Successful Statelessness in History
Private Communities in Medieval Christendom as a Blueprint for a Libertarian Future
As an ardent advocate of libertarian ideas, one question I often get is: if a libertarian society with no state control is so good, why have we not seen examples of it working in history? To answer this challenge, many have cited the legal and political structures of ancient Ireland and Iceland—or even the not-so-wild West of the American frontier experience—to show instances where statelessness, or near statelessness, worked for a period of time.
While these examples are not without their merits, they often fail to impress the intended audience as they generally existed on the fringe of where the main action of history was taking place and came and went with relatively little consequence. These libertarian advocates are missing the much larger and more prominent example that existed within and across medieval Christendom, the civilization that encompassed most of western Europe for no less than one thousand years.
Statelessness in the Middle Ages
Now, how is it that so many people—even those well versed in history—could have overlooked this supposed hotbed of statelessness in practice? Were the Middle Ages not full of autocratic kings doing what they wanted, waging wars, and keeping serfs confined to working the fields? Surely this was a period of tyranny and certainly not a model of freedom, let alone statelessness.
To address this, we need to make two important distinctions. Firstly, that governments are not always states. Indeed, governing functions can exist in corporations, clubs, associations, and charitable institutions, performing any number of roles demanded by their constituents. It is, therefore, possible to find the governing functions we associate with states—such as common infrastructure, security, and rules of conduct—provided by private organizations.
Secondly, we should also recognize that states—as we now know them, with clear territorial borders, absolute sovereignty, and a monopoly on the legal use of force within their borders—were not always the norm. In Christendom, prior to the interruption of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation movements and the subsequent rise of absolutism in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, medieval kings and princes were not considered above the law but were charged with duties to protect the realm while always operating subject to divine laws and ancient traditions that they did not create. Both their control and their sovereignty were actually quite limited.
Indeed, it was as late as 1648, with the Treaty of Westphalia, that something more recognizable as a modern sovereign state came into being. From this treaty onward, each state could enhance its validity by being recognized by the other states around it, thus reducing the need for rulers to require the support of their own constituents and lesser authorities.
This is not to say that the pre-Westphalian monarchs of medieval Europe did not have state-like features from time to time, or that some of them did not toil to solidify their rule and remove any opposing institutional structures they found around them. Rather, it was during this long period of history that many rulers either did not pursue these goals or were relatively unsuccessful at achieving them if they did.
With these two concepts in mind—the possibility for governance to be separated from states and for states to be considerably less absolute than they are today—we can now pierce through the conventional medieval historical narrative, with its simplifying map of Europe showing large swaths of territory belonging to this king or that emperor. Instead, we should aim to see it as the people of the time would have experienced it: as a landmass with a patchwork of competing and overlapping kings and lesser nobility, with the influence of any one authority largely limited to the immediate surroundings of their castles, fortresses, and military barracks.
While there is much to say about the limited powers of the kings and princes of Christendom, it is not to them that we are primarily looking to find stateless societies in action. Rather, it was with little to no direction from the nobility of a region—and often despite them—that free communities, including towns, monasteries, and universities, sprang up voluntarily, independently, and spontaneously in the power voids that existed across Medieval Europe. Initially small and isolated, these communities evolved to create their own governance solutions, common infrastructure, and interconnected networks, and allowed their freely associating residents access to legal systems independent of the reach of feudal lords and kings. In short, they created free, orderly, and stateless societies.
Monasteries
Monasteries first emerged in Europe during late antiquity and the early Middle Ages, primarily as religious communities dedicated to prayer, labor, and study as the political and economic structures of the Roman Empire decayed and the tumult of constant invasions ensued.
By copying and preserving ancient Greek and Roman manuscripts, monasteries ensured the survival of classical learning and literacy itself. Monks educated not only future clergy but, over time, also the nobility—teaching subjects such as Latin, philosophy, theology, logic, and geometry.
Each monastic community followed a specific rule (e.g., the Benedictine Rule, the Cistercian Rule), which outlined daily life, discipline, and governance. The abbot or prior served as the chief legal authority within the monastery, overseeing internal discipline and disputes. Monks were judged under Canon Law—the legal system of the Church—rather than under secular law, with bishops or higher church authorities having ultimate legal oversight, allowing the monasteries to remain largely independent of local secular rule. As they came to control more lands and wealth, monasteries also established their own legal mechanisms for handling land disputes, tithes, and agreements with secular rulers.
Over time, the range of activities of monastic communities expanded, as did their influence across broader society. Crucially, it was monasteries that led the development of advanced farming and industrial techniques that improved agricultural productivity and economic stability, contributing to a period of sustained population growth across Western Europe. Many monasteries also provided medical care and social services, offering aid to the sick, poor, and travelers, and eventually established the first hospitals and hospices. Monks were also critical for the development of Romanesque and Gothic architecture, designing the grand cathedrals and abbeys that spread across Europe during this period.
