Rules of Russian duel. A duel in Russia is more than a duel! A duel is a duel of equals: Is Zolotov right Games of a duel on machine guns

How the duel took place and what they dueled with

Rules of duels (Dueling Code Durasov Vasily Alekseevich)

First of all, a duel is the occupation of nobles; commoners and commoners should not have anything to do with it, and it is an activity of nobles equal in position and status. According to the Durasov Duel Code of 1912, insults can be:

First degree - hurting pride and violating decency (apparently a sidelong glance, the code does not specify what exactly).

Second degree - offending honor (gestures, swearing).

Third degree - usually insult by action (from a wound, to a blow or tossing a glove, a touch is enough).

If there are aggravating circumstances: a woman is insulted or a weak person, the severity automatically increases by a degree, if on the contrary, the severity decreases.

The insulted person chooses a weapon, depending on the severity of the insult, he may have privileges (if insulted by an action, he can assign distances, fight with his weapon, choose the type of duel, etc.).

If someone cannot fight, then a relative or interested person can replace him.

One quarrel - one duel.

IT IS ESPECIALLY INTERESTING NOW - for slander of a journalist, if he is unavailable, the editor or the owner of the sheet where the libel was published duels.

Duels are divided into:

Legal (according to the rules for pistols, swords or sabers);
- exceptional (having deviations from the code in conditions);
- for secret reasons (they don’t want to wash dirty linen in public, but they are ready to tear holes in each other).

Seconds are appointed from among the worthy, of whom there is a court of honor - three decide controversial issues, the seconds can kill the one who violated the rules of the duel.
Having received an insult, the insulted person must declare to his opponent: “Dear Sir, I will send you my seconds.” If the opponents do not know each other, they exchange cards and addresses. Then they communicate through seconds.

Before the duel, a “Meeting Protocol” is drawn up, which describes how the duel will go and a “Duel Protocol” - how it went (there are forms in the code, I’m not kidding).
During a duel, you cannot speak or make unnecessary sounds other than “I’m fucking mother!” after a hit or an injection, violate the orders of the leader of the duel (!), violate the commands “stop”, “shoot”, “1,2,3”.

For swords they choose a wide and long alley, for pistols an open area.

It is better to undress to the waist, but you can also wear clothes that have been tested for protection.
They fight with swords either, having the opportunity to jump around and around, or they place their left legs on the indicated point and stab each other, retreating three steps means defeat. You can fight all the way, you can take breaks of 3-5 minutes per round. They fight with the hand they are used to; they cannot change it.

The swords are either your own or someone else’s, of the same length; the seconds must have metalworking tools for urgent repairs, including a vice and files (I’m not kidding).

There are a bunch of rules like if you knocked out a weapon, fell, wounded - you can’t finish it off, otherwise you’ll lose, just yell loudly and defend yourself, but you can’t attack anymore, in general, if you violated something, you’ll be punished.

Pistol duel at 25-35 steps in Europe, 10-15 in Russia.

Six types of legal pistol duels:

1. Duel on the spot on command: shoot from 15-30 steps while standing after the command: “one”, but not later than “three”.
2. Duel on the spot at will: they shoot from 15-30 steps after the command “shoot” as they wish, they can stand with their backs and turn around.
3. Duel on the spot with consecutive shots: they shoot from 15-30 steps, determining who is first by lot.
4. Duel with approach: they converge from 35-45 steps to the barrier (mark) with a distance between barriers of 15-25 steps, you can shoot as soon as the command “get closer” is received. You can’t shoot while moving, stop and shoot before the barrier, stand and wait in the same place, the enemy may approach the barrier itself.
5. Duel with approaching and stopping: the same distances, but you can shoot on the move, after the first shot everyone freezes like rabbits and shoots from where they stopped.
6. Duel with approach along parallel lines: they walk towards each other along parallel lines, at a distance of 15 steps, you cannot shoot straight away.

All duels have a time limit on the second shot.

The leader of the duel is in charge of the action, watching the loading of weapons by the seconds or a specially invited prima ballerina from the loaders, how they shuffle around at the beginning, during and after, writing denunciations to the officers’ meeting (!)

There are usually two shots fired, and a misfire is usually counted as a shot (even a serviceable high-quality flintlock gave 15 misfires per 100 shots).

You can show off: shoot in the air, this is only legal for the second, the first is not allowed, although they did this, if you shoot in the air first and the second does so, the first loses, and the second can shoot at him, if he doesn’t hit, he won’t be punished.

