Good at writing and making rules! If you get offended (odor included)by and the frenchie shows up on the church grounds at 5 in the morrow ,expect a blade dipped in poison and its witnesses carrying pistols...
Believe it or not, I learned a bit of this back in the 1980's when I played a Play-by-Mail role-playing game called "En Garde!" Sure, it's a game and not historically reliable but ... "Sir - you have been dallying with my wife! I require answer!" "Sir - I'm not sure if I should answer your challenge for you declaring an untruth about me, or the suggestion I've such low taste!"
@@johnandrewserranogarcia7223I doubt it, though it’s within the same vein. The video game is more a tactical hack and slash game with a very Princess Bride feel to it, where your goal is to fight hordes of enemies using the environment to your advantage. Not much roleplaying or political intrigue but I give it a hearty recommendation.
Back before t'internet, we relied on snailmail for distance game play. You bought in to a game, getting the rules and creating a character. You then posted to the referee a month's worth of 'orders', usually 4 week chunks, such as 'recuperating', 'try joining X club', 'on campaign in Army' etc. You had standing orders, such as 'If you see Character Z then challenge him to a duel!'. The referee would sort out the events for that month, resolve game play, etc. then post back the old order sheet, with results, and a fresh ordersheet for the coming month. Sounds over-complicated but it worked ... with what we had. 🙂
My guess is that the saber maintained the quality of being susceptible to veto because of its inherent ability to cause grievous injury or death FAR more readily than epee, and because pistol duels were at least somewhat likely to end with one or both parties missing entirely. I’m a sword duel, the end of the matter is determined usually by either first blood or a yield from one of the duelists (or death, if that is the chosen resolution method, but that would make it irrelevant which weapon was used). With a saber, “first blood” could very easily mean permanent disfigurement/disablement, life-threatening injury, or indeed, death itself. The epee de combat was a far less “capable” weapon in that respect, I suspect for that very reason. And pistols are almost kindof the duel lists version of a coin flip, with some skill thrown in. I’m not an expert on dueling, or at least not as well versed in its nuances than I am knowledgeable about the weapons themselves; these are just educated guesses honestly, but they seem fairly plausible to me.
21:16 In a Polish comedy novel, during a duel, the "second" guy loads guns in such a way that he throws bullets into his sleeve, and there is only powder in the barrel. In his plan, this was to cause both gentlemen's shots to fail and the duel to end bloodlessly. But... He forgot that they were supposed to shoot "until someone hits." XD
@@kleinerprinz99 This is the book "Trans Atlantic" by Witold Gombrowicz. Funny, but requires knowledge of some historical context to understand all the meanings.
23:58 Anecdotal evidence seems to support this. During a visit to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, a foreigner noticed that many men had scars on their heads, probably from saber cuts, which, however, were not fatal. In fact, the most famous saber duel from a film about those times also ends this way ;)
I think the thing about a retired officer being allowed to refuse a sabre duel might be linked to the weapons a retired officer might have been familiar with in 1836 ; the regulations at the beginning of the 1800 mean he'd probably only have used a smallsword, and if challenged by a non-retired officer who had been using his time's regulation weapon, a sabre, he might be at a severe disadvantage.
Believe it or not, in France, duelling survived into the age of film. There are a number of real-life non-fatal sword duels conducted under versions of this code on UA-cam. 'Second blood' seems pretty common, actually (at least based on the fact they often stop and then restart). I suppose it's essentially 'best of three'.
There were student fraternities in Germany that kept dueling at least to the turn of the century - I did not follow it to the present day, so it may be outlawed by now. It was heavily regulated, fought in armour that exposed only legal targets. Seconds could use their canes ("Ziegenhainer") to deflect illegal strikes. Injuries were stitched up on the spot and for a long time fencers proudly displayed their scars. Those duels used cutting instead of thrusting to prevent lethal injuries.
Jim Bowie had some of the most famous duels in American history (most before he invented his knife) I recall one on a sandbar that he wasn't even in where the seconds started arguing and he ended up getting stabbed through the chest with a sword cane and still won.... I believe by knitting 2 or 3 people to death.
There are two schools of thought on who wins a knife duel. One is that no one wins. But I find that excessively pessimistic. The second school says that the winner is the last one to bleed out.
Possibly your one of your most important video's to date because without Chateauvillards code the many of the rules of Olympic fencing wouldn't make a lick of sense. I have always thought it bizzare how in HEMA culture duelling codes were ignored for so long. Couple of clarifications though: Chateuvillard code is was based and devised on existing dueling norms prevalent at the time. While in 18th century smallsword you could use your off hand and often encouraged to use it in *rencontres* for the most part in formal duels you were not allowed to use your offhand without the opponents consent. This difference between 'recontres' and 'duels' needs more exploration because they are NOT the same thing, causing much confusion particularly outside France, the Brits being particularly guilty. Chatevillards text was the absolute textbook for about 20-30 years, but mores over dueling changed, particularly in Italy where they were never quite happy with some of the french regulations and devised their own fitting with their extant own traditions. You skipped over the Witnesses section, which is understandable. But in many ways its the *most important* part of the book which sets the tone for what a European duel is, as opposed to other cultures.
The delay when shooting a flint lock is directly related to any fouling from the black powder. Your first shots at the range will have no delay. But as you fire more shots, especially without any kind of cleaning, you will start to notice a bit of a delay. In my experience it's like half a beat. You barely have time to count to one before it goes off.
I should point out that the black powder we have today is better quality than they had in the old days. And black powder is sensitive to moisture. Both factors would affect the burn rate of the charge. So the delay may have been more of an issue back in the old days.
@@phantomapprentice6749 as far as I'm aware a cutlass wass neithet used for formal duels nor as cavalry weapon. I thought more of a cavalry Palasch of the Broadsword/Backsword Type with a Blade of 34" to 40".
There were no duels in Russia in either the 16th or 17th centuries, with the exception of duels between foreigners (the first documented duel was between a Scot and an Englishman). But since the middle of the 18th century, when the Russian nobility was strongly Westernized, duels have become very popular! In general, the rules of Russian duels are almost identical to the French ones, but at the same time, pistiol shooting distances were much smaller than in France.There was also an exclusively Russian method of dueling shooting, at point-blank range through a handkerchief, in which one pistol was randomly loaded, and the second was not. This method of dueling was described by Dostoevsky. I have read the dueling code of Vasily Durasov (year 1912!), but I do not know if it has been translated into other languages.Thus, although the tradition of dueling came to Russia very late, it remained in use for a very long time. The last duels were during the Civil War era in the 1920s!
USA, state of Kentucky: our governor's oath used to include that He had never fought a duel. There is an area in KY where the border dips South towards Nashville Tennessee* called "Dueling Ground" where people would duel as it was legal in KY much later than it was in TN. *Allegedy the jog in the border was to include a large moonshining operation in KY; the border further west also has several irregularities, possibly directly related!
Yeah, I imagine that people who had consistently proven to be honest could just laugh off an insult. But if you are a bit shady, you don't want people to call you out on it...
I heard that under German law you are still kind of allowed to defend your honour. So if someone comes up to you in the street and calls you the son of a duck, and you punch them, it's regarded as self defense, because the initial verbal abuse is considered an act of aggression and a kind of assault. Am I right in thinking that?
