The taming of the duel: Masculinity, honour and ritual violence in london, 1660–1800

Historical Journal

Volumn 45, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 525-545

  Shoemaker, Robert B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84937387766     PISSN: 0018246X     EISSN: 14695103     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0018246X02002534     Document Type: Article

References (170)

1. Ute Frevert, Men of honour: a social and cultural history of the duel (Oxford, 1995),pp. 3–5.
2. The best treatment of duelling in eighteenth-century England is still Donna Andrew, ‘The code ofhonour and its critics: the opposition to duelling in England, 1700–1850’, Social History, 5 (1980), pp. 409–434
3. which focuses on attitudes towards duelling, but see also V. G. Kiernan, The duel in European history: honour and the reign of the aristocracy (Oxford, 1988), chs. 6–10.
4. Peter Borsay, The English urban renaissance: culture and society in the provincial town, 1660–1770 (Oxford, 1989);
5. idem, ‘The London connection: cultural diffusion and the eighteenth-century provincial town’, London Journal, 19 (1994), pp. 21–35;
6. Philip Carter, Men and the emergence of polite society, Britain, 1660–1800 (Harlow, 2001);
7. Lawrence Klein, ‘Politeness and the interpretation of the British eighteenth century’, Historical Journal (forthcoming);
8. G. J. Barker-Benfield, The culture of sensibility: sex and society in eighteenth-century Britain (Chicago, 1992), chs. 2 and 5;
9. Anthony Fletcher, Gender, sex and subordination in England, 1500–1800 (New Haven, 1995), ch. 16.
10. Miles Ogborn, Spaces of modernity: London's geographies, 1680–1780 (New York, 1998), ch. 3;
11. Robert B. Shoemaker, ‘ Public spaces, private disputes? Conflict on London's streets, 1660–1800’, in T. Hitchcock and H. Shore, eds., The streets of London, 1660–1870 (forthcoming);
12. idem, ‘The decline of public insult in London, 1660–1800’, Past and Present, 169 (2000), pp. 97–131;
13. idem, ‘Male honour and the decline of public violence in eighteenth-century London’, Social History, 26 (2001), pp. 190–208.
14. Lawrence Stone, The crisis of the aristocracy, 1558–1641 (Oxford, 1965), pp. 243–4;
15. John Cockburn, The history and examination of duels, shewing their heinous nature and the necessity of suppressing them (London, 1720), pp. 351–352.
16. Antony Simpson, ‘Dandelions on the field of honour: duelling, the middle classes, and the law in nineteenth-century England’, Criminal Justice History, 9 (1988), pp. 106–107.
17. Kiernan, Duel in European history, p. 218.
18. Frevert, Men of honour, chs. 3–5;
19. Pieter Spierenburg, ed., Men and violence: gender, honor, and rituals in modern Europe and America (Columbus, OH, 1998), chs. 1–3;
20. Kiernan, Duel in European History, chs. 11, 15–16, 18.
21. The accounts analysed were derived from a thorough survey of all relevant pamphlet literature; Gentleman s Magazine (using the contemporary index);
22. the Verney correspondence (Historical Manuscripts Commission, Seventh report)
23. Samuel Pepys's diary, John Evelyn's diary, Narcissus Luttrell's Brief historical relation, and Horace Walpole's correspondence (all using the modern indexes); The Times between 1785 and 1800 (using Palmer's Index)
24. a one year in ten sample of the published Old Bailey Proceedings and a major London newspaper (London Journal (1721, 1731).
25. London Evening Post (1741, 1751, 1761)
26. General Evening Post (1771, 1780))
27. The life and noble character of Richard Thornhill, esq. who had the misfortune to kill Sir Cholmley Deering, Bart. … in a duel in Tuttle-Fields, on Wednesday 9th of May, 1711 (London, 1711);
28. A true account of what past at the Old Bailey, May the 18th, 1711 relating to the tryal of Richard Thornhill, esq. indicted for the murder of Sir Cholmley Deering, Bart. (2nd edn, London, 1711).
29. Simpson, ‘Dandelions on the field of honour’, p. 114.
30. James Kelly, ‘ That damned thing called honour’: duelling in Ireland, 1570–1860 (Cork, 1995), pp. 81–82.
31. Advice to seconds: general rules and instructions for all seconds in duels. By a late captain in the army (Whitehaven, 1793), p. 22.