You cannot speak, burp, or fart - they will consider it unworthy and count as a loss.

The conditions for a duel with sabers are the same as the conditions for a duel with swords. The only difference is that a duel of this type of weapon can take place with straight or curved sabers. In the first case, opponents can chop and stab, in the second they can only chop. (Remark: I went looking for a “straight saber”, found “a cavalryman’s straight saber, five letters - broadsword.” Either I don’t know something or the broadsword became a straight saber or the saber became a crooked broadsword, but let’s chalk it up to shock, I guess Durasov figured it out in “straight sabers” better than ours).

These are the rules, in a nutshell. You just need to understand that, as stated in “Pirates of the Caribbean,” the “Pirate Code” is not a set of laws, but recommended concepts.” It’s the same here - if you want to duel with two-handed weapons, no one forbids it, your cause is “noble”. At the end of the twentieth century. they shot at ten steps from “naval” Colts - siege artillery, in the First World War and Civil War from Mausers and Nagans. Recommendations are just recommendations, so as not to follow them, the main thing is to find the same crazy like-minded people.

There were crazy people regularly, so “exceptional” duels were not described in the code, but they happened:

1. At a noble distance: assigning a distance of more than 15 steps, the probability of an effective outcome was low. Meanwhile, it was at an initial distance of 20 steps from his enemy that Alexander Pushkin was mortally wounded.
2. Stationary blind duel: opponents stand motionless at a specified distance, with their backs to each other. After the manager's command, they, in a certain or random order, shoot over the shoulder. If after two shots both remain intact, the pistols can be charged again.
3. Put the gun to the forehead: a purely Russian version, opponents stand at a distance that ensures a guaranteed hit (5-8 steps). Of the two pistols, only one is loaded, the weapon is chosen by lot. At the command of the manager, the opponents simultaneously shoot at each other.
4. Muzzle to muzzle: a purely Russian version, the conditions are similar to the previous ones, but both pistols are loaded. In such duels both opponents often died.
5. Through a handkerchief: a duel with a 100% fatal outcome was prescribed in exceptional cases. The opponents grabbed the opposite ends of the handkerchief with their left hands and, at the command of the second, fired simultaneously. Only one pistol was loaded.
6. Duel in the grave: they shot at a distance of no more than ten steps, almost 100% fatal for both.
7. American duel: suicide by lot. The rivals cast lots in one way or another, and the one on whom it fell was obliged to commit suicide within a short period of time. The “American duel” was resorted to more often in cases where it was not possible to arrange a traditional duel (due to legal prohibitions, too unequal position of the opponents, physical limitations), but both rivals believed that disagreements could only be resolved by the death of one of them .

As a variant of the “Russian roulette” duel with one cartridge in the drum, but sometimes only one cartridge was taken out of the drum. It is also called hussar roulette, also soprano, although there are great doubts both about the Russian origin of this phenomenon (the first mention was in 1937 in the article “Russian Roulette” in the American magazine “Collier’s Weekly”), and about its widespread use due to the lack of documentary sources. There are a number of inconsistencies, in particular, the article describes Russian officers in the First World War, but the number of Nagant cartridges is 7 pieces. (I’m shocked, I double-checked it, I also thought it was 6), and there it is described as a revolver with 6 cartridges, so perhaps “Russian roulette” is not so “Russian” after all.

Dueling weapons

In the 18th century, firearms became increasingly common in duels, mainly single-shot hammer pistols. A terrible weapon - a single-shot dueling pistol equipped with a flintlock or cap lock - in the hand of an experienced shooter left little chance for the enemy. Differences in combat experience, moral and physical qualities of the participants never made the duel absolutely equal. The statement that identical pistols gave equal chances to duelists during a duel is true only in comparison with more ancient weapons such as swords or sabers. In the middle of the 18th century, duels with pistols became the most common, and the appearance of dueling weapons finally took shape. First of all, it should be noted that the pistols were paired, absolutely identical and did not differ from each other in any way, with the exception of the numbers “1” and “2” on the design elements. To avoid misunderstandings, the seconds brought two boxes of pistols to the duel. In the 18th and first third of the 19th centuries, pistols were equipped with a flintlock, the so-called “French battery” ignition lock, which was invented by the mechanic and writer Chevalier de Aubigny. This lock was improved by the great English gunsmiths Joseph Menton, James Perde, Charles Lancaster, Harvey Mortimer, Henry Knock and was a very progressive mechanism for its time. The principle of its operation was quite simple and in many ways resembled a regular lighter. A piece of specially sharpened and beaten flint was clamped in the hard jaws of the trigger. Opposite it there was a steel flint; under it there was a so-called “shelf” with fine seed powder. When the trigger was pressed, the trigger with the flint hit the flint hard, the shelf automatically folded back and a bright beam of sparks fell onto the gunpowder. Through a special seed hole in the breech of the barrel, the fire entered and ignited the main charge. A loud, booming shot followed. However, flintlock pistols had some disadvantages: first of all, the bright flash of gunpowder on the shelf and the cloud of smoke interfered with the accuracy of the sight. Despite the invention by the British of a special “waterproof” lock, shooting in rainy, damp weather was extremely risky, because moisture wet the gunpowder on the shelf and often led to a misfire, and a misfire, according to the harsh rules of a duel, was equivalent to a shot.