@@nathanaelsmith3553 : In theory, german , Notwehrrecht' ( law about defence in emergency) allows you , to defend yourself with necessary (not more !) violence, when your honour, freedom, the things you own, your body or life is in danger. But in reality I have never heared, that someone gets no problem, when defending his honour. Was perhaps different in 1950s/ 1960s. And in cases of robberies or other dangerous attacks, you have at least for last 25 Years problems, when you successfully defend yourself, and the criminal is hurt. It seems that current Generation of judges (and politicans) try to protect criminals better than lawrespecting citizens. And when you rape a fifteen Years old girl, you come not to prison, If you belong to a special ethnic group, happened two or three times this year. I know, this has no context to edged weapons, but in my country a to me for my lifetime unknown anger about crime and low sentences (?) grows.
@@brittakriep2938 thats why i started carrying a knive. I dont care anymore, I fight violence with more violence. My time in the Bund and various fighting Sports but I still feel unsafe and worried for my Family nowadays.
@@nathanaelsmith3553 Just to cut out the furious rant from the previous comment: No. If someone insults you, you are technically allowed to defend yourself against receiving that aggression. This does not include punching the other person afterwards, since that will not make the insult go away. If someone writes an insult on a piece of paper, you are allowed to destroy that paper, I guess. Anything else would require a lawsuit. I’m sure these rules are very similar in the numerous countries that took German civil law as the foundation of their own legal systems.
A second reason for being bare-chested, reduces the chance of infection from small fibers from coat or shirt being driven into the wound (this was a time before antibiotics)
Duels, though officially illegal, continued in Poland to 1939. Both pistols and sabres were used, not epees. Duels could be limited eg to first blood or incapacity. My father, a student at the time, was involved in a sabre duel in 1930 in Vilnius, then part of Poland. Both duellists were wounded, my father first, by a shallow chest cut, his opponent by a counter thrust lunge near the leading shoulder, which went thru, quote " like a knife thru butter". My paternal grandfather was in a pistol duel in the 1890s and was wounded in the shoulder.
🎩Hi, great topic as usual. I have a facsimile of “The British code of duel” dated 1824. SBN 85547 157 8. Think it was a private press. And even has examples of actual duels. One between the officers of the Tenth Hussars and a Mr William Battier.
While a pace is often considered: now: to be about a yard, it originally was left foot to left foot, or about 5 feet long. I have no idea which it would have been in this timeframe.
In the late 19th century two aristocratic women in Lichtenstein supposedly fought a sword duel, and they did so topless--not to ensure no cheating, but because wounds were worse if cloth got in there. This caught the imagination of men at the time, and became a standard subject for 'dirty postcards'. However, this might be an urban myth, even though the two duelists and the time and place were specified.
I wonder if hacking each other up with a sabre was regarded as something for military persons below a certain class, and something that civilians or gentlemen either did not do or would have no experience-of, also being somewhat more brutal....
I wondered if it was something to do with the unfairness between a military and civilian gentleman, considering that the military man should on average have had a vast amount more training with the weapon.
Not according to the guy who wrote the Italian duelling code- Codice Cavalesco - Jacobo Gelli. He was quite adamant it's because the french believed it was necessary that duel retained some element of lethality (irrespective of weather you believe the cut is deadlier than the thrust) There's a whole preamble in one of his books on why the Italians preferred the sabre because it was more suitable for first blood duels, and that the Epee thrust was unnecessarily dangerous for the vast majority of minor offences. That being said he wrote this some 60 years later so he hardly an unbiased observer. Also when Chateuvillard's code came out The Joinville le Pont academy for the french army did not exist, and then the sabre was reserved for those in the cavalry. Infantry officers had to focus on foil and by extension epee technique.
@@scholagladiatoria That makes perfect sense. The pistol and the smallsword would be more "fair" because any person (traning or not) would be in grave danger in a fight using these weapons.
I just assumed the trained military servicemen would have too much of an advantage with a saber. After all, if someone is in a duel trying to cut someone and not get cut he or she wouldn't avoid anything that helps them just for it being to brutal.
Thanks for an interesting program Matt. Yes, I would very much like to see an entire episode devoted to pistol dueling in the future, but please get a “proper “ pair of pistols like Wogdons or Mantons.
According to a newsreel, last duel in France was in 1968/1969. In Switzerland theoreticaly duelling ended in 1987. And ritualized duels still happen in Accademic Fencing, mostly practiciced in Germany/Austria/ Switzerland, lesser in Belgium/Poland/ Lithuania and Lativia.
The "Academic fencing" is I believe called "Mansard" and it is a ceremonial combat to create brotherhood and the point is to take the injury to the face or head amd show no fear... it's why you see so many German officers with scars on their face in WWI and WWII it still exists in some fraternity in Austria and Germany.
There were several cases of bayonet duels among Russian emigrant officers in Turkey! Cartridges became scarce, there were no rapiers, and infantry officers were poorly equipped with sabers.
I wonder if "second blood" means a 'best of three' situation? If you win both the first and the second exchanges by scoring hits on your opponent, there is no need for a third round as there is no possibility of catching up. It is only necessary to do a third round if you are even after two, so it makes sense to refer to the format as 'first to second blood' rather than 'best of three bloods'.
When I was young, I met an old guy who took part in sabre duels in the early nineteenhundreds still. The sabres had been curved, not pointed and had relatively light blades at that time, as far as I remember what he told. So almost no fatalities. He told about his scars and I asked to prove: One scar across his whole chest. From his descriptions, no doubht he was true.
I wonder if the saber refusal thing is because it was considered more likely to cause serious maiming, disfiguring or death in a contest that was often ritualized as to first blood. However the inclusion of pistols makes that seem questionable. Although, I remember Mark Twain discussing French dueling with what I take to be a large helping of humorous exaggeration, but his general point was that the pistols in fashion for that purpose were very small and weak.
The opposite. It's because the épée was seen as more lethal. Hence the italian duelling code adopting the sabre as the default weapon in reaction to the French code, because epee duels were too deadly for minor offences.
The issue with saber is that "maining/disfiguring" part. A well-aimed attack with a thrusting weapon or a bullet will be lethal very quickly. A hit that isn't lethal usually leaves injuries which heal up relatively cleanly by the standards of the era. Sabers have much higher probability of leaving a survivor with a missing limb or other severe scarring or persistent impairment. Not always the case, of course, but it's accurate as far as such generalisations go.
Good sir.... You have offended me because I cannot read physical books anymore.... As the offended party we shall use rubber chickens at 3:33 p.m. at our nearest convenience for the both of us until first flatulence...... Seriously though I love these videos about dueling
Most gunfights happen at under 15 yards and most people miss over and over at that range when someone is shooting back at them. This is why police shoot so many rounds in those encounters. Pistols are hard to hit anything with under stress. Many active shooters only manage to kill a few people despite having plenty of ammo and being in a target rich environment because they are using a pistol and are not very good with it. If they are proficient with a handgun then they kill more. AR-15's on the other hand, are easy for an inexperienced shooter to kill many people with. They are extremely easy to shoot and typically have a magazine with about twice as many rounds as a pistol.
I remember such mail effort for xmas and winter. Was a charity event in Germany. You write personal letters to random mostly elderly people. Soon enough they had overabundance of participents than recipients.
