Duels in the Middle Ages occurred on many occasions. While authorities did not usually like them, they took place for a number of reasons. Here. Jeb Smith offers an explanation on why they occurred – and what they avoided.
A 1902 depiction of Alexander Hamilton fighting his deadly duel with Vice President Aaron Burr in July 1804.
Medieval duels derived from trial by combat. When evidence and witnesses could not decide a clear verdict in court, and both sides maintained their positions, they could defend their integrity and honor in combat. Often duels were considered an accurate method to determine truth; after all, David received help from God during his duel with Goliath, the Almighty was sure to intervene, and truth would prevail.[1]
Despite the Church outlawing them, duels remained popular and kept a level of respect between individuals. They made education in proper manners and politeness as vital as we believe teaching math or language is today. A society whose citizens insult each other is attacking God; it degrades man as an image bearer of the divine. Defending "honor" is defending God. People then took insults, swears, and degrading comments so seriously the guilty party could be fined for what we deem a common occurrence.[2]
While honor might have led to the death of some in duels, the current lack of honor and human value leads to our modern plague of bullying, depression and suicide.
Avoiding war?
Further, duels could prevent larger-scale wars from occurring. Lords could settle disputes in a duel and avoid more significant conflicts. For example, in 2002, Iraq offered their president and vice president to duel with their American counterparts to avoid the cost and bloodshed we know as the Iraq war.[3] Had a duel decided matters, we would have avoided thousands of deaths on both sides (including many innocent non-combatant lives) and the tremendous cost involved.
Part of our modern objection to dueling is it is very unselfish. It declares honor, integrity, societal standards, a good name, and justice are more vital than satisfying selfish desires.
Duels prevented wars, held people accountable, and did not let "barbarity" loose on society.[4] In contrast, today, "men" are supposed to have "tough skins" and accept insults and moral decay. The potential of duels cut down on insults, especially towards women. They reduced assassinations by providing an alternative to murder and allowing a cool-down period. Depending on the time and area, very few actually died in duels, especially when the weapon of choice was a sword. An injury or even showing up for the duel proved your honor, and the would-be adversaries could talk out their differences, retaining their integrity.
Those who believe the Middle Ages were violent due to duels, should know they were even more popular during the Renaissance and reached their height in the 18th century. As the medieval feudal lords morphed into aristocratic gentlemen and standing armies replaced them on the battlefield, they needed an "outlet." Duels provided the opportunity to show their courage. In addition, democracy extends politics through all members of society. Hence, duels became common among politicians, news editors, columnists, and anyone with a political opinion – and thus they became more frequent.
A more destructive evil?
While duels are undesirable, one could argue they avoid a more destructive evil. Barbara Holland wrote, "Currently, over 10,000 people in America die every year by firearms…most of the deaths are spur of the moment, and this is considered progress."[5] Many of these deaths, some would argue, could have been prevented by reinstating duels. Many murders result from various decays in our society and how we treat, speak, and act toward each other. In retaliation and anger, execution-style murders are committed in the dark in far greater numbers, where the victim does not have a fair chance. In other words, these crimes lack the equality of duels.
Further, while our murders have significantly risen, we still defend what we hold dear in society. But rather than the good name or reputation of a lady, family, and personal honor, it is now the nation-state. Just as modern murders have risen, so has the number of people who willingly defend their government and nation out of patriotic duty. They volunteer if the country's honor is contested or insulted like individuals used to for themselves. We have elevated the state, degraded the individual, and regard one kind of duel between gigantic governments run by politicians as acceptable and the other far less devastating duel between individuals as barbaric.
The site has been offering a wide variety of high-quality, free history content since 2012. If you’d like to say ‘thank you’ and help us with site running costs, please consider donating here.
[1] (Holland 2003, 9)
[2] (Singman 2013, 118-119)(Tierney and Painter 1983, 100)(Seebohm 1911, 376)
[3] (Holland 2003, 290)
[4] (Holland 2003, 24)
[5] (Holland 2003, 285)
