Essay On Dueling

Imagine two gentlemen facing off in a Southern forest. Suddenly a shot crackles through the air, and a man falls dead to the ground. Later, the killer is not charged with murder or put before a judge or jury. Dueling is defined by Webster’s Dictionary as, “a fight between two people that includes the use of weapons (such as guns or swords) that usually happens while other people watch.” Some people consider dueling an art form, but most people now consider dueling a barbaric method of settling petty disputes. Either way, the history of dueling, the reasons for dueling, and the laws surrounding duels have impacted people in many ways. Even though all aspects of dueling are compelling, it is important to know how dueling originated and the
history of individual cases. Dueling first originated from the ritualistic prearranged combat of ancient Viking and Germanic tribes using war axes and hammers (Meade). It was viewed as a way to settle disputes the courts had no jurisdiction over such as matters of honor. Dueling thrived in Europe and the early Americas from the 1700s to the late 1800s. Dueling was especially common in the South and West United States where legal matters were more personal and the government was looser. Dueling was less popular in the North (Kingston). Duels, especially those with firearms, were viewed in a religious light. People believed that God would let the person that was in the right win the duel; thus, duels were viewed as just (Drake). The institution of dueling was mostly abolished by the late 1800’s when many laws were passed. Today, dueling has fizzled out for most of western culture, but it still thrives in poorer areas of the world, such as Paraguay (Kingston). For the most part, dueling has become an important historical activity, and its intriguing roots and lore still astound people to this day. Even though the overall history of dueling is thought-provoking, the plot of some individual duels is even more alluring. Two famous duels have captured the public eye and have been wrought into history. The Burr v. Hamilton Duel is our country’s most famous duel, with the The Ritchie-Glasswell Duel being a close runner-up. The Burr-Hamilton Duel was a disagreement over a political matter and unlike most duels it ended in death. The duel was initiated by Hamilton after he lost a Senate seat to Burr. Hamilton accused Burr of foul play. They later dueled, and Hamilton got shot in the chest and died (Meade). The equally deadly Ritchie-Glasswell Duel happened because of a girl. Richie was drinking wine at a ball and made a rude comment to a young girl Glasswell had brought to the ball. Ritchie would not apologize. Glasswell sent out a formal challenge to a duel, and Ritchie agreed. Glasswell and the seconds urged him to diffuse the conflict and apologize, but he refused (Zenry). Pistols were chosen as the weapon, and Ritchie was shot and killed (Meade). Famous duels still hold their places in history and are remembered in people’s minds. The reasons for dueling vary from place to place. In early America and Europe it is based on cultural ideals of honor and the principles of capitalism. The typical duel started when one party somehow offended the other. Next, a formal challenge would be issued by the person offended to the person who offended him. Each person would soon choose seconds, people who would decide the time, place, and weapons for the duel. The seconds also did whatever they could to amend the differences of the duelists and stop the duel. The duel would continue until the challenger’s honor was satisfied. This could be at death, first blood, or even by simply coming to the duel in the first place (Johnson). If the duel ended with both parties surviving, the wounds would be treated. If someone would be dishonored, the life of that person would be ruined. They would lose everything (Kingston). Honor is not the sole motivator for dueling, there is another important motive for dueling: money. One unusual motivator for dueling was capitalism.
Many duels were driven by unpaid debts. At the time, banks and private lenders did not have a good way of predicting the likelihood of someone paying off their loans (Kingston). When a person defaulted on a loan, the lender could tell the creditor that he had no honor and issue a challenge to a duel. Keeping honor was especially important to people such as plantation owners who were often cash-strapped, and could not afford to lose their lines of credit. If creditors lost or refused a duel, they could lose all of their property and financial lives (Kingston). Dueling was an important part of people's financial lives, and it was important to keeping healthy relations in a financial market. The motivations for dueling were varied and and the laws of the day reflected
this. The laws governing duels and the laws making dueling illegal are both intriguing. The Code Dulluo was a book published in Ireland in the early 1600’s. This book outlined the laws concerning dueling. It was considered unhonorable to break the laws of the Code Dulluo, and doing so would be equivalent to losing a duel or worse (Zenry). People who broke the Code would be shunned from their town or city. A pamphlet would be posted in the town with the details of their offense. It would become impossible for anyone who broke the Code to have a powerful position in the government or anything of the same ilk. The rules of dueling were standard and the seconds made sure the duelists knew the rules before the duel started. Public figures could not cheat or otherwise dishonor themselves in a duel. A notable exception to this is Andrew Jackson who shot a man dead in a duel immediately after his pistol misfired. In many people’s opinion, this was pure cold-blooded murder of an innocent man (Johnson). This and many other incidents like it provided lawyers and courts with enough material to eventually outlaw dueling forever. There were numerous attempts to outlaw dueling in all parts of America.
Dueling was illegal for most of its history in America. George Washington openly opposed dueling and forbade it among his officers. Ironically, the punishment for disobeying this order was death. Dueling was technically illegal in most states, but no court really cared. If a municipality did enforce the law, the duelists would just go over into the next state or a secluded part of a forest and commence the duel there. It is unclear whether the decline of dueling occurred because of passing laws or because of the decline in acceptance of dueling as a just form of trial. What is certain though is that rates of dueling sharply declined at the start of the 1800s and would never recover in
America. The history, motivations, and laws concerning dueling are important to society as a whole. Dueling is an important institution created by society. It has shaped the path of history for all time. Even if dueling is a barbaric activity, it still is an important activity.