|
Results for duel
|
On this page:
|
To engage in or as if in formal combat.
[Middle English duelle, from Medieval Latin duellum, from Latin, war, archaic variant of bellum.]
dueler du'el·er or du'el·ist n.
verb
For more information on duel, visit Britannica.com.
To initiate a duel the offended party would present a challenge to fight, which had to be accepted or the person challenged would be dishonored. Negotiations were conducted by seconds, who also observed the combat to see that all agreements of the complex ceremony were observed. The object of a duel was not necessarily to kill, and in most cases after the firing of a prescribed number of shots or drawing blood the fight would be stopped. Although dueling was opposed by the rulers and churches of various countries, it long persisted among aristocrats, army officers, and others. German students were especially noted for their duels. Duels were quite common in the United States, some fought by prominent Americans. For example, Alexander Hamilton was killed in a duel with Aaron Burr, and Andrew Jackson took part in several duels. In the United States, dueling persisted longest in the Southern states and on the Western frontier. Dueling today has been made illegal by statute in most countries. Killing in the course of a duel is usually considered willful murder, and all persons aiding the principals are guilty with them.
Bibliography
See studies by J. Atkinson (1964), R. Baldrick (1965), V. G. Kiernan (1986), K. McAleer (1994), J. B. Freeman (2001), B. Holland (2003), and J. Landale (2006).
Duels were a major source of disorder and crime in the early modern period. Of course, dueling has a history that transcends the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries. Trial by combat was common in the Middle Ages and was frequently prescribed and sanctioned by authorities as a means of settling criminal cases. The practice continued well into the modern period, especially between military men and even between public officials. The French statesman of the early twentieth century, Georges Clemenceau, is credited with twenty-two duels.
Rise of the Duel in Early Modern Europe
There are reasons for concluding, however, that dueling, defined as ritualized combat over affairs of honor, has a special place in the culture of early modern Europe. For one thing, it was then that the code of honor was established as a cornerstone of aristocratic life. Out of the Renaissance emerged understandings, derived ultimately from ancient notions of glory and heroism, that vaunted an exalted sense of the aristocratic self. Schooled in the precise etiquette of social interactions between gentlemen, noblemen were taught that honor aggrieved could only be satisfied with blood. The well-known legal scholar Andrea Alciati (Alciato) wrote an early code on the duel; Girolamo Muzio's Il duello (1550) was one of the most widely read treatises on the subject and spawned many imitations. Even Baldessare Castiglione, who expressed disapproval of the practice, acknowledged that, once committed to a duel, a gentleman must not fail to demonstrate his courage.
Another reason dueling was more of a problem in the early modern period is that, for technological reasons, it simply became easier for gentlemen to draw swords when provoked. By the mid-sixteenth century the rapier, an Italian invention, began to appear throughout Europe. Lightweight and deadly, this needlepoint sword allowed gentlemen to walk about with weapons at their sides that could be drawn at the slightest imprecation or insult. Encounters that might have ended in mutual exhaustion with cumbersome broadswords now turned instantly fatal with the merest thrust. Even courtiers and aristocratic fops with no military experience and little physical bearing were now armed and dangerous.
These factors alone, however, are not sufficient to explain the duel's prominence in the early modern period. The heart of the matter relates to the anxieties and sensitivities that prompted aristocrats to cross swords so readily. Without embracing the discredited notion of a "crisis of the aristocracy," it still can be argued that a heightened concern for their statuses and privileges led many gentlemen to the duel. Two factors seem most salient. One was the so-called military revolution that, generally speaking, challenged the aristocracy's traditional role in society, that of "those who fight," by replacing cavalry with infantry at the crux of battlefield tactics. Aristocrats continued to serve as officers in the military, but now they were forced to reconsider their role in an enterprise that increasingly valued esprit de corps over individualism, patient strategizing over brute impetuosity, leadership over heroism, and training over birthright. Another factor was the inflation of honors and the sale of offices, which greatly increased the pool of privileged elites. Under James I (ruled 1603–1625), England saw a dramatic inflation of honors, after the long depression of Elizabeth I's (1558–1603) reign, an upturn that indeed coincided with an outbreak of the dueling mania. In France new titles were distributed throughout the sixteenth century and especially during the religious wars. In addition, the nobility of the robe, the class of magistrates ennobled mostly through positions in the realms' sovereign courts, the parlements, more than doubled in the period. These magistrates not only added to the already crowded field of privileged elites, they also challenged traditional aristocrats of the sword with a different aristocratic ethos, one that emphasized learning, civility, and royal service. This did not mean they were immune to the duel. Pierre de L'Estoile recounted that a son of a robe official slew a gentleman who dared question his rank. It did mean, however, that, as with the military revolution, competition from parvenus and outsiders could provoke anxiety and uncertainty among aristocrats, prompting them to seek relief in a ritual that, if nothing else, reaffirmed their self-images as great men whose senses of honor and sensitivities to injury set them far above others. The Venetian ambassador observed that the duel formed the greatest bond between French noblemen, and his observation attests to the importance of this custom as a paradoxical feature of class solidarity.
