the upper class, but it also projects the message that the upper class is com-
posed of honorable men. To decline challenges from members of one’s own
class can result in diminished class standing. For members of a lower class
to decline to fight can also place them in physical jeopardy; they may be-
come the targets of bullies who would steal from them, take girlfriends or
mates, or injure them for sport. Upper-class members can call upon the po-
lice authority of the state to protect them. When unimportant people re-
quest protection, they are often ignored (unless perhaps they are spies or
informers for the state).
A survey of armed combat among peoples without centralized politi-
cal systems (i.e., those who live in bands and tribes) reveals numerous en-
counters that resemble dueling but fail to meet all four characteristics.
Weapons are not matched, there are no agreed-upon conditions (or at least
there is no evidence for such), or the social position of the combatants dif-
fers (social stratification is not found in bands, but may occur in tribes).
Since motives can vary, the characteristic four cannot be used to rule out
an armed combat that meets the other three characteristics. Sometimes,
however, the criteria are met. Several examples of armed combat will be ex-
amined. The purpose of the survey is not to create a taxonomy but to re-
veal the conditions under which dueling arises. Several conclusions may be
drawn from the following examples.
Although armed combat occurs among bands (usually hunters and
gatherers), dueling, if it occurs at all, is rare. Among more politically com-
plex social units known as tribes, dueling sometimes occurs. When it does,
it is usually between combatants from different political communities,
which are sometimes even culturally different. The survey indicates that du-
eling has its origin in the military, particularly within those societies that
develop elite warriors. While nearly all societies have military organiza-
tions, by no means all warring societies produce elite warriors and a war-
rior tradition. Put another way, in political systems that are not centralized,
every able-bodied male becomes a warrior, but in some societies some men
become specialists in the use of weapons. If this occurs, there emerges a
military elite with a warrior tradition. (Militaries that stress subordination
of soldiers to the military organization do not develop an elite, even though
the society may be highly militaristic.) These elites provide the first duelists.
The duels take place, as noted above, between different political commu-
nities, rather than within a single political community. The combatants
stand in front of their respective military organizations and represent them.
This pattern is also found among peoples with centralized political systems
(chiefdoms and states). At this level of sociopolitical complexity, duels be-
tween military personnel may occur within the political community. How-
ever, in some societies another factor—feuding—comes into play, which100 Dueling