On percussion flintlocks, over time, a safety cocking of the trigger, or half-cocking, appeared: the shooter cocked the hammer to half, while the sear of the trigger mechanism fell into the deep transverse cut of the trigger ankle, and the trigger was blocked. To fire, the hammer had to be cocked, while the sear went into the second, shallower notch of the cocking, from which the hammer could be released by pressing the trigger. This became necessary, among other things, thanks to the appearance of the first (muzzle-loaded) cartridges, created with the aim of increasing the rate of fire of military personnel from the muzzle of loaded guns. When using such a cartridge, its paper casing was used as a wad over the bullet, so the gunpowder was first poured onto the lock shelf, and only then poured into the barrel. If the trigger had remained cocked while the bullet was being sent into the barrel, an accidental shot could have occurred, which would have inevitably resulted in serious injury to the shooter. Before the advent of muzzle-loading cartridges, for safety, gunpowder was usually poured from a powder flask first into the barrel, and only then onto the shelf.

The first safety devices in their modern form appeared with flintlocks and even wheel locks. On expensive flintlock hunting guns and rifles there was a safety device in the form of a slider located on the locking board behind the trigger, which in the forward position fixed the trigger half-cocked, so that it could not only be released, but also cocked. This ensured complete safety when carrying a loaded weapon. For a wheel lock, the fuse usually had the form of a flag located at the rear of the lock board, which in the rear position prevented the cocked trigger from being pulled, blocking the sear. The most expensive versions of wick locks could have the same fuse.

At the beginning of the 19th century, a truly revolutionary turn in the history of firearms was made by a modest Scottish priest from Bellevue County, Alexander John Forsyth. He invented a fundamentally new ignition lock, which would later be called the “capsule lock.” The meaning of the innovation was that now it was not gunpowder that ignited on the seed shelf, but a special chemical composition. Later, the composition that ignited from the impact was placed in a copper cap-cap, placed on a steel rod - a fire pipe, through which the fire instantly went into the barrel.

The dueling pair was placed in an elegant box along with accessories. Usually they consisted of a charging ramrod, a wooden hammer, a bullet, a powder flask, a powder measure, tools - a screwdriver, a cleaner, a kreutzer for unloading a pistol. In front of each other, the opponents' seconds, jealously watching all the subtleties, measured out an equal amount of gunpowder, carefully wrapped the lead bullet with a special leather plaster and, using a ramrod, hammered it into the barrel with blows of a hammer. The bullets were round, lead, with a diameter of 12-15 mm and a weight of 10-12 g. Black smoky powder was added to 3-8 g. According to the rules, it was allowed to use both rifled and smooth-bore pistols, as long as they were exactly the same. All dueling pistols had sights. On the earliest samples, the sight and front sight were fixed, like those of a military weapon. Later, adjustable sights appeared - front sight horizontally, rear sight - vertically, to adjust the aiming line. Sometimes the trigger mechanism of the pistol was equipped with a special device to soften the trigger force - a sneller, but most duelists preferred the usual “tight” trigger. This is explained simply - in excitement, unable to control his own finger, the shooter could fire an involuntary, accidental shot past the target. Even without a sneller, the pistol made it possible to fire a very accurate shot.