Informative, as always. Perhaps, in future, you could evaluate a post-apocalypse system that includes non-standard "weapons" like bats and hockey sticks.
Extremely good video, as usual, Matt!! It would be interesting to delve into the origins of duelling in the ritualistic combat of Germanic tribesmen since Antiquity.
Speaking of the duels to second blood, we sometime do round robin sparring where each fighter has two hp and a strike to the head or thrust to torso costs 2 hp but anything else costs one. You continuously fight till you loose and it makes for a quick and dynamic play on bearpit/round robin fighting.
William Hope thought that the SHEARING SWORD was the best sword for duels (and self defence). It seems like good advice, if you only need to draw first blood. The shearing sword is a very fast cutter. Hope thought that the BACKSWORD was the best choice for a Sword of War.
The British are a unique people - they were the first to switch to firearms in duels, instead of blades, ahead of time. Later, they were ahead of time once again, banned dueling, but left a number of dueling and noble rules in such a popular sport as boxing, making it popular all over the world and profited from it.
Firearms makes it easier... at a distance, less stabbiness, killing up close is nasty than at a distance.. better to be more dispassionate.... very British... better if you have your Gentleman’s Gentleman fight it for you .
@@davidbrennan660 With a firearm, you could also "delope" - (which I'm sure many people here know is deliberately shooting wide) for example if you quarreled with a good friend, or just realised that the reason for the duel was trivial, and by the time of the duel things had cooled down. I have read somewhere that the seconds of the duellists might agree that both parties would delope, that way neither party had actually backed down from the duel, and neither had to apologise. They would still get to face each other, look deadly serious, and make a lot of noise and smoke. Honourably. 😄
@@Therealcoachie Very much so. The French and italians who preferred the blade thought pistol duelling to be an 'impertinence'' , the sort of activity an adolescent may partake in, but not a man.
> Later, they were ahead of time once again, banned dueling, Death(s) from dueling was premeditated murder going back to King Athelstan, the first man declared King of the English (as opposed to K. of Wessex, as his grandfather Alfred was). It had to e proved in court, though, leading to "rules" siting duels in places with fuzzy jurisdiction, like islands in a river, or below the high water mark of a beach (which meant that the Admiralty Courts tried it, and they usually didn't bother :-) .
The flintlock may ignite the priming charge ... possibly....as fast as fulminated of mercury ... Howsowhomever ....the burst of smoke/flame does cause issues with holding and maintaining one's aim.... I would challenge your claim though....lock time is NOT the same...nope nope nope. Sounds like a good topic for a video on dueling pistols.... With film through the sight picture for each lock type....as well as timers to prove you claim, sir .... The gauntlet has been offered.
9 місяців тому
It is very interesting that there are rules to force people to stop cheating (hand tied in the back) or to force them to show they aren't cheating (removing clothes) in those duels. Duels are supposed to be gently and a matter of honour, but it seems that a lot of people just wanted to kill or hurt the other party and not just repair honour, which is interesting when considering this more deeply and socially. It looks even a bit silly when we think of it : killing or hurting someone on purpose is clearly a bad thing for one's honour, especially under the false pretence of repairing the said honour...
The Catholic Church outlawed duels way back in 1215 4th council of the Lateran, 1869 Pope Pius IX decreed Excommunication. This so-called honor code simply protected the Bullies among society as it supposed honor among people who purposely insulted others and could easily defeat all others, otherwise they wouldn't be insulting them. There was a Russian movie about duels and their duels were for the most part pure luck with almost no skill IE Russian roulette. Or only one gun was loaded, and both guns were a foot from the opponents' head, no chance of missing. It was a movie and I don't know how true it was. Further I'm pretty sure anyone who went to blows against the insulter rather than the _honorable tool_ lost all honor, an interesting detail? *ALL* rules in any competition are there due to previous _cheating_ as it wasn't in the rules it wasn't actually cheating. Patrick O'brian mentions in one of his books the Doctor, who was Irish is speaking with a Scotts how the English are rather _shy._ Where as both of them in college regularly were asked to _step out._
An entire book of illegal regulations, because when you make the rules illegal, only outlaws have rules! Honour is of course very important, but equally, the lengths people are going to here to make a swordfight 'safe' and 'fair' is... slightly odd. *Possibly* it's something to do with the various European nobility all having bred themselves into a kind of physicality that is pretty decent when it comes to agile fencing and accurate shooting, but possibly not quite so good at basic brawling. ('Having a fight out the back of the pub' - usually with multiple witnesses, and fairly usually with some sort of 'offense' being given, however contrived or imaginary, is pretty honourable in its own similar way, with the obvious exception that some people are physically *far* better built for a fist-fight than other people. And while agility and blinding speed are still probably the most important things at the end of the day, they're definitely not the whole story anymore.) So in keeping alive the tradition of being angry at someone, but also erudite in the use of skilled weapons, and willing and able to follow a series of agreed upon rules, they are keeping intact the entire idea of European nobility itself? And, in some minor way, also tacitly acknowledging that it had effectively been outlawed in the modern world. While at the same time, also acknowledging that half the nobility absolutely can't trust the other half to behave honourably and to honestly engage in a fair fight - potentially to the death - hence the truly European sized book of rules and regulations for the whole thing. Until you end up with near farcical things like The Last Duel, with a secret illegal location, and a secret illegal doctor disinfecting all the cuts after every engagement, for basically no other reason than because two guys wanted to have a 'real' swordfight with real blood, because they were both amazing swordsmen. iirc, the fight in question, at least as detailed in the article, the other guy actually scores first, after which the protagonist chalks up a long series of hits. Which makes the 'second blood' rule pretty interesting here. It's possibly not about scoring two hits in a row in the same sequence, and simply that 'first blood' overly favours someone with a neat, one-time trick the opponent isn't prepared for and is kind of outraged to lose to? Not dissimilar to the way that most sports matches are played over the span of an hour or more, with each team having to more or less fully engage with the entire arsenal of tricks and tactics the other team can deploy, instead of someone just winning after 18 seconds because they guessed exactly right on the very first play.* * 18 seconds, of course, would be a perfectly acceptable amount of time for a swordfight, and probably very impressive if it was all one sequence.
I think I remember reading somewhere, probably fantasy literature, that "second blood" or some similiar phrase was used in the sense of "until someone is incapacited". Can anyone tell me where I might have got that idea from?
Ah cool. I used to be a reenactor of 18th-19th century dueling in the southern united states. I would teach everyone all there is to know about the duel and then demonstrate it. I worked at the home of Andrew Jackson and I can tell you every thing about him. Also gave tours of his home. We had italian made flintlock pistols with caps in them. Full 1830s dress. Good times at The Hermitage.
I don't know about dueling to the death but there should be an stipulation under the law that allows one to defend their honor from egregious insult with violence. Let's say you are walking down the street with your lady and some guy starts saying lewd and offensive things to her. You should be able to kick the shit out of that guy and not worry about getting charged with assault. You should not be able to provoke people and hide behind the law. My favorite author Robert E. Howard, Creator of the Hyborean age and it's many characters including "Conan the barbarian", has a quote on this topic. He says "The barbarian typically has much better manners than the civilized man because the civilized man can be impolite without having his skull split as a general thing." .