Opposition to the Duel
Authorities and critics bemoaned the dueling mania in part because de facto toleration of the practice seemed to concede that the nobility was above the law, subject to a code of conduct all its own. Disturbers of the public peace, duelists were thus obstacles to the goal of imposing civility, comity, and legal uniformity on early modern societies, a crucial task of early modern state making. But the real cost of dueling in terms of civil disturbance and lives lost was enough to make it a major concern. Precise figures are hard to come by, but it is clear that the bloodletting was significant. In the early seventeenth century the jurist Jean de Savaron commented that there were "few or no noble houses exempted from this carnage" (Traicté contre les duels, Paris, 1610, p. 49), while a preacher at the Estates-General in 1614 argued that dueling was responsible for twice as many deaths as the Wars of Religion. In Britain during the reign of George III (ruled 1760–1820) there were 172 reported duels, a somewhat modest figure except that 91 had fatal consequences. And if the comments of critics and reformers are any measure, dueling continued as a major source of criminality throughout the early modern period.
Attempts to curb the duel began in the mid-sixteenth century. The Council of Trent (1545–1563) condemned the practice. In 1566 unauthorized dueling was declared a capital offense in France; in 1576 it was deemed a treasonous act. James I, who had ample exposure to intramural brawling during his reign in Scotland, made extirpation of the duel a personal mission, even writing a treatise against it. Kings, however, often proved reluctant to prosecute a crime that stemmed from martial qualities they admired. Henry IV (1589–1610) of France was notoriously lax in backing up the royal ban. Cardinal Richelieu (1585–1642), on the other hand, encouraged Louis XIII (ruled 1610–1643) to remain steadfast in the execution of François de Montmorency-Bouteville (1530–1579), a well-known scion of one of the most prominent families in Europe, after he was convicted of breaking the law by dueling in broad daylight in a Parisian square. Religious reformers, secular moralists, and legal commentators continued to denounce the duel as a symptom of the egotism, lawlessness, irreligion, and other excesses, like drunkenness and libertinism, that seemed endemic to the aristocracy. In the Enlightenment, dueling, and especially the code of honor, came to be seen as a useless relic from a benighted age, unworthy of reasonable, truly sociable men. Charles-Louis de Secondat de Montesquieu (1689–1755), commenting on the practice of seconds in the duel, famously remarked on the folly of a "man who would have been reluctant to give someone else five pounds in order to save him from the gallows . . . would make no bones about going to risk his life for him a thousand times over" (Persian Letters, no. 90, p. 172).
And yet even in the age of reason the duel had its apologists. Some writers waxed nostalgic for the martial, heroic values it seemed to embody, especially in a time when refinement and the influence of women were hallmarks of high society. Others simply maintained the justice of recourse to the duel as a necessary, if dangerous, means of defending one's reputation in extremis. As Samuel Johnson (1709–1784) pronounced, "No, Sir, a man may shoot the man who invades his character, as he may shoot him who attempts to break into his house" (Boswell's Life of Johnson, quoted by Kiernan, The Duel, pp. 179–180). If there was stubborn ambivalence with regard to the duel, this perhaps reflected the fact that the early modern period remained, despite all the changes, an aristocratic era dominated by notions of honor, a belief in the superiority of noble blood and lineage, and a sense of the legitimacy of private justice.
