How Dueling Worked in Early-Modern Europe
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.ย. 2024
- Duels were not simply the swift swordplay we all know from swashbuckler novels such as Alexandre Dumas’ Three Musketeers. The image of duels, clearly, is highly romanticized. In reality, the practice of dueling varied heavily depending on time and location. Although duels had certain things in common over time, there were no two alike. People have written whole books on very limited aspects of this topic. Obviously, we can’t cover every detail of dueling, so we will make use of a technique known as ‘Ideal Type’. This term is most closely associated with the great German sociologist Max Weber. For Weber, looking for essential characteristics and elements of a given phenomenon was key to understanding social and cultural realities. However, the type does not correspond to all of the particular cases. In our case, this means that we will not focus on a few specific duels. Instead, we explain central aspects of an ‘idealized’ duel as it might have taken place between the 16th to 18th century by making reference to reoccurring elements and illustrating examples. Keep in mind, however, that duels changed both locally and over time. So digest the following information carefully and consult the bibliography for further references. Without any further ado, this is how modern historiography explains dueling.
Patreon (thank you): / sandrhomanhistory
Paypal (thank you): paypal.me/SandRhomanhistory
We also have Twitter: / sandrhoman
#history #siege #sandrhoman
Bibliography:
Banks, Stephen, A Polite Exchange of Bullets: The Duel and the English Gentleman, 1750-1850, Woodbridge 2010.
Billacois, F. Le Duel dans la société francaise des XVIe-XVIIe siècles. Essai des psychosozilogie historique, Paris 1986.
Burkhart, Dagmar, Eine Geschichte der Ehre, Darmstadt 2006
Frevert, Ute, s.v. Duel, in: Encyclopedia of Early Modern History Online dx.doi.org/10.1... (letzter Aufruf am 10.06.21).
Frevert, Ute, Ehrenmänner. Das Duell in der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft, München 1991.
Geifes, Stephan, Das Duell in Frankreich 1789- 1830 (Pariser Historische Studien 102), München 2013.
Hopton, Richard, Pistols at Dawn: A History of Duelling, Little 2011.
Kiernan, Victor G., The Duel in European History, Oxford 1988.
Lynn, John A., Giant of the Grand Siecle. The French Army 1610-1715, Cambridge 1997.
Prietzel, Malte, Kriegführung im Mittelalter. Handlungen, Erinnerungen, Bedeutungen (Krieg in der Geschichte Bd. 32), Paderborn 2006.
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.6 (1/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/m05kZ2GDKXg/mqdefault.jpg)
I forget the man's name, but I once read an account of a 17th-century Neapolitan nobleman who had fought more than 20 duels (and killed 14 people) over the matter of who was the greatest Italian poet, Dante or Ariosto. Seeking salvation on his deathbed, the duelist admitted he had never read the poetry of either man.
A Sigma Male
@Kurt: That's definitely one for the you can't make this s**t up file.
@@dpeasehead Interesting that you should say that. I have been trying to find the duelist's name, and the oldest reference I have found so far to the incident is from an 1806 account (in "Missionary Magazine aka the Evangelical Intelligencer" available via Google books). It also mentions him making the admission on his deathbed and it also doesn't mention the noble's name. (It does say he *fought* 14 duels over the issue, so I may have misremembered the numbers).
That is definitely not the source I originally read it in, and they identify it as an "anecdote". So, at the moment, none of the sources I can find give me a precise name or years involved ... so it is possible it might just be a very *old* "old wives' tale".
There are plenty of ridiculous deaths resulting from duels though. Like Stephen Decatur, the American naval hero from the War of 1812, was killed in a duel. He sat on the jury that court-martialed and temporarily expelled Commodore James Barron from the Navy, and Decatur later opposed Barron's reinstatement. So Barron challenged him to a duel and both men were shot, though only Decatur died...and Barron then "forgave" the mortally wounded Decatur.
And so, the Navy the reinstated Barron to his old rank and position.
For some reason.
(Is that a happy ending?)
@@Pandaemoni Yes, happy ending
Benvenuto Cellini maybe? I advise all to read his auto biography.
The fact that pistol duels gradually largely replaced sword duels in the late 18th and 19th centuries actually made them less deadly. Both participants' honour was deemed satisfied if both men shot and missed, whereas sword duels generally required someone at least be injured before the matter could be considered closed. Pistol duels developed a strange additional level of etiquette as a result. It was common for both sides to fire in the air, and it was often considered bad form to actually aim properly. This could get quite complicated- there are a lot of debates about the duel that killed Alexander Hamilton, for instance. Hamilton fired over Burr's head, which should have been enough to satisfy their honour, but his shot arguably passed close enough to Burr that Burr felt justified in assuming he was aiming to kill and returning fire with a lethal aimed shot.
Good point. This also explains how Clemenceau survived so many duels - around 1900, the pistol duel had become very "safe" in France, and politicians would often duel for show. At the same time in Germany, the pistol duel was very deadly. The duelists stood much closer to each other and it was frowned upon to intentionally miss. The French duel was also much more "inclusive", with even journalists and Socialists participating - people who the German noble/bourgeoise elites definitely did not consider "satisfaktionsfähig" (able to give satisfaction).
The pistol was also considered to be more fair, since it didn't require as much skill as a sword.
About the German duel at 1900, i can recommend Kevin McAleers "Dueling. The Cult of Honour in Fin-de-siècle Germany"
Does this mean that Andrew Jackson's duelling record is just the result of him not getting the rules?
@@ingold1470 Not sure, i've only read McAleers Book where he specifically talks about duels in Germany and France. He mentions though that the Germans thought of American duels as dishonourable, so they probably worked very differently than the German ones.
@@starbucks3954 Lol imagine someone killing his opponent on accident xD McAleer mentions that somtimes the projectiles for duels were made out of quicksilver, so they would immediately turn into dust when the pistol was fired.
Also you have to keep in mind that guns were getting progressively more accurate. Standing 10 meters away from your opponent with a 18th century pistol is very different from a 20th century pistol.
@@starbucks3954 a lack of rifling
I highly recommend the film "the Duelists." About two French officers during the Napoleonic Wars engaging in several duels arising from some obscure perception of insult.
It's actually about how persons regularly used dueling to avoid punishment and how dueling actually had near-zero basis in honor. If anything it was an excuse for people (who, in any other time, would have been considered a serial killer) to just rack up a body count.
There was no insult to speak of: he was there to arrest him for dueling and to get out of it the detained officer threw a fit about being arrested by a lower-rank (which is just how arresting someone works) and challenged the Sargeant tasked to arrest him.
Duels never resolved anything.
Oh yeah, a oldie, but still a timeless classic!
you've insulted my honor, my good sir. I challenge you to a dual.
@@Hytegia yeah idk about that.