Excellent video Matt, and what a fascinating topic! Speaking of dueling with strict rules, I’d love to see a video where you discuss Mensur. I’d bet that you have some valuable insights regarding this rather strange form of dueling. Keep it up Matt, looking forward to seeing whatever you make next! 🤺
strongly disagree on the claim that flintlock and percussion function the same when properly loaded. Percussion locks of pretty much any type have about zero lock-time delay(at least noticeable delay); it's basically equivalent to a modern firearm with self contained cartridges. Flintlocks on the other hand, have a noticeably longer lock time as regardless of the powder type the priming powder needs to flash before the propellant charge is ignited. This makes practical accuracy with flintlocks much harder than more modern firearms like those using percussion hammers. Using percussion pistols would significantly lower the threshold for a novice shooter in a duel.
When Queen Kristina of Sweden abdicated in the 17th Century, she retained the rank and title of queen, she just wasn't Queen of Sweden anymore. She set up a sort of mini court in Rome, to which she had taken refuse as she had converted to Catholicism, this being the reason she was forced to abdicate. Along other noble rights that she retained was that of meting out justice to her retainers. One of these, Monaldesco, was tried for a crime, I think it was treason, and I think her motive was that he had been her lover and had been unfaithful. If I don't remember incorrectly, the trial took place in an orangerie, I think that of the Vatican. She was to my recollection both judge and jury, but he was nevertheless allowed to plead his case. There were not many people present, I think four including the queen and defendent. At the end of the proceedings (I think half an hour or thereabouts) he was found guilty and sentenced to death. I think as they had no really suitable weapons or tools available, it was decided that he should be executed by rapier, and needless to say, this was a gentleman's weapon that was to hand as gentlemen would in this period often wear a sword with their civilian dress. Here comes the most interesting part: Monaldesco appears to have feared what the outcome of the proceedings might be and was wearing a mail shirt under his jack or doublet or whatever gentlemen wore in those days. When those who tried to execute him (at least two) noticed this, and that their thrusts weren't having the desired effect, they resorted to getting him down on the ground and stabbing him with their rapiers at the neck and thus from the neck opening into his abdomen (I think from the bottom also). A testament to what a genial and effective form of protection mail is, right from Antiquity to the present day (I'm thinking here chiefly of the mail veil worn by tank drivers suspended from their helmets during the First World War, as suggested by George V's physician and there being an excellent example of this at the Imperial War Museum in London).
The last duel in Scotland was allegedly in Glasgow University Union in 1899. The story says it was until the first cut, which was a strike to the face.
Bringing it back would lead to an immediate step up in social behaviour. Today every coward know he is backed by law . Thats why he can afford to be a mouthpiece in social Media nd in Reallife. Noone would cheat if he knew it could cost his life.
You mentioned that the option of Crispin gloves was determined by the insult as described in a previous chapter. Are the qualifying insults more severe and thus meriting the incentivizing of deeper targets by the offended party?
Could the rule which permits either duelist to refuse the saber have to do with the inherent gruesomeness of slashing and cleaving wounds? Doesn’t seem honorable to force retired Grandpa to risk having his skull cleaved open in public if that prospect scares him. Much less disgusting and humiliating to see him run through.
My guess as to why a saber could be declined especially by a former officer is simply that it wouldn't be a fair fight. If you're doing a duel for honor then it doesn't really show much honor if you choose a weapon you have more experience with due to military service. So lets say a formerly enlisted man challenges someone to a duel who never served. It could be a matter of almost saying "I would win no doubt so no" or "dude you would win that's not a fair fight so no." Just my guess though.
I think shirtless was also to do with being able to readily see when blood was drawn. A baggy shirt may conceal a blow and allow some one time to land a blow before it’s noticed
Matt, you could talk to Brian and see if you could be the narrator for the audio book. With appropriate preface to give proper context for people who are not your fans.
I would love for you to do a deep dive into the why of the different rules. But if you ever call me a son of a duck, I will be laughing to hard to do anything about it.
I am shocked a sponsor thats actually related to historical events, you know like this bloody channel. No one came here because they were interested in trinkets or cereal or shoe polish or whatever.
There is nothing stopping you from challenging someone to a fight, if that's what you want to do. Step into the octagon for an MMA legal option. Lots of people are still stabbing each other illegally in the world.
It's not exactly the same, but the majority of the murders that happened this year in the city where I live resulted from some immediate personal dispute (officially called "individual disrespect"). So folks absolutely still shoot & otherwise hurt or kill others based on matters of honor. It's not great. The world doesn't need more of it.
Go to historicmail.com/SCHOLA and check out with code SCHOLA. Get 10% off and surprise a loved one or a friend with this timeless gift.
Good at writing and making rules!
If you get offended (odor included)by and the frenchie shows up on the church grounds at 5 in the morrow ,expect a blade dipped in poison and its witnesses carrying pistols...
thats a great sponsor!
7:00 wait a minute
don't forget that women who felt their honor had been insulted would find a champion to fight
i recall that Kubrick's "Barry Lyndon" has a full walk-away duel with the rules stated beforehand
Believe it or not, I learned a bit of this back in the 1980's when I played a Play-by-Mail role-playing game called "En Garde!" Sure, it's a game and not historically reliable but ...
"Sir - you have been dallying with my wife! I require answer!"
"Sir - I'm not sure if I should answer your challenge for you declaring an untruth about me, or the suggestion I've such low taste!"
There's a video game made recently with the same name, I wonder if your role playing game inspired the video game.
@@johnandrewserranogarcia7223I doubt it, though it’s within the same vein. The video game is more a tactical hack and slash game with a very Princess Bride feel to it, where your goal is to fight hordes of enemies using the environment to your advantage. Not much roleplaying or political intrigue but I give it a hearty recommendation.
Dallying?who dare you sir I was merely dillying your wife
Play-by-mail? Interesting.
Back before t'internet, we relied on snailmail for distance game play. You bought in to a game, getting the rules and creating a character. You then posted to the referee a month's worth of 'orders', usually 4 week chunks, such as 'recuperating', 'try joining X club', 'on campaign in Army' etc. You had standing orders, such as 'If you see Character Z then challenge him to a duel!'. The referee would sort out the events for that month, resolve game play, etc. then post back the old order sheet, with results, and a fresh ordersheet for the coming month. Sounds over-complicated but it worked ... with what we had. 🙂
More on pistol duels, yes please!
There is a good german book
7:00 wait a minute
don't forget that women who felt their honor had been insulted would find a champion to fight
My guess is that the saber maintained the quality of being susceptible to veto because of its inherent ability to cause grievous injury or death FAR more readily than epee, and because pistol duels were at least somewhat likely to end with one or both parties missing entirely. I’m a sword duel, the end of the matter is determined usually by either first blood or a yield from one of the duelists (or death, if that is the chosen resolution method, but that would make it irrelevant which weapon was used). With a saber, “first blood” could very easily mean permanent disfigurement/disablement, life-threatening injury, or indeed, death itself. The epee de combat was a far less “capable” weapon in that respect, I suspect for that very reason. And pistols are almost kindof the duel lists version of a coin flip, with some skill thrown in. I’m not an expert on dueling, or at least not as well versed in its nuances than I am knowledgeable about the weapons themselves; these are just educated guesses honestly, but they seem fairly plausible to me.
I genuinely thought you were doing a bit with that ad read.