Bibliography
Billacois, François. The Duel: Its Rise and Fall in Early Modern France. Edited and translated by Trista Selous. New Haven, 1990. Translation of Le duel dans la société française des XVIe–XVIIe siècles (1986).
Kiernan, V. G. The Duel in European History. Oxford, 1988–1989.
Montesquieu, Charles-Louis de Secondat. Persian Letters. Translated by C. J. Betts. New York, 1973.
Savaron, Jean de. Traicté contre les duels. Paris, 1610.
Schneider, Robert A. "Swordplay and Statemaking: Aspects of the Campaign against the Duel in Early Modern France." In Statemaking and Social Movements: Essays in History and Theory, edited by Charles Bright and Susan Harding. Ann Arbor, Mich., 1984.
—ROBERT A. SCHNEIDER
n.
A formal ceremony preliminary to the reconciliation of two enemies. Great skill is necessary to its satisfactory observance; if awkwardly performed the most unexpected and deplorable consequences sometimes ensue. A long time ago a man lost his life in a duel.
That dueling's a gentlemanly vice
I hold; and wish that it had been my lot
To live my life out in some favored spot --
Some country where it is considered nice
To split a rival like a fish, or slice
A husband like a spud, or with a shot
Bring down a debtor doubled in a knot
And ready to be put upon the ice.
Some miscreants there are, whom I do long
To shoot, to stab, or some such way reclaim
The scurvy rogues to better lives and manners,
I seem to see them now -- a mighty throng.
It looks as if to challenge me they came,
Jauntily marching with brass bands and banners!
Xamba Q. Dar
In the days of the wild west, street duels were a common sight.
Tutor's tip: The character's "dual" (made up of two parts; having two functions) role of father and brother made it impossible for him to fight in a "duel" (combat) when he was challenged.
As practiced from the 15th to 20th centuries in Western societies, a duel was a consensual fight between two people, with matched deadly weapons, in accordance with rules explicitly or implicitly agreed upon, over a point of honor, usually accompanied by a trusted representative (who might themselves fight), often in contravention of the law.
The duel usually developed out of the desire of one party (the challenger) to redress a perceived insult to his honor. The goal of the duel was not so much to kill the opponent as to gain "satisfaction," i.e., to restore one's honor by demonstrating a willingness to risk one's life for it.
Duels may be distinguished from trials by combat, in that duels were not used to
determine guilt or innocence, nor were they official procedures. Indeed, duels were often illegal, though in most societies where
dueling was socially accepted, participants in a fair duel were not prosecuted, or if they were, were not convicted. Only
Duels could be fought with some sort of sword or, from the 18th Century on,
with
After the offense, whether real or imagined, once upon a time party would demand "satisfaction" from the offender,[2] signalling this demand
with an inescapably insulting gesture, such as throwing his glove before him, hence the phrase "throwing down the
At the choice of the offended party, the duel could be
Under the latter conditions, one or both parties could intentionally miss in order to fulfill the conditions of the duel,
without loss of either life or honor. However, to do so, "to delope", could imply that your
opponent was not worth shooting. This practice occurred despite being expressly banned by the
For a pistol duel, the parties would be placed back to back with loaded weapons in hand and walk a set number of paces, turn to face the opponent, and shoot. Typically, the graver the insult, the fewer the paces agreed upon. Alternately, a pre-agreed length of ground would be measured out by the seconds and marked, often with swords stuck in the ground (referred to as "points"). At a given signal, often the dropping of a handkerchief, the principals could advance and fire at will. This latter system reduced the possibility of cheating, as neither principal had to trust the other not to turn too soon. Another system involved alternate shots being taken—the challenged firing first.
Many historical duels were prevented by the difficulty of arranging the "methodus pugnandi". In the instance of Dr. Richard Brocklesby, the number of paces could not be agreed upon; and in the affair between Mark Akenside and Ballow, one had determined never to fight in the morning, and the other that he would never fight in the afternoon. John Wilkes, who did not stand upon ceremony in these little affairs, when asked by Lord Talbot how many times they were to fire, replied, "just as often as your Lordship pleases; I have brought a bag of bullets and a flask of gunpowder."
