depending on the regional customs, oftentimes the person challenged set many of the terms.

Yes: generally the challenged party could choose location and weapons as well as mechanism, provided that they were not obviously biased. This permitted the weaker party, when challenged, the opportunity to eliminate some of their opponent’s disadvantages (if they were smart enough to think about it and figure out how.)

For those fellow nautical fiction buffs, I need point no further than the first book of the hornblower series to show an excellent example.

In simple form this makes it difficult for the weak folks, who are then unable to challenge anyone (since they then lose their advantage.) in theory this was often handled by social dislike for people who duelled and slew those who wee obviously in an unfair fight.

Heh, that made me laugh out loud. Amp, stuff like this is why I love your site so.

—JRC

In Denmark, their justice was held to be so perfectly calibrated that no one needed to hire a proxy and even little old ladies had to defend themselves in person, though efforts were made to level the playing field. If she was defending her case against a man, the man had to stand waist-deep in a pit while she circled around him whacking him with a stone in a leather sling and he flailed back at her with a club. If he missed her three times, she was innocent, with her honor restored.

As far as our types always losing duels to the jocks,

(a) that’s one of the differences between pistols and swords. Swords offer much more refinement and control (experts could settle disputes with a single scratch to the arm) but also required much more practice, which thus favored the wealthy.

(b) that’s partly the role of the seconds, both to try to defuse the fight and to ensure fairness (with handicapping as needed (as in golf, not the Godfather)). And the book is full of many cases where two parties send letters back and forth for months — they never actually duel, but the threat of a duel is enough to keep them speaking and negotiating, just as a lawsuit holds similar threat today.

(c) depending on the regional customs, oftentimes the person challenged set many of the terms. Even if Bill O’Reilly could challenge Al Franken, he couldn’t dictate the weapons or time and place. It would’ve be up to Al for how to respond, whether he decided to apologize, shoot it out as O’Reilly wanted, or chose some other terms (drinking contest? battle of wits?)

I finished the book on Friday — the last third drags a little bit, but it picks up near the end with Pushkin’s life story.
And it did confirm something else I had suspected: the Geneva Convention comes out of some of the duelling codes — I thought that gentlemanly assurance of fairness might — and the fact that America seems unwilling to abide by them only proves that fair duelling will never make a comeback.

(And thanks to you as well for the flattery, JRC!)

Echidne

the other party backed down, as I recall the story…

Please come see! We’re having soooo much fun and we’d love it if your pets would join too!

Regards

Sam ~ Woof Woof!