Chances of survival of a duel or battle

[Kyro_Lantsberger]

I think that you are asking a couple different questions that raise interesting ideas......survival in battle is totally different than surviving a duel. Conventional Wisdom seems to be that disease, malnutrition, and those nasties usually cull the herd more than battle actions of the enemy.

In a duel, I am far from expert, but look at it this way. Watch any bout of competitive fighting, see all the double hits.Tae Kwon Do guys get wrapped up in leg knots with each other all the time, boxers often counter simultaneously. Put something sharp, pointy, and deadly into the mix, and the logical result follows.

As skill increases, the ability to time free shots increases. Skill is essentially comfortabitlity with the weapon, and an intuitive sense of the tempo and angles of combat.......which I think answers the toungue in cheek question of "why not point the sword and run".......going back to the prior example of boxers, just imagine the consequences of holding out your fist and running at a trained boxer.

Good questions and good thoughts, though.......Ive read some of the articles folks have posted here, and it does support the English school's criticism of rapier/smallsword fighting.

[Allen Johnson]

I dont think its fair to compare unarmed sporting contests to a potentially fatal duel with sharp blades. You KNOW you can take blows in those other sports and be ok. In boxing you might allow a body shot on you if you can land a blow on your opponents chin. In sport fencing in order to obtain right of way all you have to do is touch your opponents attack and riposte. As long as you made contact and landed your riposte you get the point. Even if after your contact with the opponents blade it continues in to hit you square in the chest. These type of things are obviously out of the question in fighting with sharps. You are never going to say, 'hmm I'll let this longsword hit me in the leg because I'll hit him in the head at the same time'. Even though he might be dead, you wont exactly be in a position to be of much use after. If you survive the bleeding and treatment of the wound.

[Will Adamson]

A bit beside the point...but it must be pointed out that any analysis of statistical data on simultaneous woundings needs to disregard the schlager blade duels in German universities in I think the late 19th to early 20th centuries. From what I have read, they seem to be more a ground for the manufacturing of "manly" looking scars, and to prove that you aren't afraid of getting cut up. Of course, this is most likely outside of the time frame being examined, and it is not really life or death duelling, street fighting, or battle.

Just a tidbit.

[s_taillebois]

Another factor would have been the social pressures used to moderate the effects of the duel. It was a usual practice, to have unofficial interdiction by the clergy, or an aristocrat, to try to moderate the bad feelings. Hence, people did tend to be careful not to give offense just for entertainments sake...word got around. And the loss of social status/face which drove the duels, was eqaully balanced out by the dislike that often came from trying to force an inappropriate duel.
It wasn't uncommon for the duel to end at the first disabling, or appreciable blood...to have killed the opponent after he had fained was considered dishonorable. Perhaps, that's an also an indirect allusion behind Silver's condemnation of the rapier.
And anyway, for the aristocrats, one couldn't get too hyped over offenses. A duel every now and again was tolerated, but someone who did so too much...either had the King's power come down on him, for being a menace to the peace of the aristocracy...or was jumped by hired street killers (ie Welsh Daggermen) under the losing families pay.
Lots of examples of that in the literature of the period, Shakespeare being a good source.

[s_taillebois]

Another consideration was, even if the duel was successful and justified by community norms, in some cases penitence was expected.
So aristocrats getting into such things, also had to consider the potential of having to wear penitent shifts, and have to walk down to the local Bishop and cathedral. And by late medieval standards, that would have been almost as bad as dying.
Also it wasn't uncommon for the swords used in such events, to be left at, or behind the church altar as a form of penitence. Expensive, and not everyone could go around replacing their swords on a routine basis.
So without doubt, duels did occur with distressing frequency, but they did have quite a few mechanism's in place to keep a cap on it all. At least for the aristocrats.

[Will Adamson]

I've never heard the leaving the swords behind the altar thing! That would mean that churches could build up quite the collection directly attached to the duelling lore of the locale. Is this the case?

[s_taillebois]

Loyola mentioned the practice (he did so after being crippled in a battle). And some of Joan Pouselle's followers got their weapons in that manner.
What the churches did with these, not really sure. May have destroyed them, buried them somewhere. It doesn't seem that places like Pisa Cathedral, Chartres, or Santiago have kept them. At least any mention of such in my readings.
And anyway, if someone had done this type of penance (the public appearence in a pentitent shift or the leaving of the weapon)...it would have been considered inappropriate to have encouraged any stories about it all. Also problematic, because the clergy could have added terms to the penance.
There were some incidents of violence within the sanctum itself...ie when Thomas Becket was killed. Henry 2nd although he ordered the killing (perhaps), he did censure the knights involved. GainLorenzo Bernini once chased his brother into a church (with a drawn sword). Didn't kill anyone though...although as a devout catholic he no doubt wore the hair shirt for a while, or something...
And the scene in Romeo and Juliet, where Mercurio is killed at the church steps (in many stage scenes-the written play has it in a 'public place) seems to have been a reference to the symbolic aspects of churches and swords.
And using Shakespeare as an a general example...it seems the disurbance of the public arena (usually centered on the church), was more of an offense then the actual killings in the duels. Act 1 "Three civil brawls, bred of an airy word, by thee old Capulet and Montegue. Have thrice disturbed the quiet of our streets; and made Verona's ancient citizens Cast by their grave beseeming ornaments. To wield old partisans in hands of old, Cankered with peace to part your cankered hate. If you ever disturb our streets again. Your lives shall pay the forfiet of the peace"
Later in the play, Romeo Montague is as much banished for the disruptions to the common, as he is for his role in the deaths of Mercurio and Tybault.
Using Shakespeare as a example of the attitudes of the period...they were a very violent culture, but when duels and such extended into disrupting the common good, it wasn't genteely tolerated. Hence all the social pressures in place to moderate these events, or at least trying to ensure they stayed in an appropriate venue.
Not something the more violent areas and attitudes of our society are seemingly capable of doing.

[s_taillebois]

Taking way too much time on this....
Forgot to mention, if one had left a weapon at the altar...be it from a duel or battle, and went back on the penace...that was a very serious peril from their religious moral view.
In the gothic and Renn. it wasn't uncommon for people to give each other knifes and swords for tontines. So if one left a weapon at the church, and then reneged on the penitence (such as bragging about the duel) ...it would have considered breaking a pact with God. And in that period, breaking a bond with any social superior was a decision not done lightly.
To do so with God, good Lord...

[JeanryChandler]

The infamous Conyers Falchion seems to have been dedicated to a church in this manner in the 12th or 13th

http://bjorn.foxtail.nu/h_conyers_eng.htm

http://www.hurworth.org.uk/conyers_falchion.htm

[s_taillebois]

M. Chandler,
Good reference, completely forgot about that one.
Although by my preference for bastard swords, the Conyers Falchion looks like an unweildy thing. But given the depth of that blade, I imagine it could have made quite a mess of maille.