Famous weapons historian Yu.V. Shokarev in one of his articles says that “in the middle of the last century, an expert commission that studied all the circumstances of Lermontov’s death fired control shots from a dueling pistol and a powerful army TT. It turned out that the penetrating ability of a dueling pistol is only slightly inferior to the power of the TT, the pointed bullet of which can pierce through eight dry inch boards at a distance of 25 meters. But most of the duels took place at a distance of 15 steps...” Some slaves of honor happened to shoot at 6 steps. However, it should be said that in special, absolutely exceptional cases, the opponents’ seconds, not wanting their friends to die, by mutual agreement allowed some liberties when loading pistols. The most innocent was a double or even triple charge of gunpowder: when fired, the pistol was thrown up strongly and the bullet flew past the target.
“Criminal” from the point of view of the code of honor was simply not putting a bullet into the barrel, which M.Yu. described so well. Lermontov in "Hero of Our Time".

Pistols could be purchased without special permission from the police at any large gun store or directly from a gunsmith. The products of English gunsmiths were considered the best, but... in 1840, in England, on the initiative of peers, admirals and generals, a society was created, the members of which swore an oath to no longer take part in duels. Thus, under the influence of the British elite, who protested against dueling, duels were rejected and all conflicts were resolved in court.

Since that time, the production of dueling pistols in England has practically ceased, and gunsmiths have switched to the creation of sports, road and hunting weapons. The palm went to the French and German masters. Pistols were bought in all European capitals and were even ordered by mail. Needless to say, dueling headsets have always been particularly carefully crafted. These perfect killing mechanisms were decorated with steel engraving, gold and silver inlays, and the stocks were made of seasoned Italian walnut, ebony or Karelian birch butts. The trunks were forged from the best varieties of bouquet damask and deeply blued in black, brown or blue. The pistol handles were covered with beautiful grooves - flutes. Arabesques and grotesques were often used in decoration - stylized ornaments of flowers and plants, bizarre images of half-humans, half-animals, mysterious masks, faces of satyrs, mythical monsters and acanthus leaves. Dueling pistols were expensive, but who would dare to bargain when purchasing an instrument of honor.

Much less often, long-barreled firearms (duel with shotguns, rifles, carbines) and multi-shot pistols or revolvers, for example, the “naval” Colt, were used for duels. Dueling with rifles and shotguns was popular in America and Mexico; the “American” duel consisted of two or a group entering a house, a forest, a gorge, finding an enemy there and seeing what happens. This is already a completely wild type of duel, rather not of the nobility, but of commoners.

Epee (from Italian Spada) is a long-bladed piercing-cutting or piercing weapon directly descended from a one-and-a-half-handed sword with a blade length of 1000 mm or more, straight, in early designs with one or two blades, later ones with a faceted blade, as well as a characteristic developed hilt of complex shape with a protective bow, weighing from 1 to 1.5 kg. The epee appeared, like many types of swords, in Spain in the 1460s. Gradually, the sword became lighter and turned into a sword, which at first was just a light sword with a somewhat complicated hilt, which made it possible not to wear a plate glove. The sword was originally used for cutting, only over time it became primarily a piercing weapon.

What can be called a combat sword is a Reitar sword, common among armored Reitar horsemen (from German Schwarze Reiter - “black horsemen”), they preferred not to charge into the infantry formation after shooting like cuirassiers, but to systematically shoot the infantry with pistols. Their auxiliary weapon was a sword, since most of the Reitar were from Southern Germany, the legendary mercenaries, famous throughout Europe, gave their name to their sword. Reitar sword (German Reitschwert (“horseman’s sword”) is a piercing-cutting weapon with a straight blade, total length – 1000-1100 mm, blade length – 850-950 mm, blade width – from 30 to 45 mm, cross width – 200 -250 mm, weight from 1100 to 1500 g, there are early examples weighing up to 1700 g. It was most popular in the cavalry of the 16th century, it was mainly used as a sword, moreover cutting than piercing.

A rapier or civilian sword with a straight blade about 1100-1300 mm long, weighing about 1.5 kg is familiar to us from films about musketeers, where they are forced, due to the directors’ ignorance, to swing it and stab it like later examples. In fact, fencing with such a rapier was quite poor, a piercing lunge, a few simple defenses, rather dodges, the blades rarely rang, and a couple of basic chopping blows, for example, the “peasant”, when a sword grabbed with two hands struck with all the might. This is approximately what the musketeers were taught, whose fencing skills were extremely poor; in the time of d’Artagnan, fencing was considered shameful, you had to win through force, chopping, otherwise it was considered dishonest. The musketeers shot poorly (they did not carry a matchlock musket, preferring to buy guns with their own money), they fenced even worse, but sometimes they only burst into the bastions with swords, inspiring well-deserved terror, however, like the cardinal’s guards, who were in no way inferior to them. But mostly the musketeers were engaged in dispersing peasant uprisings and political arrests, for which the rapier was quite enough for them. It fell out of use in the 17th century and was often used in conjunction with fist shields, then dags (daggers).

