Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny1A.2
Rule by duel: A hereditary aristocracy, but with a twist: any commoner can challenge any noble at any time to a formal duel, to the death, and if the challenger wins he wins the title and estate and other entail of the defeated noble. Or the noble can yield without a fight, simply handing over the estate.
But it has to be a formal, public duel, with formal rules and specified weapons, or other equivalent challenge, just killing a noble is prosecuted as murder and the heir inherits as usual.
Probably unstable, but definitely would be interesting while it lasted...
|
That kind of system would probably lead to the aristocracy teaching their offspring in various one-on-one fighting styles from an early age on, just to make sure the title and estate stay with the family. And the aristocracy would very probably implement laws against commoners possessing weapons and also receiving formal training with them. There'd very probably be an exception for times of war, since you don't want your noble scions to lose their life on the field of battle when there's so much of the commoners' blood around to spill.
Also, the weapons allowed to be wielded in a duel very much would be straight weapons, and not tools, so no axes, flails, or knives/daggers. This way, you limit the prospects of Jack the Lumberjack, who happens to be very skilled with his axe, to raise above his station even further. The same goes, of course, for the wiry farmer's daughter Jacqueline, who's so skilled with a knife that you can't even guess at what she just did with it.
All in all, something similar to the European Middle Ages or the Edo period in Japan would probably be the result, resulting in far less social mobility than maybe was expected when the law was laid down.
M.