History and culture of dueling ****************************** Duels go back at least to 11th century medieval Europe and have gone through some changes. Each culture had their own rules of engagement and customs. While medieval European duels were fought with sabres or swords, the practice of using pistols came about in the 1600s. In the early 1700s, dueling was illegal in parts of Europe, but laws did not seem to diminish the practice. Dueling was not for everyone, but reserved only for those in high standing. You had to be of noble birth, or otherwise be considered a "gentleman" in order to even qualify to settle a dispute or prove or reclaim honour by way of a duel. This generally meant that you had to be either wealthy, powerful, or both. Even in cases where dueling was illegal, there was often no prosecution, the offenders being too high ranking or untouchable to punish. In a duel, each person was accompanied by at least one person, called a "second." Prior to the 1600s, not only did the dueling parties have to duel, but their seconds as well. In most European societies, it was disallowed for a person of lower class to challenge someone of upper class to a duel, and vice versa. For a nobleman to even consider a duel against a lower-ranking person was a dishonour in itself. Any person of lower standing who had committed offence to a nobleman was usually just beaten with a cane by a nobleman, or one of his servants, and dismissed. The general idea behind dueling was for an offended nobleman to protect his honour by challenging the offender to a duel. Once the duel was fought, the issue was meant to be considered resolved, regardless of the outcome. It was common for a place and time to be agreed upon, usually in some isolated place, away from crowds or prying eyes, especially in cases where the practice was banned by the local government. Going back through the ages, there were many different rules of engagement and forms of etiquette. Since 17th century European culture, it had standardised into the duels that most people are now familiar with. After a slight, insult or dishonour (real or imagined) the offended party would challenge the offender to a duel. This could be communicated verbally, or by removing a gauntlet (glove) and throwing it at the offender's feet or in other ways. If the challenged picked up the gauntlet, that was taken to mean that they agreed to a duel. This is where we get the term "Throwing down the gauntlet." There were also cases of slapping the offender across the face with the gauntlet, in particularly bitter cases, but was not common. Unlike portrayals you may have seen in the media, duels were not always to the death. There could be different terms agreed to by both parties. Often, just drawing first blood was enough to satisfy the dueller if one party was no longer able to fight. Sometimes, one or even both duellers would intentionally miss, and the issue would be settled without bloodshed. In dueling with pistols, the general rule was one shot each, and only one shot, unless another arrangement was made. In using pistols, the most common method was to have the duellers stand back to back, take a preset number of steps, turn and fire, or have a counting of seconds, then turn and fire. Sometimes the duel was initiated by having a neutral person throw down a handkerchief, signalling the duellers, already facing each other, to fire. Dueling with pistols began to fall out of favour in the 1800s, has declined sharply to the point of extinction, and unsurprisingly it is illegal almost everywhere today. There are however no distinct laws against duels, it's the damage and injuries and death that makes it prosecutable. Dueling still exists, but it has taken less bloody forms such as wrestling. source: www.gunclassics.com