Short swords (English: Small sword) are piercing weapons with a straight blade about 800 mm long, total length about 1000 mm, weight 1-1.3 kg. They can be either with blades or exclusively faceted with a sharpened tip. Appearing in the middle of the 17th century under the influence of the French school of fencing. The Academie d'Armes, founded at the end of the 16th century, subsequently almost replaced other types of swords. These are the swords familiar to us from later times, which were owned by officers, sometimes soldiers, and of course nobles; according to status, it was later awarded to university students or their graduates , was a distinction of status for civil officials and gradually degenerated into a ceremonial weapon, still used today and sporting swords and rapiers.

The saber in its usual sense appeared in the 7th century among the Turkic peoples as a result of a modification of the broadsword; the first sabers were found in kuruk near the village. Voznesenki (now Zaporozhye). Saber (Hung. szablya from Hung. szabni - “to cut”) is a chopping-cutting bladed weapon with an average length of a curved one-sided blade sharpening of 80-110 cm, with a mass of 0.8-2.6 kg. The saber appeared as an idea to reduce the weight of the blade while maintaining the same chopping abilities, by reducing the contact area, and in general it copes with the task. As a bonus, with a slight bend, it became possible to inflict a cut wound, which significantly increases the chances of quickly incapacitating the enemy due to large blood loss.

In the countries of Central and Western Europe, sabers were not common until the second half of the 16th century; they received recognition in the 18th-19th centuries, and swords and swords were mainly used. In the 17th-18th centuries, under Eastern European influence, sabers spread throughout Europe and became a cavalry weapon; they were used to arm hussars, dragoons and mounted grenadiers. They came from sabers of the Polish-Hungarian type. During the Egyptian campaign, the French introduced the fashion for Mamluk-type sabers, and the Cossacks, who flaunted such popular weapons in Paris, only strengthened it. Sabers began to be used everywhere in European armies, regardless of military branches, right up to aviation. Sabers and broadswords (or dragoon sabers) are still used as ceremonial weapons in many countries.

Weapons and dueling code

Let us remind you that Viktor Zolotov responded to the accusations against himself, as well as his department, presented in the investigation of the so-called “Anti-Corruption Foundation”. He accused Navalny and his foundation of slander and, like a real man, offered the oppositionist a duel.

We talked with the historian, author of a book about dueling scandals of the early last century, Andrei Ivanov, about the rules by which duels used to be arranged, how they happened between military and civilians, how an apology could be made, and why resolving issues through the courts was considered humiliating.

Constantinople: Were duels between military and civilians allowed before? How did they happen?

Andrey Ivanov: At the end of his reign, Alexander III in 1894 legalized duels between officers, because they had always existed, but were illegal. To establish some kind of order, a legislative measure was adopted. True, officers had the right to sort things out at the barrier only after a decision was made by the officer’s court of honor. If he came to the conclusion that there was no other way to wash away the offense, then such permission was given. And according to all the rules, the duel was arranged.

And in 1897, fights between officers and civilians were allowed. Although this created a certain problem. There was such an episode in the first State Duma, when Lieutenant Smirsky challenged Deputy Yakubson to a duel, who spoke unflatteringly about the Russian army. But the problem was that if the officer had the right to do this, then there were no legal acts allowing this for civilians. And the problem arose of how a civilian could respond to a call if he ended up violating the law.

Ts.: And how was this problem solved?

A.I.: In this case, she resolved it with an apology from the deputy. This challenge did not bode well for him, since the officer was a prize-winner in shooting and a future famous designer of sporting weapons. Therefore, the deputy chose to apologize. Otherwise, the civilian would face punishment, although not very severe.

The judges, as a rule, came into the situation by agreeing that a duel is not a murder, but a duel. Duelists, if no one was killed, were punished with short prison terms, usually a few days or weeks if there was an injury.

Ts.: What if they killed?

A.I.: If an officer was killed in an officer's duel, but the duel took place with permission, then there was no criminal prosecution. But if civilians fired and someone was killed, the criminal penalties could be up to several years.