In English, the word duel is attested from the latter half of the 15th century. It derives from Old Latin duellum (Classical Latin bellum "war"), in Middle Latin associated with duo "two" by popular etymology, shifting its meaning to "one-to-one combat". The word is ultimately from the root "to burn, to destroy", cognate to Old English teona "damage".
Physical confrontations related to insults and social standing pre-date human society, but
the formal concept of a duel, in Western society, developed out of medieval judicial duel and older pre-Christian practices such as
the
The first published
To decline a challenge was often equated to defeat by forfeiture, and was sometimes even regarded as dishonorable. Prominent and famous individuals were especially at risk for being challenged.
The Russian poet Alexander Pushkin prophetically described a number of duels in his works, notably Onegin's duel with Lensky in Eugene Onegin. The poet was mortally wounded in a controversial duel with Georges d'Anthès, a French officer rumored to be his wife's lover. d'Anthès, who was accused of cheating in this duel, married Pushkin's sister-in-law and went on to become French minister and senator. The whole affair was instigated by anonymous letters, apparently written by two homosexual princes in order to avenge d'Anthès for his homosexual affair with the Ambassador of Holland.[citation needed]
In 1864, American writer Mark Twain—then editor of the New York Sunday Mercury—narrowly avoided fighting a duel with a rival newspaper editor, apparently through the quick thinking of his second, who exaggerated Twain's prowess with a pistol. [3] [4] [5]
Among the most famous duels are the American Burr-Hamilton duel, in which notable
The last fatal duel in Canada, in 1833, saw
(See also: List of famous duels)
In 1808, two Frenchmen are said to have fought in balloons over Paris, each attempting to shoot and puncture the other's balloon; one duelist is said to have been shot down and killed with his second. [1]
Thirty-five years later, two men are said to have fought a duel by means of throwing billiard balls at each other. [1]
Some participants in a duel, given the choice of weapons, are said to have deliberately chosen ridiculous weapons such as howitzers, sledgehammer, or forkfuls of pig dung, in order to show their disdain for duelling.[1]
In the
Knives were the weapons used in such fights. They would begin with an exchange of sexually-related insults in a public place such as a tavern, and the men would fight with the intention of slashing the other's face, rather than killing. As soon as blood was drawn onlookers would intervene to separate the men. The winner would often spit on his opponent and dip his neckerchief in the blood of the loser, or wipe the blood off his knife with it.
The winner would generally make no attempt to avoid arrest and receive a light penalty, such as a short jail sentence and/or a small fine.[6]
In Poland duels have been known since the Middle Ages. Polish duel rules were formed, based on Italian, French and German
codes. The best known Polish code was written as late as in
Duelling is widely known to have existed for centuries in the Philippine Islands. In the Visayan islands, the offended party would first "hagit" or challenge the offender. The offender would have the choice whether to accept or decline the challenge. In the past, choice of weapons were not limited. But most often, bolos, rattan canes, and knives were the preferred weapons. Rules may be agreed upon. Duels were either first-blood, submission, or to the last man standing (last man still alive). Duels to death were known as "huego-todo" (without bounds).
Widely publicised duels are common in Filipino martial-arts circles. One of those very controversial and publicised duels was between Ciriaco "Cacoy" Cañete and Venancio "Ansiong" Bacon. It was rumored that Cacoy won in this match by executing an illegal maneuver, but this rumor has not been proven to this day. Another match was between Cacoy and a man identified only by his name "Domingo" in the mountain barangay of Balamban in 1948, which was also very controversial. Some claimed that this event was just a hoax.
The Roman Catholic Church and many political leaders, like King James I & VI of Britain, usually denounced dueling throughout Europe's history, though some authorities tacitly allowed it, believing it to relieve long-standing familial and social tensions.
Dueling began to fall out of favor in America in the
By the end of the 19th century, legalized dueling was almost extinct in most of the world. Some American states have laws that establish procedures for legal dueling, but it is unlikely that they would be upheld in court.
Many jurisdictions have very high-level bans laid against dueling, with stiff penalties for violation. Several United States state constitutions ban the practice, the most common penalty being disenfranchisement and/or disqualification from all offices.
Dueling still continues to occur, albeit not with regularity.