32. Shoemaker, ‘Male honour’, p. 205.
33. Self-murther and duelling the effects ofcowardice and atheism (London, 1728), p. 68.
34. See also [Louis de Muralt], Letters describing the character and customs of the English and French nations … translated from the French (London, 1726), p. 6;
35. [William Hope], Swordsman' s vade mecum: or, a preservative against the surprize of a sudden attaque with sharps (Edinburgh, 1705), p. 3.
36. Cockburn, History and examination of duels, p. 137.
37. London Metropolitan Archives (LMA), Accession 1268, 17 May 1761.
38. Public Record Office (PRO), KB 33/17/2, Trinity 6 Geo. III. As the indictment goes on to say, he was therefore challenged to fight ‘with pistols’.
39. See also W. S. Lewis, ed., Horace Walpole 's correspondence (48 vols., London, New Haven, and Oxford, 1937–1983), xvn, p. 246, XVII, p. 255.
40. The British code of the duel (London, 1824), p. 44.
41. A hint on duelling, in a letter to a friend. To which is added the bruiser, or an inquiry into the pretensions of modern manhood (2nd edn, London, 1752) pp. 32–7;
42. Abraham Clerke, A home-thrust at duelling, intended as an answer to a late pamphlet intitled, a hint on duelling (London, 1753), p. 21;
43. Samuel Stanton, The principles of duelling; with rules to be observed in every particular respecting it (London, 1790), p. 27.
44. For popular boxing matches, see John Beattie, Crime and the courts in England, 1660–1800 (Princeton, 1986), pp. 91–4. I intend to discuss non-elite duels elsewhere.
45. [John Locke], Some thoughts concerning education (London, 1693), p. 238;
46. William Hope, Hope's new method of fencing (2nd edn, Edinburgh, 1714), pp. 18, 40.
47. Bonamy Dobree, ed., The letters of Philip Dormer Stanhope, fourth earl of Chesterfield (6 vols., London, 1932), in, p. 1171 (21 June 1748), iv, p. 1732 (16 May 1751);
48. Domenico Angelo, The school of fencing (London, 1787), preface;
49. J. D. Aylward, The small-sword in England: its history, its forms, its makers, and its masters (London, 1960), pp. 107–110.
50. idem, The house of Angelo (London, 1953);
51. Arthur Wise, The history and art of personal combat (London, 1971), chs. 7–8.
52. Aylward, House of Angelo, p. 29.
53. William Hope, A vindication of the true art of self-defence (Edinburgh, 1724).
54. Seconds played a similar role in early modern France and Germany: François Billacois, The duel: its rise and fall in early modern France (New Haven, 1990), p. 65;
55. Ute Frevert, ‘The taming of the noble ruffian: male violence in early modern and modern Germany’, in Spierenburg, ed., Men and violence, pp. 39–40.
56. Honour's preservation without blood: or, sober advice to duellists (London, 1680), p. 24.
57. R. Latham and W. Matthews, eds., The diary of Samuel Pepys (11 vols., London, 1970–1983), ix, pp. 26–27;
58. J. H. Wilson, A rake and his times: George Villiers, second duke of Buckingham (London, 1954), pp. 93–98.
59. For other late seventeenth-century group duels, see Latham and Matthews, eds., Diary ofSamuel Pepys, in, pp. 170–1 ;
60. Historical Manuscripts Commission (HMC), Seventh report of the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts. Part I. Report and appendix (London, 1879), pp. 469, 479, 494, 497.
61. British Library (BL), Add. MSS 52474, fo. 56;
62. Victor Stater, Duke Hamilton is dead! A story of aristocratic life and death in Stuart Britain (New York, 1999), pp. 234–6, 246–70;
63. H. T. Dickinson, ‘The Mohun-Hamilton duel: personal feud or Whig plot? ’, Durham University Journal (June 1965), pp. 159–165.
64. William Hope, The compleat fencing-master: in which is fully described the whole guards, parades and lessons, belonging to the small-sword (London, 1692), pp. 124–125.
65. John A. Atkinson, The British duelling pistol (London, 1978);
66. J. N. George, English pistols and revolvers (Onslow County, ng, 1938), pp. 68–76.
67. Simpson, ‘Dandelions on the field of honour’, pp. 106–107.
68. Robert Baldick, The duel: a history of duelling (1965; reprint edn, London, 1979), p. 42.
69. Art of duelling, p. 49.
70. Abraham Bosquett, The young man of honour's vade-mecum, being a salutary treatise on duelling (London, 1817), pp. 88, 91.
71. See, for example, The proceedings of the King's commission of the peace … held … in the Old-Bailey … on … the 11, 12, 13, and 14th days of October, 1699 (London, 1699), trial for the murder of John Blisset.