Ts.: How could people refuse a duel? Besides apologizing, what other options were there? Ignoring?

A.I.: At the beginning of the 20th century, the duel was already becoming obsolete. And the progressive-democratic part of society opposed duels, considering them a medieval relic. Therefore, politicians and public figures often refused duels during this period, saying that this was unacceptable to them for reasons of principle.

As a rule, in this case, the party that challenged the duel considered the offender to be a coward and a draft dodger. He, in turn, was sure that he did exactly the right thing. There could be no consequences, except that the prestige of certain individuals would suffer.

Ts.: The same Zolotov said that if Navalny refuses and does not go out on the tatami with him, if he does not prove that he is a man, then he will consider him a slug.

A. Navalny. Photo: www.globallookpress.com

A.I.: This is quite in the spirit of the rhetoric of the early 20th century, when dueling scandals became part of political practice. They practically disappeared from the intimate sphere, when people, for example, hid a fight, fought because of a personal insult or for the honor of a lady. Then it became part of political PR and the desire to destroy one’s political opponent. Then these scandals naturally found their way into the press. Unflattering labels were attached, and they tried to provoke their opponent either into a duel, in which he, as a rule, would have lost, or into avoiding this duel, which also caused some damage to his reputation.

Although there is still an important point to remember here. According to the code, a duel is always a competition of equals. That is, in theory, a nobleman can shoot himself or sort things out only with a nobleman. And when at the beginning of the 20th century they began to challenge representatives of the intelligentsia, the merchant class, and so on, to a duel, this was already a serious deviation from the original meaning of the duel.

That is, before, a nobleman could beat with a stick some tradesman who insulted him. But it would never have occurred to him to challenge him to a duel. The very fact of a challenge to a duel indicates that the enemy considers his offender equal to himself in status.

Ts.: Can an officer challenge an oppositionist into the ring as a duel? Or is it just a duel?

A.I.: A duel is a duel. In modern conditions, this is a good alternative to duels, since today it would be a criminal offense to challenge your opponent to shoot, fight with swords, and so on. And in this case, the fight is proposed in such a simplified and safer form that does not entail criminal consequences.

Ts.: If a person insulted, but later admitted he was wrong, how did he apologize? A personal meeting?

A.I.: Strictly according to the code. There should be no contact at all between the offender and the insulted. It was done like this. The one who felt insulted chose two fellow seconds who conveyed to the offender the demand for satisfaction. That is, before the duel they first demanded an apology. A duel became possible only after the enemy refused to admit that he was wrong and continued to insist on his own. If he did not apologize, he was asked to appoint two other seconds so that the opposing sides would not enter into conflict, and this group of seconds, two by two, would either work out the terms of a possible reconciliation, look for a compromise formula, or develop the terms of the duel.

Ts.: In what form could they have been brought? apologies ?

A.I.: It was enough to take back my words, say that I did not mean to put an offensive meaning into them, or simply admit that I was wrong and apologize. Although sometimes it got to the point of scrupulousness and oddities. For example, when a duel situation was brewing between deputy Rodichev and Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin, Rodichev apologized for his unfortunate phrase, and Stolypin told him: I forgive you. Which caused the indignation of Rodichev, who stated that he did not ask for forgiveness, but only apologized for his words. That is, there were even such nuances.

P. Stolypin. Photo: www.globallookpress.com

Ts.: Wasn’t it considered weakness and cowardice if a person started to apologize?

A.I.: Everything depended on the situation. Sometimes it was interpreted this way - he got scared and took back his words, and sometimes it was perceived as an initially misunderstood situation. For example, when a person could accuse someone of telling a lie, the seconds spent a long time figuring out what it meant to “tell a lie” - he deliberately lied or was mistaken without knowing the truth. If the latter, then there can be no insult. The man simply didn't know what he was talking about. If he intended to insult and said that he was deliberately lying, then this is a reason for a duel.

Ts.: Could a situation arise when one person insulted a group of people at once and several people challenged him to a duel?

A.I. This has happened many times. But this caused serious problems. There was just such an incident in the army environment. An insult thrown at the Russian army. And one of the officers receives permission from his superiors to duel. The press is perplexed, and part of the officer corps is perplexed - what will happen next?

These challenges can continue indefinitely until the offender is punished, killed, and so on. Because more and more new officers will begin to speak on behalf of the Russian army, ready to replace their representative in the event of his injury or death. Such cases met with mixed assessments from society.