There was an Irish noble who when exhiled from Ireland gained command of a regiment in napoleon's army. His jealous new French peers questioned his credentials whereafter he proceeded to have several duels over a couple of days to prove his worth and won every duel. There were different duelling rules in different cultures. Irish duelling rules were fascinating.
This dude’s pronunciation is ON POINT! German, French, doesn’t matter, dude’s got it nailed down. Well done, my guy!
The Polish one is somewhat lacking.
"Hello sir"
"It's Hello Mr. Sir to you, I demand we fight a life threatening duel to satisfy my honor."
Death before Dishonor.
Now we just have lawsuits.
So that's why The Rolling Stones sang "I can't get no satisfaction."
It's Ma'am! 😡
It's STARDENBURDENHARDENBART!
@@Marinealver Yeah, because we are no longer savages obviously. You'd have long ago been knifed in the gut if society did not evolve from mindless barbarism.
"It is the fight alone that pleases us, not the victory"
- Blaise Pascal
All those "glory" quotes are from when armed forces were free to loot vanquished territory and potentially grow rich on the spoils. I'm sure that at least for some that successfully deserting from a freezing wet massacre was also somewhat pleasant.
Looting wasn't the rule.
19:18 The most impressive “preparation” I can think of for a duel was by the 20-year old mathematician Evariste Galois. In the days before his fatal duel in 1832, he wrote down some summaries of the work he’d been doing in algebraic theory. This work ended up being so groundbreaking that it opened up several major new branches of mathematics, including the eponymous “Galois Theory”.
There's an alternate timeline where Galois discovers Relativity and in 2020 they have flying cars and moon bases
Very minor, hugely consequential and fortuitous decisions are made every day. But that is the story of truly GREAT man...
I came here looking for the Galois comment, probably one of the most talented mathematicians the world has ever seen. A part of his work is the basis of "error correction" that is the backbone of digital communications and data storage technology, etc.
Thanks for the info, I had never heard of him as far as I can remember. Sad to think of what else he could have accomplished if he wasn't killed in that duel at only 20 years old. I read that his seconds abandoned him on the side of the road and he was found by someone else and taken to a doctor. This guy needed better seconds, though he may have died either way.
Stories like this is why dueling started to become illegal by that timey. The military, government and aristocracy were seeing some of their best and brightest getting cut down over goofy honor spats. I know Napoleon was like “hey, can you guys stop killing each other until AFTER we’ve won the war?”.
As you mentioned the high number of killed French noblemen, there was another reason why monarchs prohibited duells.
These men were often Officers in their Armies, so a monarch want to avoid his Officers would kill each other in peacetime, rather than fighting their monarchs enemies in battle!
Stop being such snowflakes and killing each other. You're supposed to be killing people of my choosing.
@@Zraknul I hate how that term has been deprived of all meaning.
It actually did happen pretty often that extremely skilled commanders died in duels. Tordenskiold who is generally considered the greatest naval commander ever in Danish history died in a duel with someone who claimed to own a Basilisk.
@@MALICEM12 That's what happens when children never grow up. A descriptive insult is applied to them, and they cry "I know you are, but what am I!?". All they understand is it's an insult, but the meaning is beyond their grasp. They don't have the brain capacity to come up with their own response, so they just parrot what they've heard.
Most important reason, duelling was forbidden by the church, and punished by excommunication. Emperor Frederic II of Prussia chased the duellists out of his army. He said he can use brave soldiers, but not executioners.
The Irish duelling rules are very wise. If Irishmen were allowed to challenge each other at night and when drunk there would be no Irishmen! ;-)
Lysa Arryn: "You don't fight with honor!"
Ser Bronn: "No...he did".
I always felt bad for ser varous in that scene. Lysa specifically called him out because he seemed the least enthusiastic about executing Tyrion. All that and the poor sucker gets his body needlessly kicked out the moon door, possibly never to be recovered.
Otto von Bismarck was an great duelist too. It is said that when he was young, he challenged people to duels almost weekly, and he only lost once. But even till his deathbed, the claimed to have only lost because the rapier of the opponent broke and he was hit.
That was a Mensur tho
“It was the lag”
Imaging having to deal with a sociopath who trained all day with swordfighting masters and went around challenging people just to seriously injure or kill them.
Challenge him to a pistol duel before he challenges you to a sword duel
I agree, that was the biggest flaw of allowing duels in society. Some really really strong and athletic young guy with daddy issues could essentially go around performing murder sprees disguised as dueling.
They should have instead forced disputes between two men to be resolved through brutal and an unwavering intellectual debates using superior facts and logic to overcome the opponent.
@@angrysocialjusticewarrior add abit sophistry and demagogia in the mix and that is called Ancient Athens
I read somewhere about a guy who would walk around asking for people's names, like "what's your name?" And if the guy whom he asked refused to answer, he'd then challenge that person to a duel.
Can't remember where I read this or how legit the story is, but I mean, it might be people like that existed.
@@angrysocialjusticewarrior I am in disagreeance with your comment as well as being scared by your profile picture.....and so I challenge you to duel, ser!...AH-HA!...ENGARDED!!!🤺
In Britain we still have the etiquette of “outside now” in the pubs. A Dutch man told me once that it was very civilised compared to fighting in the pub, knocking people, drinks and tables over in the process then both being barred, to having fisticuffs outside only if agreed then often coming back inside afterwards to share a few pints together. If it was the olden days I would’ve won some but probably be dead by now 😊
To bad this obviously stops to count of the island. Im sick having to kick drunk fighting idiots out, And don't go for blood myself.
Similar in parts of Norway, only insults and animosity isn't actually necessary. Someone might simply walk up to you, and ask if you want to fight. If you say 'yes', you meet up outside. It's getting rare, now, though. Young people, these days, have no sense of proper etiquette...
@erikjrn4080 I grew up in Australia and then lived 20 years in various parts of Norway. I bith worked and drank a lot in bars and restaurants in both countries, also a bit in England. I would say that fighting is exceedingly rare in Norway compared to the English speaking world. Also lived a few years in Asia and currently a few years in Northern Africa and I've noticed that in the developming world that public fights (although not loud disagreememts) are also very rare but when incidents first happen then weapons are far more likely to be used, specifically with the intent of maiming but ad l said it's pretty rare. Tbh Norway struck me as stickingly pacifist although God knows there are quite a few hard men you're generally not seeing blood getting hosed away outside inner city pubs on Sunday mornings.
I'm a count, not a saint. The least formal, but still the best duel I've watched
Fun fact about the movie “The Duelists” which is cited in the video: it was the debut film of a young Ridley Scott. Legend has it that based on the reputation that film built, when Scott released his second film, a sci-fi piece in 1979, everyone assumed it’d be a swashbuckling late 70s Star Wars clone. The story goes that this caused some people to go see “Alien” under a rather misinterpreted view of what the film would be like.
