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.

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

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.

The Polish one is somewhat lacking.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!!!🤺

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?”.

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.

That was a Mensur tho

“It was the lag”

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.

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

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.

If I am not mistaken, Pyrrhus chalenged him, but mother of that soldier stealkilled him.

Neoptolemus and Eumenes fought a brutal duel as well

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.

Really underrated comment ☝

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.

Art imitates reality I guess.

as a frenchman, I demand satisfaction!

Ha face to foot style how ya like it

I can attest to this, I was a fighters second and helped choose when and where

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

Loose, sir? Why, only in the bowels of my wavering opponent is this so.

Lose

@@BuddyLee23 lmao, nice

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

Except for most of history it was never that case.

@@Hytegia what a ridiculous generalized statement. The European nobility of a 300 yr period do not represent all men in the world ever

But in Europe it does.

As a québécois I have never heard that either

I heard it , pretty nowadays though

moi non plus

And he ended up proving himself correct

You have hate, you have anger, but you don’t use them.

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

Pretty sure this wasn‘t made within a week 😄

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"

That sounds hilariously stereotypical

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!

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.

Awesome movie.

Wonder why they don't include this one in famous stories about Lincoln they tell schoolkids

He also picked swords as the weapon and cut a tall branch over his opponent’s head, the opponent then apologised and backed out

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

Seriously.

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

quizás hasta hoy existen algunos.

Let freedom ring

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

“Whatta Loser. Sad.”

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?

@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.

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.

Totally accurate, except for the name : it's "Jarnac" (like the town).