Dueling is a scenario sometimes used in discussions of games and
One example is a dueling-type scenario with 3 participants, each with different levels of skill as a marksman. Shooter A has a 95% rate of accuracy, shooter B has 75%, and C has 5%. The shooters take positions on an equilateral triangle; each chooses a target and (if alive) fires one shot. To be fair, it is agreed that the shooters will shoot in reverse order of their skill, i.e. first C, then B, then A.
The question is, if you are shooter C, what is the best strategy? At first glance, it might seem like shooting at A would be
best, but really the best thing to do is to shoot in the air. That way, B will shoot at A, and if he misses, A will shoot at B.
Either way, C will end up with the first shot at the survivor. C exchanges the first shot in a "
In the world of cinema, dueling has provided themes for such motion pictures as Stanley
Kubrick's 1975 Barry Lyndon (an adaptation of a novel by William Makepeace Thackeray from 1844) and Ridley
Scott's 1977 The Duellists, which adapted Joseph Conrad's 1908 short story The Duel. [8] [9] The 1943 film
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
Dansk (Danish)
n. - duel, kappestrid, kamp
v. tr. - duellere
v. intr. - duellere, strides, kappes
Nederlands (Dutch)
duel, duelleren
Français (French)
n. - duel, rencontre, (fig) lutte
v. tr. - se battre en duel (contre, avec)
v. intr. - se battre en duel
Deutsch (German)
n. - Duell, Zweikampf
v. - sich duellieren, sich schlagen
Ελληνική (Greek)
n. - μονομαχία
v. - μονομαχώ
Italiano (Italian)
battersi in duello, duello
Português (Portuguese)
n. - duelo (m)
v. - duelar
Русский (Russian)
драться на дуэли, дуэль
Español (Spanish)
n. - duelo, desafío
v. tr. - batir a duelo
v. intr. - batirse en duelo
Svenska (Swedish)
n. - duell
v. - duellera
中文（简体） (Chinese (Simplified))
决斗, 斗争, 与...决斗, 在决斗中战胜或杀死
中文（繁體） (Chinese (Traditional))
n. - 決鬥, 鬥爭
v. tr. - 與...決鬥, 在決鬥中戰勝或殺死
v. intr. - 決鬥
한국어 (Korean)
n. - 대결, 논쟁
v. tr. - ~와 겨루다
v. intr. - ~와 다투다
日本語 (Japanese)
n. - 決闘, 闘争, 競争
v. - 決闘する
العربيه (Arabic)
(الاسم) مبارزة, قتال رسمي بين رجلين باستخدام السيوف أو المسدسات (فعل) يبارز
עברית (Hebrew)
n. - דו-קרב
v. tr. - נלחם בדו-קרב
v. intr. - ערך דו-קרב
If you are unable to view some languages clearly, click here.
To select your translation preferences click here.
Some good "duel" pages on the web:
 Math mathworld.wolfram.com |
Join the WikiAnswers Q&A community. Post a question or answer questions about "duel" at WikiAnswers.
Copyrights:
 |
 | Dictionary. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2007, 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2007. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Thesaurus. Roget's II: The New Thesaurus, Third Edition by the Editors of the American Heritage® Dictionary Copyright © 1995 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Britannica Concise Encyclopedia. Britannica Concise Encyclopedia. © 2006 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Columbia Encyclopedia. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition Copyright © 2003, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Columbia University Press. All rights reserved. www.cc.columbia.edu/cu/cup/ Read more |
 |
| History 1450-1789. Encyclopedia of the Early Modern World. Copyright © 2004 by The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Devil's Dictionary. Devil's Dictionary by Ambrose Bierce, 1911 Read more |
 |
| Word Tutor. Copyright © 2004-present by eSpindle Learning, a 501(c) nonprofit organization. All rights reserved. eSpindle provides personalized spelling and vocabulary tutoring online; free trial. Read more |
 |
| Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Duel". Read more |
 |
| Translations. Copyright © 2007, WizCom Technologies Ltd. All rights reserved. Read more |
Search for answers directly from your browser with the FREE Answers.com Toolbar!
Click here to download now. 
Get Answers your way! Check out all our free tools and products.