21:16 In a Polish comedy novel, during a duel, the "second" guy loads guns in such a way that he throws bullets into his sleeve, and there is only powder in the barrel. In his plan, this was to cause both gentlemen's shots to fail and the duel to end bloodlessly. But... He forgot that they were supposed to shoot "until someone hits." XD
Can I have the name of the comedy? Im intrigued :)
@@kleinerprinz99 This is the book "Trans Atlantic" by Witold Gombrowicz. Funny, but requires knowledge of some historical context to understand all the meanings.
23:58 Anecdotal evidence seems to support this. During a visit to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, a foreigner noticed that many men had scars on their heads, probably from saber cuts, which, however, were not fatal. In fact, the most famous saber duel from a film about those times also ends this way ;)
I think the thing about a retired officer being allowed to refuse a sabre duel might be linked to the weapons a retired officer might have been familiar with in 1836 ; the regulations at the beginning of the 1800 mean he'd probably only have used a smallsword, and if challenged by a non-retired officer who had been using his time's regulation weapon, a sabre, he might be at a severe disadvantage.
Matt, thanks for constantly bringing forth interesting, high quality content.
My pleasure!
Believe it or not, in France, duelling survived into the age of film. There are a number of real-life non-fatal sword duels conducted under versions of this code on UA-cam. 'Second blood' seems pretty common, actually (at least based on the fact they often stop and then restart). I suppose it's essentially 'best of three'.
There were student fraternities in Germany that kept dueling at least to the turn of the century - I did not follow it to the present day, so it may be outlawed by now. It was heavily regulated, fought in armour that exposed only legal targets. Seconds could use their canes ("Ziegenhainer") to deflect illegal strikes. Injuries were stitched up on the spot and for a long time fencers proudly displayed their scars.
Those duels used cutting instead of thrusting to prevent lethal injuries.
I recall reading an article "Bowie Knife Culture" written in the 1930's. Much of the article discussed dueling with Bowie knives in Texas. Brutal.
Jim Bowie had some of the most famous duels in American history (most before he invented his knife) I recall one on a sandbar that he wasn't even in where the seconds started arguing and he ended up getting stabbed through the chest with a sword cane and still won.... I believe by knitting 2 or 3 people to death.
@@daveweiss5647 One example of extreme Texas behavior was digging a grave and then dueling in the grave. That's close quarters.
@@ftdefiance1damn! Hadn't heard of that one! Would definitely save time on cleanup after I guess. Haha
@@daveweiss5647 the author said that and similar duels ended up with both men dead
There are two schools of thought on who wins a knife duel. One is that no one wins. But I find that excessively pessimistic.
The second school says that the winner is the last one to bleed out.
Possibly your one of your most important video's to date because without Chateauvillards code the many of the rules of Olympic fencing wouldn't make a lick of sense. I have always thought it bizzare how in HEMA culture duelling codes were ignored for so long.
Couple of clarifications though: Chateuvillard code is was based and devised on existing dueling norms prevalent at the time. While in 18th century smallsword you could use your off hand and often encouraged to use it in *rencontres* for the most part in formal duels you were not allowed to use your offhand without the opponents consent. This difference between 'recontres' and 'duels' needs more exploration because they are NOT the same thing, causing much confusion particularly outside France, the Brits being particularly guilty.
Chatevillards text was the absolute textbook for about 20-30 years, but mores over dueling changed, particularly in Italy where they were never quite happy with some of the french regulations and devised their own fitting with their extant own traditions.
You skipped over the Witnesses section, which is understandable. But in many ways its the *most important* part of the book which sets the tone for what a European duel is, as opposed to other cultures.
The delay when shooting a flint lock is directly related to any fouling from the black powder. Your first shots at the range will have no delay. But as you fire more shots, especially without any kind of cleaning, you will start to notice a bit of a delay. In my experience it's like half a beat. You barely have time to count to one before it goes off.
I should point out that the black powder we have today is better quality than they had in the old days. And black powder is sensitive to moisture. Both factors would affect the burn rate of the charge. So the delay may have been more of an issue back in the old days.
You may enjoy Wilson's CODE OF HONOR by John Lyde Wilson, 1838. It is an Americanized version of the Irish CODE DUELLO.
My mother is e very nice duck. What's the problem?
Keep in mind that "non curved sabers" might include cut and thrust heavy cavalry swords which might chop much deeper than curved blades using drawcuts
You mean a cutlass then?
@@phantomapprentice6749 as far as I'm aware a cutlass wass neithet used for formal duels nor as cavalry weapon.
I thought more of a cavalry Palasch of the Broadsword/Backsword Type with a Blade of 34" to 40".
There were no duels in Russia in either the 16th or 17th centuries, with the exception of duels between foreigners (the first documented duel was between a Scot and an Englishman). But since the middle of the 18th century, when the Russian nobility was strongly Westernized, duels have become very popular! In general, the rules of Russian duels are almost identical to the French ones, but at the same time, pistiol shooting distances were much smaller than in France.There was also an exclusively Russian method of dueling shooting, at point-blank range through a handkerchief, in which one pistol was randomly loaded, and the second was not. This method of dueling was described by Dostoevsky. I have read the dueling code of Vasily Durasov (year 1912!), but I do not know if it has been translated into other languages.Thus, although the tradition of dueling came to Russia very late, it remained in use for a very long time. The last duels were during the Civil War era in the 1920s!
USA, state of Kentucky: our governor's oath used to include that He had never fought a duel. There is an area in KY where the border dips South towards Nashville Tennessee* called "Dueling Ground" where people would duel as it was legal in KY much later than it was in TN. *Allegedy the jog in the border was to include a large moonshining operation in KY; the border further west also has several irregularities, possibly directly related!
Kentucky was very profound as a Southern state for dueling.
You should discuss things like secret rifling. For people fighting over their honor, they certainly tried to cheat a lot.
That reminds me, I have read of the "seconds" of the duellist probing the barrel of the pistol to check for exactly that.
Yeah, I imagine that people who had consistently proven to be honest could just laugh off an insult. But if you are a bit shady, you don't want people to call you out on it...
Forgotten: In german system a honourable cut had 2,5 cm/1", a honourable thrust showed the triange of blade.
I heard that under German law you are still kind of allowed to defend your honour. So if someone comes up to you in the street and calls you the son of a duck, and you punch them, it's regarded as self defense, because the initial verbal abuse is considered an act of aggression and a kind of assault. Am I right in thinking that?
@@nathanaelsmith3553 : In theory, german , Notwehrrecht' ( law about defence in emergency) allows you , to defend yourself with necessary (not more !) violence, when your honour, freedom, the things you own, your body or life is in danger. But in reality I have never heared, that someone gets no problem, when defending his honour. Was perhaps different in 1950s/ 1960s. And in cases of robberies or other dangerous attacks, you have at least for last 25 Years problems, when you successfully defend yourself, and the criminal is hurt. It seems that current Generation of judges (and politicans) try to protect criminals better than lawrespecting citizens. And when you rape a fifteen Years old girl, you come not to prison, If you belong to a special ethnic group, happened two or three times this year. I know, this has no context to edged weapons, but in my country a to me for my lifetime unknown anger about crime and low sentences (?) grows.
@@brittakriep2938 thats why i started carrying a knive. I dont care anymore, I fight violence with more violence. My time in the Bund and various fighting Sports but I still feel unsafe and worried for my Family nowadays.
