What happens if someone refuses a duel?

Dueling is a significant plot point for a couple of books. The practice is clearly enshrined in law, but to my knowledge we never got too much in the way of details. This leads me to wonder why people actually agree to stand on a field and shoot at each other with archaic pistols when they clearly don't want to.

In 'old' times when society was a bit more violent and dueling was a thing I suspect that refusing a duel would get you shamed as a coward, but in modern times where society actually frowns on the practice I'm fairly sure the majority of people would actually be behind the person who says "What? No, that's stupid!" when challenged to a duel.

This leads me to suspect that there's an actual legal punishment for refusing a duel, as opposed to it just being a tradition that you have to accept? Otherwise, why would anyone actually go through with a duel against someone like Summervale?

Scuffles wrote:Dueling is a significant plot point for a couple of books. The practice is clearly enshrined in law, but to my knowledge we never got too much in the way of details. This leads me to wonder why people actually agree to stand on a field and shoot at each other with archaic pistols when they clearly don't want to.

In 'old' times when society was a bit more violent and dueling was a thing I suspect that refusing a duel would get you shamed as a coward, but in modern times where society actually frowns on the practice I'm fairly sure the majority of people would actually be behind the person who says "What? No, that's stupid!" when challenged to a duel.

This leads me to suspect that there's an actual legal punishment for refusing a duel, as opposed to it just being a tradition that you have to accept? Otherwise, why would anyone actually go through with a duel against someone like Summervale?

Reading between the lines in RFC's account of why Paul Tankersley accepted Summervale's challenge - see http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... ngton/28/1 - it's at least clear that there's no legal punishment for refusing a duel. Apart, that is, if you want to read it that way, from it being the case that if you do accept the challenge, you are not subject to any other way the challenger may deal with the issue, such as charging you with assault in Paul's case.

There are a raft of specific issues behind accepting that duel in that case that won't be a general answer, but for that general answer (if there is one at all) - social standing means a lot to people that have it, and there are always ways to lose it. Dueling culture survives because of that social pressure to accept a duel or lose the reputation of standing by your words and deeds, and of having physical courage. Maybe that is stupid - I'm more inclined to agree with you that it is, myself, than disagree - but people do in fact value things more than their own lives, and if refusing a duel jeopardizes that, they've got powerful reason not to.

I think Jeff has it right on this one. People accept challenges to duel as a result of social pressure. Then, too, add in the whole concept of honor into the mix which somehow translates into challenging someone to a duel if one feels one's honor has been questioned. Or that declining a challenge makes one less than honorable.

Dumb, I think. Honor has to do with honorable behavior such as dealing with integrity, looking out for others, and so on. It has nothing to do with dueling. Risking a bullet or otherwise placing one's self at risk in defense of someone who is vulnerable or in defense of one's community or country can be applauded as commendable. Doing the same thing out of hyper-sensitivity is entirely something else. And going around looking for duels and calling it "defending honor" is simply criminal.

Don

n7axw wrote:I think Jeff has it right on this one. People accept challenges to duel as a result of social pressure. Then, too, add in the whole concept of honor into the mix which somehow translates into challenging someone to a duel if one feels one's honor has been questioned. Or that declining a challenge makes one less than honorable.

Dumb, I think. Honor has to do with honorable behavior such as dealing with integrity, looking out for others, and so on. It has nothing to do with dueling. Risking a bullet or otherwise placing one's self at risk in defense of someone who is vulnerable or in defense of one's community or country can be applauded as commendable. Doing the same thing out of hyper-sensitivity is entirely something else. And going around looking for duels and calling it "defending honor" is simply criminal.

Don

It's quite possible that certain segments of the population would totally shun someone who refused a 'reasonable' duel. Depending on who those are that might be a real problem. (Imagine if it was your boss, or a Lord being rendered politically powerless in the House of Lords, etc)

Also, it seems unlikely in modern Manticore, but it's not impossible that in their semi-recent past for a military officer to refuse a duel be be at risk of being dismissed from the service either for lack of honor or lack of courage. And even if no formal process existed for that the refuser risks it coloring every commanding officers impression of them, every fitness report, every promotion board. That can be a lot of pressure to do the 'honorable' thing and put your life on the line to satisfy honor.

Excellent question if somewhat non usual. Answers already given. Social, peer, professional, institutional, reverant and other absolute pressures enter into it.

To add to the strangeness, the more at stake, the higher the complusion of both to agree to meet on the field. And the individual accepting a challange has a great advantage.