The Duelists is a superb movie.
Yes the Duellists its a great movie, but Alien Made a saga and probably a gente. So IMO Scott proved with both movies how talented and versatile he was.
I've got a nice high school duel story:
Back in high school, I was on the receiving end of a bucket of water as a prank. Pursuing the assaulter, I got hold of him and we wrestled near a pool of water, me trying to get revenge on my honour. We both couldn't move the other one into the pool. Then we agreed to a draw as the gentlemen we were. While technically I did not get my revenge, still my honour was restored.
you call a highschool fight a duel?
LOL
@@angrysocialjusticewarrior you call a prank a fight?
Very noble of you sir.
@@angrysocialjusticewarrior he still challenged someone to a single combat
@@angrysocialjusticewarrior At least he would fight, any "social justice" warrior would just REEEEE
If I'm not mistaken, the last official duell was held in France and was televised! It was to first blood. At that time it was pretty much outlawed across all of the West.
However, I happen to know someone who was challenged to a duel in this age! It was a little like the Jarnak case in that the odds were vastly one sided... In other words, one tried to kill the other and make it look fair.
True, Gaston Defferre against René Ribières, two representatives of the assemblee nationale, in 1967
What are you talking about. There was a duel between an AR and a skateboard in Kenosha just last year.
@@johnjohnson1997 that wasn't a duel! They didn't agree to meet and duke it out with the same type of weapon...That was multiple criminals charging and three getting shot by a naive kid who bit off more than he could chew...
@@edi9892A rapist and a crowd of oppurtunist looters who thought this kid was clueless with the gun. He came to Kenosha to protect family businesses and was jumped. He defended himself in my and many other people's eyes. I'm sure anyone would do the same for businesses of close family members that were put under threat by looters marching among people seeking actual ends to police violence. If the people who claimed Rittenhouse was a murderer were fighting against a crowd and a mentally unstable chomo I'm sure they'd be singing a different tune.
Wiki: Roughly 300 fencing fraternities (Studentenverbindungen) still exist today and most of them are grouped into umbrella organizations such as the Corps, Landsmannschaft or the Deutsche Burschenschaft in the Federal Republic of Germany, Austria, Switzerland and several other European nations. Their traditions still include academic fencing and dueling scars
Based
Proud to be a part of it
I wonder how dueling scars work in our contemporary times 🤕
"Academic" fencing is far off from the fencing done in duels referred to here (except for their mentioning at the end).
Academic fencing seems so unnatural and far off from original fencing because the fraternities wanted to make it less lethal.
Interestingly many german fraternities still practice "academic fencing", which is the remainder of the old duelling culture. Of course nobody is killed today, but so called "Mensuren" are still fought with sharp blades and without helmets (though eyes, neck and torso are protected). They dont nescesserely end bloody, but open cuts (so called "Schmisse") are pretty common.
There are also Seconds taking part in the process, whose job is to protect their fencer (the so called "Paukant") by jumping in after a number of blows. They are heavily protected though.
The Mensuren are mostly fought in a competetive sense, because many fraternities require their members to fence a certain number of these, but sometimes they still erupt out of conflict or insult as well. If that is the case, the insulted person usually rips a business card halfway trough and politely hands it to the other guy. If he rips it apart the Mensur is agreed and will usually take place a few days or weeks later.
Its a very interesting part of preserved culture, although it of course is controversial as well.
It was all about single combat in the classic age: Anthony challenged Augustus when he was under siege in Egypt; the Old Byzantine General agreed to duel another general and died of a heart attack as they approached to fight.
some poor sap challenged Pyrrhus of Epirus.
If I am not mistaken, Pyrrhus chalenged him, but mother of that soldier stealkilled him.
Neoptolemus and Eumenes fought a brutal duel as well
18:15 The rapier is NOT light, it can weigh from 900 to 1300 grams which is heavier than typical sabre and equal to Scottish broadsword. The disadvantage of rapier is in its point of balance close to hilt and that it is mostly thrust-centric though can cut - it makes rapier a good weapon for 1v1, but it is not as effective in a chaotic situation where you need to control several opponents, as it happens in battle
Mark Twain discusses dueling in his travelogue Innocents Abroad written about his travels in Europe and the Holy Land in the late 19th century. He was in Heidelberg and elsewhere and discusses the ethos of dueling amoung the students in Austria and Germany at the time. His observations are almost always perceptive and thought provoking.
I'd like to see dueling come back. It would improve everybody's manners.
I second the motion Sir Brute
Perhaps the both of you should meet in person.
@@SofaKingShit Why? He hasn't insulted me. You, on the other hand...
38spl snubbies at 25 yards. 5 shots, fire until empty. Duel over whether anyone is hit or not. Use round nose to increase survivability.
Andrew Jackson is smiling in his grave Mr. Brute
Spain's XVI-XVII centuries has probably the biggest tradition of dueling with swords because of how common it was and because it was a very characteristic cultural trait that defines Spain very well at that time and abounded both in literary works and in the middle of the street. Even ordinary people like a baker would pay someone to teach them a trick if they needed it at some point in their life. It could very well be its own genre and it is almost a crime that almost no one takes inspiration in that setting for a historical or fantasy book.
Dueling is popular in fantasy xD
@@adrianjezierski8093 I meant XVI century Spain
Alatriste?
@@johnnychen6634 the only thing I know that has used Spain from that time as inspiration
Madrid was the most dangerous city at the time
“Your old fashioned french style has no chance against my new Italian backhand style- begone!”
Art imitates reality I guess.
as a frenchman, I demand satisfaction!
Ha face to foot style how ya like it
There were some forms of duel that don't get the same amount of attention as others. One of these is mentioned here- horseback duels. One of these was memorably won by Jeffery Hudson, a dwarf favourite of queen Henrietta Maria of England who was allegedly only 2 feet tall. Crossbow duels were also a thing, apparently, although I've never been able to find out much about them other than Leonardo Da Vinci's student/ lover Salai was fatally injured in one.
Mortars were used at least once
And Hot-Air balloons!
@@masterpython Is that real or just in Neal Stephenson's Baroque Cycle books? It was a fantastic scene in the books either way.
Thus the origin of the term "what a real Löser ..."
Really underrated comment ☝
Duels still happen all the time in highschool with the ritual phrase "Catch me outside."
I can attest to this, I was a fighters second and helped choose when and where
Life in the dueling era quite literally: You Laugh, You Loose.
Loose, sir? Why, only in the bowels of my wavering opponent is this so.
Lose
@@BuddyLee23 lmao, nice
A few thoughts. Duelling would have been great for pychopaths. Monarchs had a vested interest in not letting their valuable military officers kill each other (though to be fair, when someone died in a duel the dependants would probably have complained about it to the monarch, who also would have known personally more than a few people who were killed). The legal system replaced duelling as a dispute resolution mechanism. It's hard to avoid arguments sometimes. If duelling was still around, I would be dead by now.