72. Shoemaker, ‘Male honour’, pp. 193–198.
73. Stanton, Principles of duelling, p. 69.
74. Simpson, ‘Dandelions on the field of honour’, p. 113.
75. The trial of Captain Edward Clark …for the murder of Captain Thomas Innes … in a duel in Hyde Park, March 12, 1749: at Justice-Hall in the Old Bailey (London, 1750), p. 7.
76. Stanton, Principles of duelling, p. 77.
77. Bosquett, Young man of honour's vade-mecum, pp. 7–10.
78. Advice to seconds, pp. 28–33.
79. British code of the duel, p. 48.
80. A true account… relating to the tryal of Richard Thornhill, p. 9;
81. An account of the life and character of Sir Chomley Deering (London, 1711), p. 5.
82. Advice to seconds, pp. 24–25.
83. Art of duelling, p. 49
84. British code of the duel, p. 47
85. Bosquett, however, argued that a pace was five feet: Young man of honour's vade-mecum, p. 101.
86. Times, 11 June 1799.
87. The Vauxhall Affray; or the macaronies defeated (2nd edn, London, 1773), p. 7;
88. Clare Brant, ‘Duelling by sword and pen: the Vauxhall affray of 1773’, Prose Studies, 19 (1996), pp. 160–72.Because Bate was a clergyman, he could not use a pistol or sword, and a boxing match occurred instead.
89. British code of the duel, p. 43.
90. Times, 28 May 1798.
91. London Evening Post, 22 Oct. 1761 ;
92. General Evening Post, 14 Mar. 1771;
93. Times, 23 Aug. 1790.
94. Thomas Comber, A discourse of duels, shewing the sinful nature and mischievous effects of them (London, 1687), p. 51.
95. Raymond Postgate, ‘ That devil Wilkes’ (London, 1930), p. 49.
96. See also accounts of the 1779 duel between Charles James Fox and William Adam: Gentleman s Magazine, 49 (1779), p. 610;
97. John A. Atkinson, Duelling pistols and some of the affairs they settled (London, 1964), pp. 115–116.
98. Gentleman's Magazine, 56 (1786), p. 523;
99. The Daily Universal Register (Times), 9 June 1786.
100. Gentleman's Magazine, 74 (1804), p. 285.
101. Advice to seconds, p. 21.
102. Gentleman s Magazine, 61 (1791), p. 672.
103. The proceedings on the King's commission of the peace … held … in the Old-Bayly, on … the 14th, 15th, l7th, 18th, and 19th days of January, 1697 (London, 1698), trial for the murder of Christopher Ludbrook.
104. Baldick, The duel, p. 69.
105. Latham and Matthews, eds., Diary of Samuel Pepys, in, p. 170, VIII, p. 363;
106. The Weekly Journal; or, Saturday's-Post, 28 Jan. 1721.
107. Simpson, ‘Dandelions on the field of honour’, pp. 121–33;
108. Andrew, ‘Code of honour’, pp. 412–413.
109. Stater, Duke Hamilton is dead!, pp. 218, 229–34.
110. The case of Captain John Laverick, relating to the killing of Captain John Lawson (London, 1748), pp. 6–9; LMA, MJ/SP/i748/04/54–9.