In addition, the Church opposed duels in any form, believing that this was a kind of pagan prejudice, a legacy of proud Rome, an exaggerated concept of one’s own honor. Since it was inappropriate for a Christian to be challenged to a duel for a personal insult, this issue had to be resolved somehow differently.

Ts.: Has the Church always been against duels?

A.I.: Always. But then it was not about a fight in the boxing ring, but about the threat of deprivation of life. That is, one of the duelists could turn into a killer, the other, in fact, become a suicide. And before the legalization of officer duels, dead duelists, as we remember, were not even buried in an Orthodox cemetery - they were equated with suicides. When Pushkin was mortally wounded in a duel, only the personal intervention of Nicholas I avoided this problem with Christian burial.

The Church has always been against it, believing that none of the Orthodox Christians should be offended by personal insults, should endure reproaches and forgive their enemies.

Ts.: In remote places too There is the concept of honor, where you have to be responsible for everything you said. Has the dueling theme migrated to the prison theme?

A.I.: There they were different, not connected with the ideas of the nobility, which in the 20th century captured part of the urban population. In the 20th century, not only nobles, but also townspeople began to sort things out through duels. Konstantin Leontyev, for example, was an Orthodox thinker and ended his life as a monk, but at the end of the 19th century he said: can a real nobleman not love duels? No, even considering it a sin, he will still prefer it to another way of sorting things out. That is, he will not drag his offender to court.

A real nobleman can forgive the offender, he can beat him with a stick, he can resolve the issue like a knight in a duel, but dragging the offender to peace is not a matter of honor, but rudeness. That is, complain to structures and institutions that you have been offended.

Ts.: Did we come up with the concept of a duel ourselves?

A.I.: Adopted in Europe. The first duels appeared in the Russian army during the time of Alexei Mikhailovich, but these were duels of foreign officers in Russian service. And from there they already migrated to the Russian army, and then spread to the entire nobility. Although absolutely all monarchs tried to fight this phenomenon, from Peter the Great to Alexander III. Although the latter legalized officer duels, he did this not because he considered them a good thing, but decided that since they fight anyway, it is necessary to somehow limit this custom and introduce it into a legal framework.

Ts.: It’s probably not often in history that servicemen called in civilians who couldn’t even really shoot.

A.I.: I wouldn't say infrequently. In the military environment it simply happened more often. In the 19th century, for example, there were enough such cases. Even Pushkin's duel with Dantes. Pushkin is a civilian, but an avid duelist. Everyone among the nobility then knew how to shoot and was ready for such a clarification of disputes. But at the beginning of the 20th century, the situation changed: many politicians and deputies took a gun in their hands for the first time to defend their honor, believing that they had no other way.

V. Zolotov. Photo: www.globallookpress.com

Thus, in Zolotov’s challenge there are no gross violations of the dueling code and Russian legislation. After all, he offered Alexey Anatolyevich not swords and pistols, but tatami and hand-to-hand combat. In addition, Zolotov acted like a nobleman, offering the offender a duel instead of a trial, which is blamed by supporters of the oppositionist - after all, the latter, in accordance with noble traditions, is regarded as rudeness. True, Zolotov could have simply beaten Navalny with a stick, but, apparently, he decided to be democratic, elevating the oppositionist to his status.

The history of fights goes back to ancient times. They fought over women, for the right to own land, for revenge, and finally just to show their strength and humiliate, or even destroy their opponent. Even in ancient times, judicial duels were known, appointed to resolve disputes on property and other issues (in particular, in “Russian Truth”), circus fights of gladiators in Ancient Rome, medieval knightly tournaments, fist fights in Rus'. But they are not included in the concept of a classic duel. We think the most succinct and accurate definition of a duel was given by the early-century Russian military writer P. A. Shveikovsky: “A duel is an agreed-upon fight between two persons with a deadly weapon to satisfy outraged honor, in compliance with certain conditions established by custom regarding the place, time, weapons and the general circumstances of the battle.”

From this definition we can isolate the following main features of a classical duel:

1. the purpose of the duel is to satisfy the outraged honor (and not a circus performance, not a resolution of a dispute, and not a competition of strength);
2. there are only two participants in the duel (and not “wall to wall”), i.e. the offended person and his offender (hence the very word “duel”);
3. the means of dueling are lethal weapons (and not fists, like the merchant Kalashnikov and Kiribeevich);
4. the presence of rules (conditions) of a duel established by custom, which must be strictly observed.