Not really.
"Socially equally Parties" - that would also include nowadays for an example height, weight and expierences in relation to the insult you brought up. If we don't consider Gender in general by the way - Means, if you "insult my Honour", yes I may challenge you to a duel but you're maybe two feet bigger than me and simple state "Well - Dude. Find first somebody equally to me. :/" -> no legal Duel, because you refused it due to reasonable reasons.
Futhermore, it wasn't always "Until the death!" - First Blood was also something which was around since ancient times. Sure, first Blood meant often something like "Less fingers", "maybe a limb less" and so on. But you don't always died.
If we would simple use lighter and more flexible Swords for an example, like in modern "Student fencing" (together with a eye protection), the most you'll get is a "Schmiss", a deeper Scar.
That we don't duel nowadays anymore has more to do with the "Monopoly of Violence" from the State than anything else - Imagine you could settle certain private Disputes between two people without the State mengles in it? :(
That would be horrible! ... For the State.
@@DaroriDerEinzige socially equal has nothing to do with height or weight. By today's standard, it would be categorized by Middle class, upper middle class, politician or royalty, poor, homeless, etc
and although it was not always to the death, this only depended on the victor on whether to spare his opponent or not. The fact that it is a legal duel means it will always be easy to explain why you were not able to avoid killing your opponent.
Overall, your counter arguments are just ambitious and idealistic about the brutal reality of what duel would be like if they were legal in modern day. You'd more likely eventually end up with a knife in your chest from an athletic teenager going through his rebellious phase, than you are to retire from your job.
@@angrysocialjusticewarrior It does, to some extend.
Otherwise, average Male Boxers could make money with beatin' up most of Women Boxers around the same, or below their own weight class.
But everybody knows the outcome beforehand in 9 out of 10 Times.
Same goes for Tennis.
Which is one reason nobody cares, nobody encourages it and nobody pays for it. Same goes for Duels, Duels between two people which were strongly sepperated by skill weren't viewed as "honourable".
Futhermore, no it wasn't up to the victor itself - It was up to the specific rules.
In Germany, duels to the death were pretty rare actually. Many duels were made under the whole "First Blood Rule"-Aspect in the first hand.
It was also considered a shame if you accidentily killed your opponent because it showed bad skills.
In France, the country mentioned in Video here, in over 10 000 Duels only 400 people died - and that was already in an age in which they also used Pistols for Duels.
Duels were and are still to some extend for an example pretty alive in the "Burschenschaften" and "schlagenden Studentenverbindungen" (fraternity) nowadays in Germany, although often illegal/not public.
Again; Duels were always under a strict rule set.
You say "It's likely to get a knife to your chest from some weird teen!" - Yeah, well, Knifes were for an example not "regular Duel Weapons", so the usage would be forbidden, which means it would become Murder and not a honourable duel.
For which then the "Gentlemen Code" of "not telling anyone what actually happened" wouldn't apply either.
In general most people also mixin' Duels often with "Single Combat"/"Gottesurteilen" ("Judgement of God"), in which somebody was charged with something and then demanded trial by combat.
Which was, by the way, also not a thing for everybody because only certain people could apply for it in the first place and those were always to the death.
But common Duels weren't that.
Even in the Sagas of the Vikings it is stated, that Duels - so called Holmgang - weren't always deadly.
Sometimes they even ended in a draw because a.) the loosing of your weapon meant "you lost" and b.) they often applied a "first blood" rule.
Which means; if your sword breaks but the blade touches your opponents cheek and wounds him slightly - You both have lost.
And the Holmgang was in fact "under the eyes of the Gods", which means you both had to accept it.
Futhermore, to kill somebody who honourable stood in front of you but hasn't a weapon in his hand (broken sword -> no weapon), meant you would dishonour you and your family.
So the Holmgang would've been over then.
... In General, I think I provided a lot of facts in regards of your whole "counter argument".
@@angrysocialjusticewarrior
You could choose water pistols as weapons of choice. The loser gets plenty wet.
@@Alias_Anybody I second that!
Oh that's an amazing topic. Thanks for covering this
Many duels ended in mutual fatal injuries. This applied to both the sword (especially thrusting weapons, e.g. rapiers) and pistols. Francesco Alfieri, an Italian fencing master from the mid-17th century, noted that a badly injured duelist often becomes much more courageous and fierce than before receiving a blow, and thus such players (often already being mortally injured and so having much less to lose!) often defeat and kill their opponents. Another point was, a rapier or small sword sometimes got stuck between the ribs of one of duelists, and than the wounded (mostly mortally wounded) man mostly try to seize the opportunity to retaliate with fatal thrust.... With pistols, mutual deaths occurred especially where the distance was less than 10 meters (especially in Germany and Russia). When the distance was very short, even dying after receiving a shot close to the heart, you might still be able not only to exercise your right to shoot in your last seconds but also to hit your opponent fatally (despite of being yourself already in agony). And it was justified by the rules of duello....Even in some dueling codes it was written that if life cannot be defended in a duel, it should be (at least!) sold as costly as possible.
I think I might have wrote a comment like this on another video, but this one is very well done and I need to say it again.
This channel is absolutely fantastic and extremely professional. I'm a working historian going through my graduation and my work is focused on public history, taking the work and knowledge produced in academia and turning it into something interesting and accessible to the general public.
The work that is done here is extremely professional and one of the best examples of public history I've seen on the internet. The choice of topic is always great and attractively presented, but to me the most impressive part is the research that goes into ths content, the constant referencing to professional historians and, what I would call this channels key phrase, "this is how modern historiography..." demonstrates and leaves it clear to the audience how this is condensation of academic work in a more accessible form. This channel makes me very happy, as a historian seeing academic work being taken out of the university halls and as a public historian, seeing someone do it so well, professionally and in an attractive manner.
You are doing an amazing work, keep it up. We need more public history like this.
Alexandre Pushkin was killed in a duello for his honor because a French Army Officer in Russian Army, flirted with his wife. What a loss. Great video by the way.
That sounds hilariously stereotypical
Duels never disappeared, just... changed form, and tools XD
Back at my univeristy days, when one guy, who considered himself a decent person(in other words, would never hit somebody by surprise), and would get in the way of the other- of course most times happened under influence of various substances- they'd get out of the bar/disco/ whatever place they have met, and managed to get angry with each other enough to try and punch a person- and then they'd brawl in agreed spot, while surrounded by high pitch screaming of girls, and chanting, roaring, whistling pals, who were there, to ensure, that nobody else would join, and that they could restrain both guys, if enough was enough. There was no hitting a guy, who fell, no "dirty blows", no biting... And there was even a little classy move- that i learned to be good manners, and which i actually did by accident one time, and fully on purpose the second- when victor would buy a beer/a big shot/a drink for a loser, and congratulate him ona a good fight, compliment some particular moment- like telling him, that we almost lost at that moment, and even we do not know how we survived, or that he has hell of a hook, or he is fast, or something like that-, which very often resulted in bad blood disappearing right away, and changed rather brutal encounter into a story to tell and event of the night... Sometimes, actually, guys would pal around through the rest of the night together... One time i saw a guy, who got hit by another, and lost the fight, tell the policeman, that he fell and hit his face...