Universities
While monasteries were the primary centers of learning in early medieval Europe, the rise of universities in the 11th and 12th centuries marked a new phase in the pursuit of knowledge. The origins of the first universities were rooted in the intellectual revival of the 11th century; they emerged from cathedral schools and guilds of scholars rather than being directly controlled by political authorities. These private arrangements were then formalized and protected in a number of ways.
In Bologna, students banded together to form a guild that negotiated with the town authorities and controlled university policies. In Paris and Oxford, the universities were closely tied to various ecclesiastical authorities and monastic orders rather than to feudal lords or kings.
When kings were involved, it was generally to grant charters of protection—allowing universities to operate without feudal oversight and providing autonomy in governance and legal matters. For example, King Frederick I (Barbarossa) granted privileges to the University of Bologna, recognizing its autonomy from local feudal lords. The University of Oxford received a charter from King Henry III, securing certain legal protections. Papal support, such as Pope Innocent III’s endorsement of the University of Paris, ensured that it was protected from excessive secular interference. Indeed, when outside interference did occur, universities were often able to stand up to local authorities, as in the Paris strikes of 1229, when students and professors protested royal intervention.
Medieval universities operated under a unique legal framework known as clerical or academic law, largely independent of local secular and feudal authorities. They generally followed Roman and Canon Law in their legal proceedings, with professors and students being judged by university officials (such as a rector or chancellor). Additionally, many university members were considered part of the clergy and were thus subject to ecclesiastical courts rather than secular ones.
The universities that the West inherited from the Middle Ages were, therefore, not originally controlled by feudal lords or kings but operated under a mix of self-governance, Church protection, and negotiated privileges with local city or royal authorities. Autonomy from state influence allowed universities to be independent communities focused on intellectual freedom, debate, professional training, cultural exchange, and innovation. They formed an interconnected international community of scholars, with people and ideas moving with relative freedom between various university locations. This decentralized network of scholars can be credited with nothing less than the creation of the Western education system and the intellectual milieu that allowed for the development of the modern scientific method, along with its adjacent technological achievements.
Free Towns
In parallel with the development of monasteries and universities, free towns began to grow. Many of these independent communities started as market settlements or trading hubs, often located at crossroads, riverbanks, or near castles and monasteries. Some towns, such as Cologne and Milan, developed from older Roman cities that had survived the early medieval period, while others formed around fairs and marketplaces, such as the Champagne fairs in France. Merchants and craftsmen—rather than feudal lords—were the driving forces behind these towns.
In the 11th and 12th centuries, some towns began forming communes, a form of self-government in which town residents (generally merchants, artisans, and guilds) collectively managed local affairs. These communes often sought charters of liberties from lords, bishops, kings, or even the Holy Roman Emperor, granting them privileges such as self-governance, tax exemptions, rights to hold markets, and legal autonomy, often in exchange for money or military support. In England, the Magna Carta (1215) confirmed certain rights for the City of London and inspired other towns to seek similar privileges. In France and the Holy Roman Empire, towns secured burgher rights that allowed them to govern themselves without interference.
Local officials, often elected by guilds or wealthy citizens, oversaw governance and certain legal matters. Burgess Courts and Merchant Law Courts handled local disputes, especially those related to trade, property, and contracts. These courts followed town laws and mercantile customs rather than feudal law. Trade and commerce were regulated by guilds, which had their own internal legal rules and enforcement mechanisms.
Many independent towns had to fight against local feudal lords or kings who wanted to reassert control. Revolts and struggles—such as the Battle of the Golden Spurs (1302) in Flanders, where townspeople defeated French knights—illustrate how urban communities resisted external rule. Similarly, the Swiss Confederation, which began as an alliance of rural and urban communities, successfully resisted Habsburg domination in the late Middle Ages.
Town Leagues
As trade and commerce expanded, so did wealth, prompting some free towns to cooperate with one another to protect their economic interests and security. This led to the formation of leagues—voluntary alliances of towns with shared political, economic, and sometimes military goals. Most town leagues had standardized trade laws, tolls, and coinage; mutual defense pacts; diplomatic influence through negotiated treaties and military campaigns; and, importantly, legal autonomy, with many offering independent judicial systems separate from the feudal and royal courts that surrounded them.
Several prominent town leagues emerged across Europe and played a critical role in not only securing town freedoms, but also in influencing the region’s broader history and development. The Lombard League (12th–13th Century), a coalition of northern Italian cities including Milan, Venice, and Bologna, was formed in 1167 to resist the control of the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick I Barbarossa. This league was powerful enough to defeat the emperor’s forces at the Battle of Legnano (1176), leading to the Peace of Constance (1183), which granted greater autonomy to the cities.
The Hanseatic League (13th–17th Century), one of the most influential and lasting town leagues, was dominated by cities in northern Germany and the Baltic region. Established in the mid-13th century, with Lübeck and Hamburg as key members, it expanded to include over 200 cities across modern-day Germany, Scandinavia, Poland, and the Low Countries, and controlled major trade routes—specializing in timber, fish, grain, and textiles. The Hanseatic League even maintained its own fleet and waged war against the king of Denmark in the 14th century to maintain free trade and prevent Danish control over vital ports and trade routes.