“Rules of the duel between Mr. Baron Georges Heeckeren and Mr. Pushkin

The text of the terms of the duel between Pushkin and Dantes has reached posterity. For illustration, we present it in full:

1. Opponents are placed at a distance of 20 steps from each other and 10 steps from the barriers, the distance between which is 10 steps.
2. Opponents armed with pistols, following this sign, moving towards each other, but in no case crossing the barrier, can shoot.
3. Moreover, it is accepted that after a shot, opponents are not allowed to change place, so that the one who fired first would be exposed to the fire of his opponent at the same distance.
4. When both sides fire a shot, then in case of ineffectiveness the fight is resumed as if for the first time, the opponents are placed at the same distance of 20 steps, the same barriers and the same rules are maintained.
5. Seconds are direct intermediaries in every relationship between opponents on the spot.
6. The seconds, the undersigned and vested with full powers, ensure, each on his side, with his honor, strict compliance with the conditions stated here.

Unwritten order of duel

The unwritten order of the duel was as follows. At a predetermined time (usually in the morning), opponents, seconds and a doctor arrived at the appointed place. Delay was allowed no more than 15 minutes; otherwise, the latecomer was considered to have evaded the duel. The fight usually began 10 minutes after everyone arrived. Opponents and seconds greeted each other with a bow. The steward, chosen by the seconds from among himself, suggested that the duelists make peace for the last time (if the court of honor recognized this as possible). If they refused, the manager explained to them the conditions of the fight, the seconds marked the barriers and loaded the pistols in the presence of the opponents. When dueling with sabers or swords, opponents undressed from the waist down to their shirts. Everything was supposed to be taken out of the pockets. The seconds took places parallel to the battle line, the doctors - behind them. The opponents performed all actions at the command of the manager. If during the duel one of them dropped his sword, either it broke, or the fighter fell, his opponent was obliged to interrupt the duel at the command of the manager until his opponent stood up and was able to continue the duel. As a rule, a sword duel was fought until one of the opponents completely lost the ability to continue it - that is, until he was seriously or fatally wounded. Therefore, after each wound, the fight was suspended, and the doctor established the nature of the wound and the degree of its severity. If during such a duel one of the opponents, despite warnings, retreated three times outside the battlefield, such behavior was counted as evasion or refusal of a fair fight. At the end of the fight, the opponents shook hands with each other.

Pistol duels had several options.

• Option 1 The opponents stood at a distance of 15 to 40 steps from each other and, remaining motionless, took turns shooting on command (the interval between the command and the shot had to be at least 3 seconds, but no more than 1 minute). If the insult was medium or severe, then the insulted person had the right to shoot first (but only from a distance of 40 steps, i.e. maximum), otherwise the right to fire the first shot was decided by lot.
• Option 2(relatively rare). The opponents stood with their backs to each other at a distance of 25 steps and, remaining motionless at this distance, continuously fired over their shoulders.
• Option 3(perhaps the most common). The opponents stood at a distance of up to 30 steps from each other and, on command, walked towards barriers, the distance between which was at least 10 steps; on command, the first one fired on the move, but waited for a return shot while standing still (shooting without a command was allowed if the barriers were 15-20 steps apart from each other, and the opponents in the starting position were up to 50 steps apart; but this is a relatively rare variety). In such a duel, the time for a return shot did not exceed 30 seconds, for the fallen one - 1 minute from the moment of the fall. It was forbidden to cross the barriers. A misfire was also considered a shot. The fallen man could shoot while lying down (as the wounded Pushkin shot at Dantes). If during such a duel, after four shots, none of the opponents was wounded, then it could be stopped.
• Option 4 The opponents stood at a distance of 25-35 steps, positioned along parallel lines, so that each of them had his own opponent to his right, and walked along these lines to barriers spaced 15 steps apart, stopping and shooting on command.
• Option 5 The opponents were positioned at a distance of 25-35 steps and, remaining motionless, fired simultaneously - on command for the count of “one-two” or on a signal of three claps. Such a duel was the most dangerous, and both opponents often died (the duel between Novosiltsev and Chernov). At the end, the opponents shook hands with each other.

Note that these rules (at least the same distance), established by the end of the 19th century, were in many ways more humane than the usual rules of Russian duels of the first half of the 19th century. It is curious that if in the second half of the 19th century the number of duels in the Russian army clearly began to decline, then after official permission in 1894 their number again sharply increased.