The decline of dueling coincided with firearms getting much more reliable. Duels should have the possibility of death, but should not (usually) be “to the death”.
True, but to be fair, wasn’t this the point of duelling pistols? Much like fencing swords aren’t like real swords, duelling pistols weren’t crafted to be the most accurate or damaging firearms possible. And they came in pairs so the duellists would both have the same exact standing.
Of course, if you have to impose artificial restrictions on your supposed deadly combat to make it less deadly, you might as well simply remove the death element at all and make it a game of paintball.
The decline of dueling coincided with firearms getting much more reliable.
Possibly, but I don’t really buy it. Dueling declined first in the northern United States, and then was ended in the south only after public opinion changed, not before. It persisted in places like Peru until well into the mid twentieth century, when people surely weren’t using flintlock pistols. There are also studies like this one (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0147596720300378) that claim that the decline of dueling was pretty closely connected to either economic development or the presence of the federal government (as measured by post offices).
The decline of dueling coincided with firearms getting much more reliable. Duels should have the possibility of death, but should not (usually) be “to the death”.
True, but to be fair, wasn’t this the point of duelling pistols? Much like fencing swords aren’t like real swords, duelling pistols weren’t crafted to be the most accurate or damaging firearms possible. And they came in pairs so the duellists would both have the same exact standing.
Of course, if you have to impose artificial restrictions on your supposed deadly combat to make it less deadly, you might as well simply remove the death element at all and make it a game of paintball.
Possibly, but I don’t really buy it. Dueling declined first in the northern United States, and then was ended in the south only after public opinion changed, not before. It persisted in places like Peru until well into the mid twentieth century, when people surely weren’t using flintlock pistols. There are also studies like this one (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0147596720300378) that claim that the decline of dueling was pretty closely connected to either economic development or the presence of the federal government (as measured by post offices).