The Confederation of the Rhine Towns was a league of cities along the Rhine River, formed in the 13th and 14th centuries to defend trade and resist local nobility. Key cities included Mainz, Cologne, and Strasbourg. The league focused on economic cooperation and the security of river trade routes.
The Swabian League of Cities (14th–15th Century) was a federation of free imperial cities in southern Germany, including Ulm, Augsburg, and Nuremberg, that aimed to protect its members from feudal lords and the Holy Roman Emperor.
The Rise of States
By the late Middle Ages and early modern period, the power gaps provided by the relatively disparate and decentralized feudal system began to close. Many once-independent towns and trading outposts fell under royal control as kings consolidated power; universities were gradually subjected to greater state influence and funding; and many monasteries were violently sacked and closed through the political and religious upheavals of the period. The rise of centralized monarchies in France, Spain, and England led Europe in a general trend toward greater state power and weakened local autonomy. In some places where medieval institutions survived well into the early modern period—like Venice and the Swiss Confederation—they gradually took on many of the attributes of the burgeoning states around them.
It is critical to understand that this decline in free communities was not because the people and institutions of medieval Europe did not know how to resist the centralizing tendencies of kings; they had effectively done so for centuries. The new absolute monarchs were not stopped simply because the intellectual, spiritual, and cultural will to resist them had diminished. Why did this happen? Basically, new issues and opportunities had taken center stage while the once fiercely guarded freedoms of the towns, universities, and monasteries were deprioritized. These influences included the wars of religion that followed the Protestant Revolution, which weakened and often subjugated church authorities to secular rulers, removing a significant bulwark to state authority. Also, the discovery of the Americas and new sea routes to Asia led to the development of maritime empires with wealth flowing to the European kingdoms of the Atlantic seaboard. These developments tended to concentrate power and wealth in the hands of monarchs, which proved all too alluring for those aspiring to prominence to focus on aligning with royal courts rather than resisting them.
The political outcomes that the West ultimately experienced as a result of this change were royal absolutism, then revolution, and finally the modern, increasingly centralized nation-state. This progression saw the intermediate and autonomous institutions that once permeated Christendom and protected local freedoms either removed or diminished to the point of impotence in the face of state control.
Attempts to secure individual freedom were made through the new state system. The American Declaration of Independence, inspired by the political philosophy of Locke, who drew on medieval natural law traditions, gave rise to a society governed by extremely limited state authorities for the first century of its existence. Meanwhile, the persistence of the medieval Magna Carta in England similarly granted it—and many English-speaking countries—a degree of political freedom envied around the world. It is no mistake that Anglosphere countries, such as the US and Great Britain, led the world in economic, cultural, and political influence over this period.
However, opportunities for ambitious individuals to accumulate power and wealth by tapping into the expropriating forces of the state have continued to win out in recent decades, with the rise of the welfare-warfare state and international superstate bodies such as the European Union and the United Nations. These developments have only further isolated and atomized the general population beneath ever larger, more comprehensive, and burdensome state entities.
Lessons for Future Stateless Societies
Independent medieval communities that operated largely outside the domain of kings—a domain that was already relatively limited—played a crucial role in shaping Western civilization. It was these centers of anarchic order that ushered in waves of cultural, economic, technological, intellectual, and spiritual progress across Christendom, lifting it from the dark ages that followed the political and economic collapse of the Roman Empire and driving its progress and flourishing for over one thousand years.
Although eventually absorbed into surrounding states, the contribution of these free communities to history is nothing short of spectacular. Achievements include the rise of literacy, trade networks, advanced legal systems, double-entry bookkeeping, mechanical clocks, musical notation, the establishment of the university system, the development of the foundations of modern science, hospitals, and hospices; and the artistic and architectural triumphs associated with Romanesque, Gothic, and early Renaissance movements.
With this history and legacy in mind, libertarians should be more assertive in citing the medieval period as the prime example of statelessness in practice. While state influences were always present during this period, they were largely held at bay and minimized in free communities—at least in enough places and for enough people for freedom to take hold and yield civilization-scale benefits. The towns, monasteries, and universities of Christendom were established by freely consenting pioneers, they formed local governing institutions and utilized independent legal systems—all outside the direct control of the state or proto-state authorities of the time. They were, in essence, successful stateless societies.
While we have inherited the fruits of these stateless societies, we have largely torn down the tree that produced them. It is to our detriment that we ignore the example of the free communities of Christendom and continue to limit our options to the state system for our future. We too, can form communities by consent. We too, can look for private governance to supply the common infrastructure and regulatory needs of our communities. We too, can prioritize the need for legal systems to operate independently of any prevailing ruling structures and hierarchies.
If our future is to be one of greater freedom, we would be well served to look to the free communities of medieval Christendom as a guide for developing new spaces for statelessness.