But, of course, there were also people, who just wanted to punch somebody, no matter, how they'd achieve this- which is bullying, and is disgusting-, and i almost died laughing, when i heard, how several different guys, met on several different occasions, complained, that "thugs" use unfair ways to win fights, and that they slowly kill "proper, fair fights"...
Is it just me, or times change, but we, men, never did...? XD
Sometimes here (in the US) your friends on multiple sides JOIN IN the fight so you get a massive brawl. Also the whole "guns are a thing' so one dude tried to fight honorably, is defeated, geta a firearm instead and whelp
Hey, not sure if you had read it last week, but i had expressed exactly the wish of watching a video about duels in a comment on the "how to start a fight in the middle ages".
One week later this video comes out:
if on purpose, thanks for the video.
If not on purpose, thanks for reading my mind unknowingly! ;-)
Pretty sure this wasn‘t made within a week 😄
I mean as a french, i've never heard the expressoion "Coup de Jarnac"
As a québécois I have never heard that either
I heard it , pretty nowadays though
moi non plus
Stupendously well made content as always. Was lowkey hoping you would include the duel between Tordenskjold (a well renowned admiral in the Danish navy) and Staël von Holstein (a nobleman with German descent). But obviously there would be a great number of duels to choose between over several decades of dueling.
"The Deluge" is a great movie with some fairly realistic polish saber duels from the 17th century.
It is better to duel without a shirt on, because often, small pieces of fabric can end up in the wounds and cause infections.
The last image you used shows a historic German student fraternity duel called "Mensur". This is a tradition that is still done today, but it no longer serves the purpose of a duel, and the rules have changed a lot. The purpose is just to train and prove the mental strength to remain calm in such a stressful situation, and to prove one's skill maybe. The participants stand at a distance so that one rapier can fit between them, from chest to chest. The whole torso is protected by a chain mail shirt, and the neck and weapon arm is protect by padded leather, like in the picture. The hand is protected by a glove and the handguard of the rapier. These "rapiers" don't have a point, but they do have sharp edges. Strokes are aimed at the head of the opponent, but the eyes are protected by a pair of glasses that looks like diving googles that are made of metal.
There are also seconds, a referee and a doctor. A Mensur always has a set number of rounds that consist of a set number of strokes. Of course, it can be cut short if one party is hit severly, but often no one is hit.
But yyou can still challenge someone from another fraternity to a one-on-one duell, called "persönliche Contrahage" (PC) or fraternity against fraternity called "Pro Patria" (PP) which often consists of at least 3 members each, namely the Senior, Consenior & Subsenior, who are the head members of their fraternity.
@@gowoe Of course, but "offically" it's not done to settle a personal dispute.
I can't believe I had never heard of Lincoln's "duel" until this late in my life! :-o However, it was more accurately a "near duel."
"Since Lincoln was challenged by James Shields [over a nasty editorial Lincoln had written], he had the privilege of choosing the weapon of the duel. He chose cavalry broadswords "of the largest size." "I didn't want the d--d fellow to kill me, which I think he would have done if we had selected pistols," he later explained. For his own part, he did not want to kill Shields, but "felt sure [he] could disarm him" with a blade. At six feet, four inches tall, Lincoln planned to use his height to his advantage against Shields, who stood at a mere five feet, nine inches tall.
The day of the duel, September 22, 1842, arrived and the combatants met at Bloody Island, Missouri to face death or victory. As the two men faced each other, with a plank between them that neither was allowed to cross, Lincoln swung his sword high above Shields to cut through a nearby tree branch. This act demonstrated the immensity of Lincoln’s reach and strength and was enough to show Shields that he was at a fatal disadvantage. With the encouragement of bystanders, the two men called a truce." -www.battlefields.org/
Wonder why they don't include this one in famous stories about Lincoln they tell schoolkids
Twice the pride, double the fall.
And he ended up proving himself correct
You have hate, you have anger, but you don’t use them.
0:14 honestly i’m shocked that anyone believed this hentai plot tier rumor
People were, and still are predominantly stupid and childish.
It's not about believing or disbelieving it. Once someone claimed it he had to restore his honor.
Just because you are an adult, doesn't mean you can't have mentality of 13 year old call of duty player.
@@TallDude404 fair point
I'm not really surprised that anyone believed it, it happens more often than we think.
Not that I would know... rolls eyes
You mentioned Abraham Lincoln as a duelist, but he was really too modern and practical a man to engage in such old fashioned silliness. He *did* get challenged to a duel once, but as the recipient of the challenge in the old American west, he was given the choice of weapons and terms for the duel.
He responded by selecting the weapon of pillows. The other man backed down. 😄
He also picked swords as the weapon and cut a tall branch over his opponent’s head, the opponent then apologised and backed out
"Let's bring back the motherflippin' duel!" - The Silver Jukebox.
Thanks for an illuminating walkthrough of this subject. There were some bizarre occurrences, not least that whilst swords and pistols were the usual weapons of choice for duels, the parties could opt for more unusual weapons, for instance, in one duel, I read somewhere that billiard balls were hurled by the duellists.
Just watched *The Duellists (1977)* for the first time. Ridley Scott at his finest, great story and phenomenal cinematography!
I believe they actually had to create special techniques for the low lighting conditions of the period, to capture the absolutely perfect uniforms and fashion, that actually change through the years. The film is even based on real people!
Awesome movie.
Dueling with pistols was legal in Uruguay until 1992. There were cases of duels in 1985 and 1989.
quizás hasta hoy existen algunos.
Let freedom ring
No wonder Eustachius lost the duel, he is literally a Löser
When I heard that name I knew he would lose.
an akhashik joke
It must be where we derived that word from. A lot of words such as mustard are french. Words we use originate from all over the world and are often someone's name who did something in history to give us the reason behind the word weither the word is titled in respect of the person or with sarcasm or to mock the individual. But very often it is the case where someone does something utterly stupid and their name is used as reminder for others not to follow suit. Benedict Arnold and Judas Iscariot names are good examples of this. Calling someone a Benedict Arnold or a Judas meaning they are a traitor or turncoat. Some words obiviously proceed the persons representation or place in history and we often use them without knowledge or question of the origin.
