murder to the injured party to replace the murdered one.
The custom arose as a defensive measure.
"Members of the clan were supposed to provide each other with help and support. An insult to a clan member was tantamount to an insult inflicted on the entire team. Each relied on his family as a force capable of protecting him from any enemies. “From here, from the blood ties of the family, the obligation of blood feud arose,” wrote F. Engels.
At one time, the Soviet state carried out a lot of cultural and educational work locally and fought against the remnants of the past through criminal legal measures. “In 1928, Chapter X “On crimes constituting remnants of tribal life” was introduced into the Criminal Code of the RSFSR. Its action was limited mainly to the regions of the North Caucasus, where Sharia courts previously existed.
How thorough and large-scale this work was can be judged by the level of its comprehensive preparation.. Thus, specifically for party workers responsible for solving this problem in the Chechen-Ingush Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, a “Memo on the reconciliation of bloodlines” was published through the party line [Leontyeva 2010]. These commissions included authoritative people: elders, a prosecutor, a police chief, and a mullah. “I was a member of one of these commissions,” recalls Musa Khadisov [former prosecutor of the Urus-Martan region of the Chechen Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. - M.A.]. “We called the bloodlines and talked with them. It happened that they refused blood feud. They were encouraged for this: they were given cars out of turn, allocated land, could be promoted.”
After the collapse of the USSR, the previous system of administrative and criminal punishment was eliminated. According to Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code, an aggravating circumstance is the commission of murder motivated by national, racial, religious hatred or enmity or blood feud. Compared to the previous wording of Art. 102, paragraph “k” of the Criminal Code of 1960 (“murder committed on the basis of national or racial enmity or discord”), the new Criminal Code, apparently, has been clarified: among other things, this paragraph includes murder motivated by blood feud [Criminal Code of the Russian Federation] .
In other provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, its drafters ignored this issue as non-existent. However, at the local level, the issue of blood feud, as before, is very relevant. For example, if you look at the reports of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Dagestan, you can see that in the mid-2000s, about 15% of all murders and attempts in the republic were in one way or another connected with blood feud.
Therefore, blood feud is not a relic, but a reality of our time.
The persistence of the custom of blood feud forces local authorities create on state level conciliation commissions, which perform the functions of a regulator. The commission includes representatives from all settlements- approximately seven people from cities and villages. These are the elders of clans, spiritual leaders and people revered by the people, regardless of their age.
“The conciliation commission is a bureaucratic body in its own way. All acts of reconciliation are recorded. They also record the number of victims of the blood feud. Residents of the village where the reconciliation took place put their signatures as witnesses. Here are the quotes: “Residents of the village of Sagopshi, Malgobek district, thank the chairman of the reconciliation commission, Latyrov Sosarko, for his work in reconciling the bloodlines of the Merzhoevs - Kholukhoevs, Merzhoevs - Belkhoroyevs (8 people were killed, 2 people were injured)”; “Residents of the village of Yandare express gratitude to Latyrov Sosarko for reconciling the bloodlines of five teips (7 people died). Sosarko did a great job of reconciliation. May Allah help him!”; “The Batazhev family (Troitskaya village) expresses its deep gratitude to Latyrov Sosarko for eliminating the blood feud of 50 years ago and reconciling us with the Aliyev bloodlines from the village of Dachnoye” [Khalip 2004].
Here is a report on the work of such a commission
I will give a few statements from members of such commissions.
Shamkhan Khadzhi Hamadov, 56 years old, Kharachoy teip: 
“The Chechens have had a blood feud since time immemorial - they do not forgive from generation to generation. On this side they kill, on the other side they kill. It is very hard work to reconcile the parties. This is not one person, this is a tape! He has relatives on his mother and father who are thirsty for revenge. This is not an easy task, it is a titanic effort to negotiate with them. They don’t sell or buy from us - they forgive a person for the sake of Allah.
For example, we had a case in Aldy. One person died in the accident. A drunk man in a Kamaz drives into the oncoming lane, not realizing what he is doing. That person died on the spot. He left 5 children, all kids. The youngest was 2 or 3 months old. The father of the deceased says: “Bring this driver to me! “Well, breathe on me - drunk, not drunk? Drunk".
Then the Kamaz driver, naturally, ran away somewhere, hid, and I started talking with the relatives of the murdered man and the victims. They asked me: “What should we do? What right do we have under Sharia? Do we have the right to kill? “These people, with power, money, and their masculine character, without any doubt, could settle accounts with a person. I explained to them: “Yes, he was drunk, you can ask this of him, but before Allah, a more worthy and highest reward for you will be if you forgive, if you can forgive him.” I'll put it briefly, it's long, many hours, daily work. And they said, “We don't want another family to cry. We don't want any more children to be left without a breadwinner. No matter how hard it is for us, we will forgive him for the sake of Allah.”
Abu-Kasim Zaurbekov, 82 years old, Chanti teip:
“I’ll tell you one case. There were two sides, both from the Chinhoy teip - this is a high mountainous region towards Georgia. Even before the repressions, before 1943, they had a dispute. One relative stole a horse from another. A third relative undertook to reconcile them. So that there would be no hard feelings between them, he bought another horse, gave it to the owner, and on top paid another 5 thousand rubles - that’s how much horses were worth then. And who stole it is already a closed question, don’t tell anyone. Well, the owner of the horse shifted the blame onto the man who brought the horse. He replies: “I didn’t steal it and I don’t know who stole it.” He takes an oath. After that everyone was expelled. And there, in Kazakhstan, there was hunger, cold, there was nothing. This one, who brought the horse, walks across the field to find something, and stumbles upon the one whose horse was stolen - he was herding cows, and he had a rifle. The shepherd detained him and said: “You stole my horse.” They got into a fight. And somehow the one who had the rifle died. How is no longer known. The second one was sent to prison for 10 years. After returning home in 1957, the family whose man died declares blood feud against the family of the man who returned the horse. He categorically does not take it upon himself, he says: “I swear an oath to you that I did not steal the horse and have nothing to do with it. I swear a second oath that I was not involved in the murder of this man, I was not armed, I did not take the weapon away, I don’t know how it fired.” He moves to another village, fearing blood feud, and does not admit his guilt. This conflict lasted 40 years, many people tried to reconcile them. Then they turned to me, although I am from a different teip. I went to talk to the man who was declared a blood feud. He swore to me that he did neither one nor the other. I say: “I accept the first oath that you did not steal the horse, but I cannot accept the second oath: except for you two, there was no one there, why did he die - the gun fired itself or he stumbled - his death was it remains for you. So you have to take the blame."
He had to agree. He takes the blame upon himself and gathers the people - relatives, authoritative people, elders. Hundreds of them go to the other side, beg them, beg them, give them some gifts. In our country, it is considered a gift to present a large ram. They forgave him and made peace.
My father and grandfather did this, I listened to these conversations when I was little. Thanks to me, 60 bloodlines were forgiven"
Obviously, blood feud will not disappear so easily. This is a very deep tradition. And in modern world, in which humanism and culture are increasingly disappearing, cases of blood feud will only increase.
What do you think about this?