@@nathanaelsmith3553 Just to cut out the furious rant from the previous comment: No. If someone insults you, you are technically allowed to defend yourself against receiving that aggression. This does not include punching the other person afterwards, since that will not make the insult go away. If someone writes an insult on a piece of paper, you are allowed to destroy that paper, I guess. Anything else would require a lawsuit. I’m sure these rules are very similar in the numerous countries that took German civil law as the foundation of their own legal systems.
8:48 So, if you ever plan on tricking Matt into offending you, keep in mind, pistols over sabres.
Second blood, AKA First Blood Part II.
A second reason for being bare-chested, reduces the chance of infection from small fibers from coat or shirt being driven into the wound (this was a time before antibiotics)
I've noticed the terrerium in the back for some time now and I am curious as to what is in it?
now back on subject, great video
A scorpion, and assorted prey.
Duels, though officially illegal, continued in Poland to 1939. Both pistols and sabres were used, not epees. Duels could be limited eg to first blood or incapacity. My father, a student at the time, was involved in a sabre duel in 1930 in Vilnius, then part of Poland. Both duellists were wounded, my father first, by a shallow chest cut, his opponent by a counter thrust lunge near the leading shoulder, which went thru, quote " like a knife thru butter". My paternal grandfather was in a pistol duel in the 1890s and was wounded in the shoulder.
Super interesting. You made me want to read the book. No matter how strange the whole concept of duelling may seem to modern man. 👍🌞👍.
🎩Hi, great topic as usual. I have a facsimile of “The British code of duel” dated 1824.
SBN 85547 157 8. Think it was a private press. And even has examples of actual duels. One between the officers of the Tenth Hussars and a Mr William Battier.
While a pace is often considered: now: to be about a yard, it originally was left foot to left foot, or about 5 feet long. I have no idea which it would have been in this timeframe.
There is always a delay with flintlock, even when using propper FFFF priming powder. Follow through is important.
In the late 19th century two aristocratic women in Lichtenstein supposedly fought a sword duel, and they did so topless--not to ensure no cheating, but because wounds were worse if cloth got in there. This caught the imagination of men at the time, and became a standard subject for 'dirty postcards'. However, this might be an urban myth, even though the two duelists and the time and place were specified.
Always refuse sabre against Matt Easton.
What about the handkerchief as a duelling weapon (cf the very historically acurate sketch from Fry and Laurie) ?
I wonder if hacking each other up with a sabre was regarded as something for military persons below a certain class, and something that civilians or gentlemen either did not do or would have no experience-of, also being somewhat more brutal....
For officers and gentilmen only. lower class and enlisted it was just brawling with weapons and assault.
I wondered if it was something to do with the unfairness between a military and civilian gentleman, considering that the military man should on average have had a vast amount more training with the weapon.
Not according to the guy who wrote the Italian duelling code- Codice Cavalesco - Jacobo Gelli. He was quite adamant it's because the french believed it was necessary that duel retained some element of lethality (irrespective of weather you believe the cut is deadlier than the thrust) There's a whole preamble in one of his books on why the Italians preferred the sabre because it was more suitable for first blood duels, and that the Epee thrust was unnecessarily dangerous for the vast majority of minor offences. That being said he wrote this some 60 years later so he hardly an unbiased observer. Also when Chateuvillard's code came out The Joinville le Pont academy for the french army did not exist, and then the sabre was reserved for those in the cavalry. Infantry officers had to focus on foil and by extension epee technique.
@@scholagladiatoria That makes perfect sense. The pistol and the smallsword would be more "fair" because any person (traning or not) would be in grave danger in a fight using these weapons.
I just assumed the trained military servicemen would have too much of an advantage with a saber. After all, if someone is in a duel trying to cut someone and not get cut he or she wouldn't avoid anything that helps them just for it being to brutal.
Thanks for an interesting program Matt. Yes, I would very much like to see an entire episode devoted to pistol dueling in the future, but please get a “proper “ pair of pistols like Wogdons or Mantons.
Very interesting.
Sir. you are a true scholar and a true son of a duck.
Wait? "Powder. Ball. Wadding."? I thought it was powder. wadding. ball.
According to a newsreel, last duel in France was in 1968/1969. In Switzerland theoreticaly duelling ended in 1987. And ritualized duels still happen in Accademic Fencing, mostly practiciced in Germany/Austria/ Switzerland, lesser in Belgium/Poland/ Lithuania and Lativia.
I seem to remember one member of Polish parliament was trying to challenge another to a duel. Early 2000s I think. He got laughed out the chamber.
The "Academic fencing" is I believe called "Mansard" and it is a ceremonial combat to create brotherhood and the point is to take the injury to the face or head amd show no fear... it's why you see so many German officers with scars on their face in WWI and WWII it still exists in some fraternity in Austria and Germany.
Also, yes, there is footage of that French Duel I believe.
There were several cases of bayonet duels among Russian emigrant officers in Turkey! Cartridges became scarce, there were no rapiers, and infantry officers were poorly equipped with sabers.
@@ns987 This is interesting.
I wonder if "second blood" means a 'best of three' situation? If you win both the first and the second exchanges by scoring hits on your opponent, there is no need for a third round as there is no possibility of catching up. It is only necessary to do a third round if you are even after two, so it makes sense to refer to the format as 'first to second blood' rather than 'best of three bloods'.
When I was young, I met an old guy who took part in sabre duels in the early nineteenhundreds still. The sabres had been curved, not pointed and had relatively light blades at that time, as far as I remember what he told. So almost no fatalities. He told about his scars and I asked to prove: One scar across his whole chest. From his descriptions, no doubht he was true.
We need dueling back online arguments would reach a whole new level
I believe it would bring back respect in interactions in general. That was kind of their purpose.
It's still done, albeit less frequently and more quietly.
I wonder if the saber refusal thing is because it was considered more likely to cause serious maiming, disfiguring or death in a contest that was often ritualized as to first blood. However the inclusion of pistols makes that seem questionable. Although, I remember Mark Twain discussing French dueling with what I take to be a large helping of humorous exaggeration, but his general point was that the pistols in fashion for that purpose were very small and weak.
The opposite. It's because the épée was seen as more lethal. Hence the italian duelling code adopting the sabre as the default weapon in reaction to the French code, because epee duels were too deadly for minor offences.
The issue with saber is that "maining/disfiguring" part. A well-aimed attack with a thrusting weapon or a bullet will be lethal very quickly. A hit that isn't lethal usually leaves injuries which heal up relatively cleanly by the standards of the era. Sabers have much higher probability of leaving a survivor with a missing limb or other severe scarring or persistent impairment. Not always the case, of course, but it's accurate as far as such generalisations go.
Wasent the oldest dueling code book from an irish lad? I may be wrong
You son of a duck!!😂😂 Right you sir have offended me, I demand satisfaction!! Pistols at dawn!! Let's get it on!!😅😅😅🤠👍
Good sir.... You have offended me because I cannot read physical books anymore.... As the offended party we shall use rubber chickens at 3:33 p.m. at our nearest convenience for the both of us until first flatulence......
Seriously though I love these videos about dueling
Thank you for continuing to be Matt Easton!
Son of a duck.
An insult for a more civilised age.
What about the United States during the same time period?