@@CosplayZine no, loser came from "to lose" which came from old English "los"
I have heard that duels also were used to get rid of some people who where, for political or private reasons in the way of others. These, lets call them victims, often politicians or artists with little experince in fighting at all were forced to challenge experienced and trained fighters by intentional insults in public. The so insult men had no choice but defend theit honor by challenging their insulters - which left those the choice of weapons and themselves very often no chance to survive this duel because the challenged was a trained fighter and would chose a weapon he himself was very familiar with and the insulted was not.
Yeah, 'professional duelists' were often the exception to the whole law enforcement looking the other way to dueling. ISTR in stories about them they never stayed in one place.
like the great russian poets Pushkin and Lermontov were killed in duels instigated allegedly with czar's permission
It would be really easy to just quietly pay a skilled fighter to insult someone you want to get rid of to force a duel, it would stay within the bounds of what's accepted as honorable so it wouldn't be as suspicious as hiring an assassin.
Watch the movie "Scaramouche", with Stewart Granger. The Marquis De Mayne, a highly experienced swordsman, and a member of the General Assembly, "removes" members of the opposition party, mostly tradesmen and intellectuals, i.e. commoners with little experience with a sword, by challenging them to duels they are not equipped to fight
Couldn't your more trained friend be the second in those cases?
Í can't believe that he didn't mention Otto Von Bismarck being challenged by someone with sausages
That would be outside the scope of these centuries, but it sure sounds interesting. Do you have more information?
@@DGol2015 search for the great sausage duel
I now read the story and it's pretty funny. 2 sausages and one of them was infected with Trichinella to show how unhygenic the factories were.
Bismark then retracted his challenge.
@@etuanno epic indeed
@@etuanno epic indeed
thanks for the great videos !!
Being executed for dueling was a rather rare thing specially if one belonged to one of the most distinguished families of France so one of the most notable cases is the one of François de Montmorency-Bouteville, the father of the great general of Louis XIV Marshal Luxembourg, he participated in several duels in which fatalities occurred so he had to flee the kingdom to avoid punishment, King Louis XIII later pardoned him but upon his return from exile he faced the challenge of the relative of one of his previous opponents so naturally another duel with mortal victims happened and thus Montmorency-Bouteville was beheaded as he could not help but get involved in issues of that sort of nature and death was the only improvement possible about the matter.
The monarch prohibited duelling, because he didn't want to lose his valuable officers, but also because the French monarch was "tres chretien", and the Church strenuously forbade this practice. He, as Christian monarch was expected to enforce this rule, by law.
I love that someone from Saxony was actually named "Loser", it's like foreshadowing their military accomplishments
The duels in the movie Barry Lyndon appear to be realistic according to the video
Wonderful research as always. Thank you guys for these extensive productions. Never miss a video.
Was it true that as seconds were supposed to ensure that duels were fair, that in the event the opposing duelist cheated or broke the rules the second could actually physically intervene - even by shooting the other party if their representative had been downed unfairly?
It was their duty -
But a 2-on-1 fight isn't really in anyone's best favor so I suspect there was a non-significant number of cheaters who got the all-good after the conclusion of the matter.
I find it worth mentioning that they're fraternities in the german speaking countries (be it Corps, Burschenschaften or Turnerschaften) which still practice some sort of dueling (so called "Mensur"). If you wonder it looks very similar to the picture at 25:42. In fact that picture does actually depict a Säbelmensur (saber duel) between to members of a fraternity. The guys by their side with red and green hats are seconds waiting to intervene at the end of a round or in case someone breaks the rules. The guy in the middle is the Unparteiischer (nonpartisan) who is an experienced member of another fraternity (recognizable by his red-white-red stripe). His job is to call the rounds and to decide whether the duelists and seconds are obeying the rules. Nowadays it's not very different, although security has been increased. You don't fight with sabers anymore but with rapiers as they are far less dangerous. You also wear protection for eyes and nose and optionally for cheeks. A doctor must also be present to provide first aid in case of injury.
I was a member of such fraternity and even fought a Mensur myself, as it is mandatory for all members. These "ordinary" Mensurs are not fought for honour and are organised entirely by the seconds who find you a fitting opponent of similar skills. It makes the duel very safe. However I've always witnessed some "real" duels. When members of two different fraternities have a beef, one can challenge another by giving him his card. The challenged writes his name on that card, if he accepts the challenge. Then their comrades prepare them for their Mensur, which tends to be rather short and bloody (due to difference in skill and desire to defend their honour). Such an event is very popular and members from other fraternities love to watch it (it even has its own name: blood tourism). One such duel I've witnessed had to be stoped after only four rounds, because one guy lost half of his ear and received several cuts on his head.
I find it very exciting and it's interesting that most people don't even realise that this kind of dueling still exists and is pretty popular, as the rooms are always filled with spectators. It is also totally legal under German law, for those of you who wonder.
Sorry for this massive amount of text, I hope I could give you a nice insight))
For historical correctness, the image at 25:35 likely depicts a so-called "Bestimmungsmensur" between German fraternity students, which is a fight with sharp blades, but not a duel. Duels for honour can still be fought among students, yes, but they are highly regulated and will definitely not be graphically documented. There is a chance that the image does depict an actual duel (considering its age and the fact that sabres are used), but I don't think it's very likely.
Little funfact: Duelling has survived in some form up to this day in some German fraternities. There is the concept of a "persönliche Contrahage", which is officially not a duel but still a way to get satisfaction by blade after an Insult.
"I can't get no satisfaction!"
Now I understand better the Rolling Stones. LOL!
satisfacción era una cosa muy complicada de coger, algún de los participantes podría no aceptar la retractación verdaderamente, y perdón se esta difícil de comprender mi Español.
@@maximilianolimamoreira5002 - Has oído hablar de los Rolling Stones, Max? Entiendo que son casi más antiguos que yo pero no dejan de ser una de las grandes leyendas de la música rock.
Imagine having to fight multiple duels because your wife can't stop sleeping around. He should have just divorced her. I believe Sir Richard Atkins was within his rights to do so since divorce was permitted starting in the 1670s in England and his duels happened in the 1690s. You wouldn't catch me fighting several duels over some woman who couldn't keep her legs closed.
Edit: ok I looked it up and apparently he fought 3 duels, but after finding out she had many more lovers, he separated or tried to separate from her. The article I read just said that these 'domestic troubles hastened his end', so maybe the stress and the wounds from his duels caught up with him.
@A H wtf
@A H Adultery was not illegal during Richard Atkin's time (1690s), and was not ground for murder. Killing your wife for adultery, on the other hand, would land you in jail. There is an argument for adultery being provocation, but in that case the quasi-legal action was killing the other man, not the wife.
@A H Ah, so your solution to one wrong act is still the accomplishment of another wrong act, and a cover up for both acts.
Regardless, it was only "punishable by death" for only 10 years before it was repealed, because everyone realized it was unenforceable, prone to abuse, and really none of the state's business.