111. Times, 24 and 25 Aug. 1796.
112. Times, 24 Mar. 1796.
113. Latham and Matthews, eds., Diary of Samuel Pepys, VII, p. 343;
114. HMC, Twelfth report, appendix, part VII. The manuscripts ofS. H. Le Fleming, Esq. (London, 1890), pp. 100, 299;
115. HMC, Seventh report, pp. 466, 469, 470, 494, 506
116. Narcissus Luttrell, A brief historical relation of state affairs (6 vols., Oxford, 1857), 11, pp. 628–629
117. Horace Walpole 's correspondence, XXXVII, pp. 227n, 243, 313.
118. BL, Add. MSS 41354, fo. 82.
119. Corporation of London Record Office, Sessions Papers, May 1718, depositions concerning the death of William Bowen.
120. Horace Walpoles correspondence, xvIII, pp. 191–2, 202;xx, p. 486; xxn, pp. 181–4.
121. Markku Peltonen, ‘Francis Bacon, the earl of Northampton, and the Jacobean anti-duelling campaign’, Historical Journal, 44 (2001), pp. 1–28;
122. Donald F. Bond, ed., The Tatler (3 vols., Oxford, 1987), 1, pp. 192–5 (no. 25, 7 June 1709), 211 -19 (nos. 28–9, 14–16 June 1709);
123. idem, ed., The Spectator (5 vols., Oxford, 1965), 1, pp. 359–60 (no. 84, 2 June 1711), 418- 19 (no. 99, 23 June 1711);
124. Gentleman'sMagazine, 6 (1736), p. 272, 25 (1755), pp. 112–13, 31 (1761), p. 57, 58 (1788), p. 1039;
125. Cockburn, History and examination of duels, p. 156.
126. Andrew, ‘Code of honour’, p. 420.
127. Donna Andrew, ed., London debating societies, 1776–1799 (London Record Society, vol. 30, 1994), passim.
128. Horace Walpole's correspondence, xxxvIII, p. 535.
129. Honour's preservation without blood, pp. 3–4.
130. Horace Walpole's correspondence, xxiv, pp. 537–8, xxvIII, pp. 481–2. See also the sources for this duel listed in n. 48.
131. John Trusler, A system of etiquette (Bath, 1804), pp. 64–6;
132. Shoemaker, ‘Male honour’, p. 196.
133. A home-thrust at duelling, pp. 47–52.
134. Horace Walpole's correspondence, Ix, pp. 318–319.
135. Stater, Duke Hamilton is dead!, p. 288.
136. Richard Hey, A dissertation on duelling (Cambridge, 1784), pp. 95–97.
137. Michèle Cohen, Fashioning masculinity: national identity and language in the eighteenth century (London, 1996), pp. 104–5;
138. Paul Langford, ‘Manners and the eighteenth-century state: the case of the unsociable gentleman’, in J. Brewer and E. Hellmuth, eds., Rethinking Leviathan: the eighteenth-century state in Britain and Germany (Oxford, 1999), pp. 298–301.
139. Shoemaker, ‘Male honour’, p. 205.
140. Carter, Men and the emergence of polite society
141. Klein, ‘Politeness’
142. Barker-Benfield, The culture of sensibility, ch. 2.
143. Cursory reflections on the single combat, or modern duel (London, 1773), p. 14.
144. Elizabeth Foyster, ‘Boys will be boys? Manhood and aggression, 1660–1800’, in T. Hitchcock and M. Cohen, eds., English masculinities, 1660–1800 (London, 1999), pp. 151–66, quote at p. 162;
145. [William Webster], A casuistical essay on anger and forgiveness, wherein the practice of duelling, and some defects in our laws … are considered (London, 1750);
146. John Fawcett, An essay on anger (Leeds, 1787), pp. 56–61.
147. Cockburn, History and examination of duels, p. 190.
148. Kiernan, Duel in European history, p. 145.
149. Shoemaker, ‘Male honour’
150. idem, ‘Decline of public insult’.
151. The North Briton. To which is added, by way of an appendix, the letters which passed between the Rt. Hon. Earl Talbot, etc. and John Wilkes, esq. (2 vols., Dublin, 1763), 1;
152. Postgate, ‘ That devil Wilkes’, pp. 44–50.
153. The Vauxhall Affray, p. 26;
154. Brant, ‘Duelling by sword and pen’, pp. 163–165.
155. Horace Walpole's correspondence, xxiv, pp. 537–538.
156. Trusler, A system of etiquette, p. 68.
157. Charles Moore, A full enquiry into the subject of suicide (London, 1790), p. 253
158. cited by Brant, ‘Duelling by sword and pen’, p. 165.
159. Lawrence Stone, Road to divorce: England, 1530–1987, (1990; pb. edn, Oxford, 1995), pp. 247, 255–6.
160. Times, 14 Sept. to 8 Dec. 1790, passim, quote from 7 Oct.
161. Times, 12 Feb. 1800.
162. For an argument about the role played by the state in the reduction of violence and aggression, see Norbert Elias, The civilizing process: the history of manners and state formation and civilization (1939; reprint edn trans. by Edmund Jephcott, Oxford, 1994), pp. 192, 201, 443–50.
163. Simpson, ‘Dandelions on the field of honour’, p. 138;
164. Kiernan, Duel in European history, pp. 102, 198–9, 204–22;
165. Kelly, ‘ That damned thing called honour’, esp. pp. 222, 283;
166. Frevert, Men of honour, esp. pp. 124–150
167. Billacois, The duel, pp. 32–33.
168. Times, 28 July 1787, 5, 8, 16 Dec. 1789.
169. Martin Wiener, ‘The Victorian criminalization of men’, in Spierenburg, ed., Men and violence, p. 204;
170. Simpson, ‘Dandelions on the field of honour’, p. 140.