Most gunfights happen at under 15 yards and most people miss over and over at that range when someone is shooting back at them. This is why police shoot so many rounds in those encounters. Pistols are hard to hit anything with under stress. Many active shooters only manage to kill a few people despite having plenty of ammo and being in a target rich environment because they are using a pistol and are not very good with it. If they are proficient with a handgun then they kill more. AR-15's on the other hand, are easy for an inexperienced shooter to kill many people with. They are extremely easy to shoot and typically have a magazine with about twice as many rounds as a pistol.
I remember such mail effort for xmas and winter. Was a charity event in Germany. You write personal letters to random mostly elderly people. Soon enough they had overabundance of participents than recipients.
Very informative.The john wick 4 pistol duel scene, if you make a video about pistol duels could you talk a litle about that ?
Informative, as always. Perhaps, in future, you could evaluate a post-apocalypse system that includes non-standard "weapons" like bats and hockey sticks.
Extremely good video, as usual, Matt!! It would be interesting to delve into the origins of duelling in the ritualistic combat of Germanic tribesmen since Antiquity.
What critter is in that terrarium behind you?
Speaking of the duels to second blood, we sometime do round robin sparring where each fighter has two hp and a strike to the head or thrust to torso costs 2 hp but anything else costs one. You continuously fight till you loose and it makes for a quick and dynamic play on bearpit/round robin fighting.
William Hope thought that the SHEARING SWORD was the best sword for duels (and self defence). It seems like good advice, if you only need to draw first blood. The shearing sword is a very fast cutter. Hope thought that the BACKSWORD was the best choice for a Sword of War.
Following from this could you do a video on the German practice of the Mensur?
Perhaps a follow up on dueling in the late 16C and early 17C, which seem a little less formal, really interesting subject, will look to get a copy.
Good thing you didn't go off and challenge someone to a saber duel without reading far enough into this book.
The British are a unique people - they were the first to switch to firearms in duels, instead of blades, ahead of time. Later, they were ahead of time once again, banned dueling, but left a number of dueling and noble rules in such a popular sport as boxing, making it popular all over the world and profited from it.
Firearms makes it easier... at a distance, less stabbiness, killing up close is nasty than at a distance.. better to be more dispassionate.... very British... better if you have your Gentleman’s Gentleman fight it for you .
You mean uniquely cowardly. You definitely should read the accords of british officers about the superiority of saber duels
@@davidbrennan660 With a firearm, you could also "delope" - (which I'm sure many people here know is deliberately shooting wide) for example if you quarreled with a good friend, or just realised that the reason for the duel was trivial, and by the time of the duel things had cooled down. I have read somewhere that the seconds of the duellists might agree that both parties would delope, that way neither party had actually backed down from the duel, and neither had to apologise. They would still get to face each other, look deadly serious, and make a lot of noise and smoke. Honourably. 😄
@@Therealcoachie Very much so. The French and italians who preferred the blade thought pistol duelling to be an 'impertinence'' , the sort of activity an adolescent may partake in, but not a man.
> Later, they were ahead of time once again, banned dueling,
Death(s) from dueling was premeditated murder going back to King Athelstan, the first man declared King of the English (as opposed to K. of Wessex, as his grandfather Alfred was). It had to e proved in court, though, leading to "rules" siting duels in places with fuzzy jurisdiction, like islands in a river, or below the high water mark of a beach (which meant that the Admiralty Courts tried it, and they usually didn't bother :-) .
Offender “So what weapon will you choose?”
Offended “sabre……”
Offender “few, I’m okay at sa..”
Offended “and rapier”
Offended “and pistol”
Offended “and…”
Offender “no more Sabre.”
The flintlock may ignite the priming charge ... possibly....as fast as fulminated of mercury ...
Howsowhomever ....the burst of smoke/flame does cause issues with holding and maintaining one's aim....
I would challenge your claim though....lock time is NOT the same...nope nope nope.
Sounds like a good topic for a video on dueling pistols....
With film through the sight picture for each lock type....as well as timers to prove you claim, sir ....
The gauntlet has been offered.
It is very interesting that there are rules to force people to stop cheating (hand tied in the back) or to force them to show they aren't cheating (removing clothes) in those duels.
Duels are supposed to be gently and a matter of honour, but it seems that a lot of people just wanted to kill or hurt the other party and not just repair honour, which is interesting when considering this more deeply and socially.
It looks even a bit silly when we think of it : killing or hurting someone on purpose is clearly a bad thing for one's honour, especially under the false pretence of repairing the said honour...
The Catholic Church outlawed duels way back in 1215 4th council of the Lateran, 1869 Pope Pius IX decreed Excommunication.
This so-called honor code simply protected the Bullies among society as it supposed honor among people who purposely insulted others and could easily defeat all others, otherwise they wouldn't be insulting them.
There was a Russian movie about duels and their duels were for the most part pure luck with almost no skill IE Russian roulette. Or only one gun was loaded, and both guns were a foot from the opponents' head, no chance of missing. It was a movie and I don't know how true it was.
Further I'm pretty sure anyone who went to blows against the insulter rather than the _honorable tool_ lost all honor, an interesting detail?
*ALL* rules in any competition are there due to previous _cheating_ as it wasn't in the rules it wasn't actually cheating.
Patrick O'brian mentions in one of his books the Doctor, who was Irish is speaking with a Scotts how the English are rather _shy._ Where as both of them in college regularly were asked to _step out._
An entire book of illegal regulations, because when you make the rules illegal, only outlaws have rules!
Honour is of course very important, but equally, the lengths people are going to here to make a swordfight 'safe' and 'fair' is... slightly odd. *Possibly* it's something to do with the various European nobility all having bred themselves into a kind of physicality that is pretty decent when it comes to agile fencing and accurate shooting, but possibly not quite so good at basic brawling.
('Having a fight out the back of the pub' - usually with multiple witnesses, and fairly usually with some sort of 'offense' being given, however contrived or imaginary, is pretty honourable in its own similar way, with the obvious exception that some people are physically *far* better built for a fist-fight than other people. And while agility and blinding speed are still probably the most important things at the end of the day, they're definitely not the whole story anymore.)
So in keeping alive the tradition of being angry at someone, but also erudite in the use of skilled weapons, and willing and able to follow a series of agreed upon rules, they are keeping intact the entire idea of European nobility itself? And, in some minor way, also tacitly acknowledging that it had effectively been outlawed in the modern world. While at the same time, also acknowledging that half the nobility absolutely can't trust the other half to behave honourably and to honestly engage in a fair fight - potentially to the death - hence the truly European sized book of rules and regulations for the whole thing.
Until you end up with near farcical things like The Last Duel, with a secret illegal location, and a secret illegal doctor disinfecting all the cuts after every engagement, for basically no other reason than because two guys wanted to have a 'real' swordfight with real blood, because they were both amazing swordsmen. iirc, the fight in question, at least as detailed in the article, the other guy actually scores first, after which the protagonist chalks up a long series of hits. Which makes the 'second blood' rule pretty interesting here. It's possibly not about scoring two hits in a row in the same sequence, and simply that 'first blood' overly favours someone with a neat, one-time trick the opponent isn't prepared for and is kind of outraged to lose to? Not dissimilar to the way that most sports matches are played over the span of an hour or more, with each team having to more or less fully engage with the entire arsenal of tricks and tactics the other team can deploy, instead of someone just winning after 18 seconds because they guessed exactly right on the very first play.*
* 18 seconds, of course, would be a perfectly acceptable amount of time for a swordfight, and probably very impressive if it was all one sequence.