@A H I dunno, why do you feel the need to defend yourself against us children?
@A H I mean, I'm not the one who started calling other people "children" just cause they didn't agree with the conversation, but you do you.
If you are sincere about dumping the personal B.S. and getting back to the historical stuff, then okay. Where did we leave off? Ah yes, we just proved that no, killing your wife was never a solution.
Blood feud, is the norm. Social peace, is not. Therefore, social equlibrium peace, is social miracle. Therefore, people who gratitude, with social equlibrium peace. Will receive it for themselves. Thank you sir for bring this topic.
In the second book of Italian fencing master Vincentio Saviolo's "His Practise, in Two Bookes" is named "The Second, of Honor and honorable Quarrels" - and is also the very first fencing manual written in English - is all about the "why" people should be resorting to duelling, and then cover the procedures one should follow.
And while living in London, Saviolo got himself a nemesis in the form of George Silver. And for years Silver tried to goad Saviolo into a duel, and every single time he was rebuked. At one point, it's said that Silver dumped a drink on top of Saviolo's head to try and provoke him into a duel and in response Saviolo simply summoned a magistrate to press charges for common assault.
And what's really interesting with duels in London during the days of Saviolo and Silver, is that between the time of the offence and the actual fight, the combatants didn't meet at all and all exchange of correspondence to set the date, time and weapons was through their seconds in a way that's not unlike a real estate deal that's handled through realtors and lawyers with the seller and buyer never dealing with each other in person.
They should bring back duelling!
Dueling with uzis
Buck knives, or tire buddy's. Guns to impersonal save that for group conflict where it's prolly nessecary at this point.
The first image is from Assisi, the town where I live, the mostly intact medieval where Saint Francis was born, OMG I'm so happy!!
While duel to the death is extreme, it would be nice to be capable of challenging one to a three round boxing match with amateur boxing rules. It isn't feasible but it would be better than brawling in public. People were more inclined to be polite and if this required fearing for one's life, I would chose politeness and see about the other matters after.
Agreed. Nowadays you’ll get thrown in jail for a simple fist fight. There just has to be convention that the loser is not allowed to come back with a knife or gun for revenge.
"People are such snowflakes, we should go back to a time where people were stoic against mere words"
The aforementioned time:
well, at least, easily offended people would be more severely dealt with, than today, it would clean up some of the demographic.
@@maximilianolimamoreira5002 not if the offended one is good with sword.
The snowflakes of today were the commoners of yesteryear.
They knew to keep their head down lest it be chopped of.
@@maximilianolimamoreira5002 Imagine complaining that other people are easily offended and in the same sentence openly wish for the murder of those people for this perceived slight.
"stoic against mere words" - I doubt anyone thought that was ever the case in any era.
"We need to go back, Marty."
Seriously.
Thanks this was fun . In the UK parliament there are two lines on the floor. These are to stop duels in parliament.
Are the good old days
U deserve More than what u have right now ur vidios are interesting and the animatiosns are good
Number one!
The challenge, demand satisfaction
If they apologize, no need for further action
Number two!
If they don’t, grab a friend, that’s your second
Your lieutenant when there’s a reckoning to be reckoned
From what i have heard and read the rapier could be used as a dueling sword but was very much a battle field side arm and compared to most swords were rather heavy and robust with the wight equal to that of a medieval arming sword if not heavier and some what longer . The small sword evolved from this a much smaller and lighter weapon and was almost purely a dueling weapon
Are you sure you are not confusing rapier with estoc? Estoc allows for much better piercing of armor and greater stopping power IIRC
@@pineapplethief4418 no i am not. There are pictures showing military drills for soilders using the rapier on the battle feild in training manuals. Also by the time rapiers had reached there peak of popularity soilders were not wearing as much armour.
I like your scientific analysis of history. Too often, I hear or read about overgeneralized conclusions on certain aspects, due to one example.
Don't duels still happen in the form of prison fights?
The only difference is usually there is the complicating factors of complex hierarchies and networks of alliances.
If you count duel as jumping a guy in the shower with a shank
No
When you say "network of alliances," that's a pretty huge difference that implies a lot of other differences. Prison combat is spontaneous mass brawls with improvised weapons, and it's about the result, not proving your courage by participating. It is essentially warfare, not a duel.
Some gangs OUTSIDE of prison may have duel-like customs for resolving INTERNAL disputes, but it's hard to verify as most members would be reluctant to tell outsiders about such things.
On an American submarine, if someone goes into the A-gang space and rings the bell that's sitting there (I can't even remember the actual purpose the bell is supposed to have), this is viewed, jokingly, as an "insult" to the "honor" of the entire division that owns the space, and, assuming no fun-ruining officers are around, one of the A-gangers will step up and wrestle the offending person. All in good fun, but has a form that deliberately echoes the idea of duelling.
Charlie saying that he declares satisfaction from the lawyer finally makes sense.
You could make a good twelve episodes anime out of the Jarnac's story
Fantastic. This is the first serious feature I have seen on this subject. Thank you
People Today: “People back in old days weren’t as sensitive as they are today!”
People back in old days: “You dare say G’day mate instead of Good day friend? Have at you knave!”
Coup de Jarnac itself is a topic on its own. What could it be? A simple high-low feint? With the back-edge or the front-edge? Did he parry a cut with his buckler and sliced low? Did he stuff his opponent's blade with his buckler and started hammering at his legs with his sword?
AFAIK, the story of Jarnak is sadder. Firstly, it was a political bullying from a vastly superior fighter and secondly, when the fighter got severely injured despite all odds, he refused to yield accepting his death rather than live as a invalid.
Totally accurate, except for the name : it's "Jarnac" (like the town).
The Rapier was not light and was used on the battlefield and often to a great effect. The channel Scholagladiatoria, which is focused on swords and swordfighting, did a lot of videos on the Rapier.
Jarnac was born too soon, stepmoms have a whole new meaning today.
How about the Duel with in it Jim Bowie. The famous Sand Bar incident. Where a certain Samuel Wells dueling Dr. Maddox. With Jim Bowie is one of the seconds to Wells.
It started out decent, before it descend into free-for all brawl between the two group. leaving a few dead and wounded. That's also where Jim Bowie famous Bowie Knife became infamous after Jim being shot many times and got run through with a sword manage to disemboweled one and cut-off the arm of another.
And now we can do duels with:
Magic the Gathering,
Pokemon,
Yu-gi-oh
Any other card game, board game.
Any martial sport.
I think we regressed somewhat.
Regressed? Would you rather have people murdering each other at weddings? Lmao
We all know that a the modern man settles all disputes of honour in the arena of 1v1 on rust
@@jermainereyem7635 yes
Would be a wedding you wouldn't forget. 😏
@@Auriorium If see anyone trying to start an old school duel at a wedding party they getting thrown tf out for starting some bullshit lmao
“Hey”
“Whatsup bro”
“Fucking duel me now”
6:20 origins of "bröther may i have some öats".