A poor man who also happens to be thruogh training or inclination a very dangerous person has a distinct advantage. He can command the rules of engagement. To the death has a final ring to it.

Sosss ... that leads to professional duellers. It also would lead to professional counter duellers. Perhaps one can obtain dueling insurance. "Champion dueller available. POR on demand. Not cheap."

Duelling might have a sobbering effect on some sorts of social behavior. It might also tend to level the playing field between social classes. One can always hire some shootest or blademan.

Perhaps our present social and political system here in the USA could benefit from legal duelling. "FILL YOUR HAND YOUR SON OF A BITCH"! If nothing else it would be fun to watch. HB

HB of CJ wrote:Excellent question if somewhat non usual. Answers already given. Social, peer, professional, institutional, reverant and other absolute pressures enter into it.

To add to the strangeness, the more at stake, the higher the complusion of both to agree to meet on the field. And the individual accepting a challange has a great advantage.

A poor man who also happens to be thruogh training or inclination a very dangerous person has a distinct advantage. He can command the rules of engagement. To the death has a final ring to it.

Sosss ... that leads to professional duellers. It also would lead to professional counter duellers. Perhaps one can obtain dueling insurance. "Champion dueller available. POR on demand. Not cheap."

Duelling might have a sobbering effect on some sorts of social behavior. It might also tend to level the playing field between social classes. One can always hire some shootest or blademan.

Perhaps our present social and political system here in the USA could benefit from legal duelling. "FILL YOUR HAND YOUR SON OF A BITCH"! If nothing else it would be fun to watch. HB

Actually professional duelist, the way the Manticoran and most historic systesm (AFAIK) were set up, is tricky.

Denver Summervale was only able to do it because he forced an issue of honor between himself and Paul. But Pavel Young wasn't able to simply hire a professional dueler once Honor challenged him. (And that coward would have done so in a heartbeat if it has been acceptable).


There have been some rules of dueling that allow the 2nd to step in if the primary has begun, but it unable to finish, the duel; but I'm not aware of any that let this step in before the duel starts. So you can't even hire a professional as your second, and then become injured or ill to let them fight in your place.


So professional duelers can't really work as insurance. Only as a way to attempt to murder someone by instigating a incident that can serve as a pretext to duel the target.

Two Pearls on this issue.

Why did Paul Tankersley accept Summervale's challenge?

Why did Pavel Young accept Harrington's challenge?

Jonathan_S wrote:There have been some rules of dueling that allow the 2nd to step in if the primary has begun, but it unable to finish, the duel; but I'm not aware of any that let this step in before the duel starts. So you can't even hire a professional as your second, and then become injured or ill to let them fight in your place.

So professional duelers can't really work as insurance. Only as a way to attempt to murder someone by instigating a incident that can serve as a pretext to duel the target.

There is TextEv for being able to hire a professional to stand in your stead. However given the case in question was Jean Marrou who was blind, I suspect that sort of thing might be considered a special case? "And Marrou would have every reason to request a champion," Daniel Chou added. "

Hmm ... That does mean there's pretty much no chance of anyone ever challenging Emily Alexander to a duel! If you're lucky she hires a professional champion, if you're unlucky Honor Harrington insists on doing the dead!

PalmerSperry wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:There have been some rules of dueling that allow the 2nd to step in if the primary has begun, but it unable to finish, the duel; but I'm not aware of any that let this step in before the duel starts. So you can't even hire a professional as your second, and then become injured or ill to let them fight in your place.

So professional duelers can't really work as insurance. Only as a way to attempt to murder someone by instigating a incident that can serve as a pretext to duel the target.

There is TextEv for being able to hire a professional to stand in your stead. However given the case in question was Jean Marrou who was blind, I suspect that sort of thing might be considered a special case? "And Marrou would have every reason to request a champion," Daniel Chou added. "

Hmm ... That does mean there's pretty much no chance of anyone ever challenging Emily Alexander to a duel! If you're lucky she hires a professional champion, if you're unlucky Honor Harrington insists on doing the dead!

You don't hire a professional, you 'ask' them to be your second. The second does the duel if you don't.

Isn't duelling, (sp?) prohibited within the military between personnal of different ranks within the same command structure? A Lieutenant could not challange and duel a Senior Captain if the Loo is in the Capts chain of command?

But ... could equal or equailivant (sp) ranks not in the same chain of command slug it out? Would this be allowed? Or would it be against the officer code of conduct? Would duelling be prohibited during a time of war? Peace also?

Seems to me there could be some abuse of the thing. Just me. HB