I think I remember reading somewhere, probably fantasy literature, that "second blood" or some similiar phrase was used in the sense of "until someone is incapacited". Can anyone tell me where I might have got that idea from?
Ah cool. I used to be a reenactor of 18th-19th century dueling in the southern united states. I would teach everyone all there is to know about the duel and then demonstrate it. I worked at the home of Andrew Jackson and I can tell you every thing about him. Also gave tours of his home. We had italian made flintlock pistols with caps in them. Full 1830s dress. Good times at The Hermitage.
I don't know about dueling to the death but there should be an stipulation under the law that allows one to defend their honor from egregious insult with violence. Let's say you are walking down the street with your lady and some guy starts saying lewd and offensive things to her. You should be able to kick the shit out of that guy and not worry about getting charged with assault. You should not be able to provoke people and hide behind the law. My favorite author Robert E. Howard, Creator of the Hyborean age and it's many characters including "Conan the barbarian", has a quote on this topic. He says "The barbarian typically has much better manners than the civilized man because the civilized man can be impolite without having his skull split as a general thing." .
Excellent video Matt, and what a fascinating topic! Speaking of dueling with strict rules, I’d love to see a video where you discuss Mensur. I’d bet that you have some valuable insights regarding this rather strange form of dueling. Keep it up Matt, looking forward to seeing whatever you make next! 🤺
Very informative. Now I'll be careful not challenging offenders to a duel knowing that they have the right to refuse the sabre as a weapon of choice.
strongly disagree on the claim that flintlock and percussion function the same when properly loaded. Percussion locks of pretty much any type have about zero lock-time delay(at least noticeable delay); it's basically equivalent to a modern firearm with self contained cartridges. Flintlocks on the other hand, have a noticeably longer lock time as regardless of the powder type the priming powder needs to flash before the propellant charge is ignited. This makes practical accuracy with flintlocks much harder than more modern firearms like those using percussion hammers. Using percussion pistols would significantly lower the threshold for a novice shooter in a duel.
When Queen Kristina of Sweden abdicated in the 17th Century, she retained the rank and title of queen, she just wasn't Queen of Sweden anymore. She set up a sort of mini court in Rome, to which she had taken refuse as she had converted to Catholicism, this being the reason she was forced to abdicate. Along other noble rights that she retained was that of meting out justice to her retainers. One of these, Monaldesco, was tried for a crime, I think it was treason, and I think her motive was that he had been her lover and had been unfaithful. If I don't remember incorrectly, the trial took place in an orangerie, I think that of the Vatican. She was to my recollection both judge and jury, but he was nevertheless allowed to plead his case. There were not many people present, I think four including the queen and defendent. At the end of the proceedings (I think half an hour or thereabouts) he was found guilty and sentenced to death. I think as they had no really suitable weapons or tools available, it was decided that he should be executed by rapier, and needless to say, this was a gentleman's weapon that was to hand as gentlemen would in this period often wear a sword with their civilian dress. Here comes the most interesting part: Monaldesco appears to have feared what the outcome of the proceedings might be and was wearing a mail shirt under his jack or doublet or whatever gentlemen wore in those days. When those who tried to execute him (at least two) noticed this, and that their thrusts weren't having the desired effect, they resorted to getting him down on the ground and stabbing him with their rapiers at the neck and thus from the neck opening into his abdomen (I think from the bottom also). A testament to what a genial and effective form of protection mail is, right from Antiquity to the present day (I'm thinking here chiefly of the mail veil worn by tank drivers suspended from their helmets during the First World War, as suggested by George V's physician and there being an excellent example of this at the Imperial War Museum in London).
The last duel in Scotland was allegedly in Glasgow University Union in 1899. The story says it was until the first cut, which was a strike to the face.
Interesting that tampered ball rounds came up, like in the duel at the beginning of the Movie Barry Lyndon.
Real men duel with knives, one wrist tied to the other mans wrist... to the death.
99% of the time, both die
Bringing it back would lead to an immediate step up in social behaviour. Today every coward know he is backed by law . Thats why he can afford to be a mouthpiece in social Media nd in Reallife. Noone would cheat if he knew it could cost his life.
That book looks splendid. I simply must have it. Thanks for letting us know!
Isn't the requirement for smooth bore and distance because they want the duel to result from "divine justice"( chance)?
I wish you would do an in-depth comprehensive series of every countries swords 🗡️
You mentioned that the option of Crispin gloves was determined by the insult as described in a previous chapter. Are the qualifying insults more severe and thus meriting the incentivizing of deeper targets by the offended party?
Could the rule which permits either duelist to refuse the saber have to do with the inherent gruesomeness of slashing and cleaving wounds? Doesn’t seem honorable to force retired Grandpa to risk having his skull cleaved open in public if that prospect scares him. Much less disgusting and humiliating to see him run through.
I sent a copy of the rules for dueling to both Chris Rock and Will Smith. I think their seconds are working on the details.
My guess as to why a saber could be declined especially by a former officer is simply that it wouldn't be a fair fight. If you're doing a duel for honor then it doesn't really show much honor if you choose a weapon you have more experience with due to military service. So lets say a formerly enlisted man challenges someone to a duel who never served. It could be a matter of almost saying "I would win no doubt so no" or "dude you would win that's not a fair fight so no." Just my guess though.
I think shirtless was also to do with being able to readily see when blood was drawn. A baggy shirt may conceal a blow and allow some one time to land a blow before it’s noticed
What model sabre is that? I have a similar one but thought it was French.
Matt, you could talk to Brian and see if you could be the narrator for the audio book. With appropriate preface to give proper context for people who are not your fans.
I would love for you to do a deep dive into the why of the different rules. But if you ever call me a son of a duck, I will be laughing to hard to do anything about it.
I am shocked a sponsor thats actually related to historical events, you know like this bloody channel. No one came here because they were interested in trinkets or cereal or shoe polish or whatever.
We should bring back duelling in the western world!!
There is nothing stopping you from challenging someone to a fight, if that's what you want to do. Step into the octagon for an MMA legal option. Lots of people are still stabbing each other illegally in the world.
It's not exactly the same, but the majority of the murders that happened this year in the city where I live resulted from some immediate personal dispute (officially called "individual disrespect"). So folks absolutely still shoot & otherwise hurt or kill others based on matters of honor. It's not great. The world doesn't need more of it.
is now a good time to point out anyone who has not seen Ridley Scott's The Duelists needs to see Ridley Scott's The Duelists?
I would like to see you do a video on Viking duels, as they were very interesting. Like “going out to the island”.
29:25 -- combatants agreeing not to use the points of their sabers. That must have taken a fair bit of self control in the heat of combat.
How different do you think the dueling codes were in the 17th century?
So the other party is called a 'witness?' Not a 'second?'
I watched The Duelist last night so i had to click on this video when i seen it come up.
Was hand to hand combat ever an option for duels?
Your father was a hamster and your mother smelled of elderberrys!
I just watched The Duellists, so this was fun to watch
Do you teach Pistol Dueling in your club?
Anyone know what he’s got in the Ecoterra?
What if both of the principals call each other "son of a duck"? Which one is the offender?
The duck for spawning them both.