Charles James Fox' reply cracked me up. What a guy!
A later example of how messy and chaotic duels can be would be The Sandbar Fight, where James Bowie was famously present (though he wasn't one of the duels). The real fight started after the duel was already over and both duellists were alive. They were apparently happy with that conclusion but not so much the other people who were present.
6:55 I guess that Löser was the loser then...
“Whatta Loser. Sad.”
Beautiful video! Should have 1 million subscribers!
Hey, this may be a dumb question, but in a previous video, you said to start a battle you could try insulting your opponent, but how would the insult reach the opponent? Would you send a messenger? Would you just insult them to your army and expect the news to reach them? Would love some clarity?
Messenger, parley, good old lungpower, whatever works.
Sometimes armies were camped/entrenched close enough they could hear each other if they were yelling. Otherwise a messenger would probably be sent.
I don't know..... But rasing middle finger may worth thousand words?
I always wondered when the original use of the word "Loser" began and why.
I didn't realise it went that far back.😂😂😂
Thank God duels aren't common practice anymore, so many men killed because of attachment to ego and reputation
If a man is stupid enough to risk his life for his ego, It may be doing the human race a favor to remove them from the gene pool.
@@genghiskhan6809 that implies that one's pride is tied to their genes, which wouldn't necessarily be the case.
And people say toxic masculinity isn't real.
You should continue this with the terms of the duel, especially those of the New World. Such as duelists sitting astride a log with their pants nailed to it and fighting with knives. Or the duelists entering opposite ends of a large warehouse at night (before electric lights) and hunting each other amongst the stacks of good with knives. Or just hunting each other in the dark woods.
People in the past were much stronger, not like modern generation that gets hurt by mere words.
People in the past:
Really? Have you even watched the video? This is about people that were willing to kill over words.
@@davidribeiro1064 That's the point. I heard so many times how modern generations are weak, because "words hurt their feelings". Every time I hear that, I think of so many instances trough history how people were offended over things we would laugh. In middle ages, slap could literally be causus belli. And don't get me started on Antiquity where self-serving justice was rampent all over the Middle East and Mediterranean.
@@aleksapetrovic6519 Got it. My misunderstanding. Thank you.
Depends on when and where. But usually when I hear someone say that people had thicker skin in the past they are referring to decades ago not centuries.
@@MALICEM12 They woulb wrong about it too.
I wanted to know about dueling in high school but my teacher never got into it and I forgot once I graduated. Recommended said the learning never stops💯
Imagine dying just because you couldn't apologize or were easily offended.
Do you think that doesn't still happen in prison fights? The only difference is usually there is the complicating factors of complex hierarchies and networks of alliances.
Happens everyday in the ghettos. Of America at least.
In Russo/Japanese war 1905 there was some Japanese soldier who was good with a sword and he challenged Russians to duels before the battle as it was the way of his ancestors.
He killed a number of Cossacks and the until he challenged them once and a guy name Alexandar Saicich approached, he came all the way from Montenegro to Japan fight for Russians. Saicich killed the Japanese swordsmen when they clashed in a sword fight on horses while the 2 armies were shouting war cries. Japanese saluted Saicich as the winner. His Saber is being preserved in Moscow museum today.
Saicich died by jumping off second floor of a burning house, he was trying to save some old books from the top floor. A hero in life and a hero in death!
Yes he should inspire us
A nobleman could not challenge a commoner to a duel.
He just took his life.
Hollywood called and wants its historiography back. Commoners were not slaves, they had rights. Even during the Middle Ages peasants were suing and lodging formal complaints against nobles left and right over disputes. That is not something you would do if said nobles could just kill you on a whim.
@@Osvath97 Do you know of any nobles that were executed for causing the death of a commoner?
Sure, they might have been fined or expected to pay damages, but nothing like the consequences for killing a peer.
@@TheEvertw It is true that the punishments were generally lower, and death sentences were sometimes lowered. But this was also true for noble-on-noble violence, not just noble-on-commoner. And we are talking about whether nobles could just kill you. Commoners lodged formal complaints about their nobles for very minor reasons at times, it is one of the reasons some famous serial killers who were noble have been doubted by some historians since commoners would have complained long before they had managed to rack up enough to become serial killers.
Gilles de Rais is a famous example of what I mentioned above, a noble being executed for killing commoners.
There is a case of a Baron of Coucy who in the 1200s murdered three peasants who were caught poaching. He was sentenced to death, but had it lowered due to outcry.
Though I am currently not finding many examples to judge on. And the examples are of higher nobles. I can bet that if you were a simple knight with few higher social connections a death sentence like that would by no means be lowered. That particular Baron of Coucy was one of the most powerful magnates in France. By necessity most nobles were not that.
The point is that it was highly illegal still. It was not like Edo-era Japan were nobles did have the right - under specific circumstances - to kill commoners.
@@Osvath97 Each time I see an ill-informed comment on this channel, you're there to offer sound historical guidance to people whose emotions about the past seem to blind them from an unbiased take.. Thanks, once again.
Duels should be brought back. In the United States we should bring back dueling. But only for serious issues. Also, all men are equal and can fight anyone and both parties must both agree on the method of the duel and it must be done on a specific future date in a safe area away from other people for safety. In the days before the upcoming duel any side can choose to not go through with it at any moment. Papers must be signed the day of the fight relieving anyone of responsibility of the outcome and nobody can sue anyone over it nor can the duelists families sue anyone. It must be filmed and have judges to watch and make sure people follow the agreed upon rules. If the duel is to the death and one does not follow the agrred upon rules and cheats, he should be put to death be execution. If there are NO RULES in physical combat this does not apply. Medics should be on hand for anyone on either side of the duel in case they survive or for the winner. Both duelists should be forced to pay for the price of judges, officials documenting the paper work and medics on hand and the license to duel. Licensed should cost a mere $50 from both parties. Most duels should be hand to hand combat with no rules and only winning by either verbal submission, tapping out, knock out, or death if death is agreed upon. You should not be FORCED to kill your opponent if you end up deciding to show mercy. This would solve a lot of problems in society and people would be a lot more polite.
In regards to Pistol dueling. What happend if both sides missed? Did they reload and try again? Or was the risk of death enough to restore one's honor?
I think it depends on rules both sides have agreed earlier.
It was generally held that honor had been satisfied after the first exchange, but some men refused to settle for that.
There was an etiquette concerning that too. If both parties were unharmed after the first shots, the seconds would do their best to convince the duelists that their honor is satisfied and the matter is settled. If one party felt like their honor was not satisfied, another round of fire would be exchanged. Only a maximum of three shots would be exchanged, however; any further exchange of fire was seen as uncivilized.