The Duel to end the war

[gary]

...and now for something completely different (Monty Python mindset):

I've read that some soldiers (don't ask me which book) suggested that they let the two presidents (sometimes its generals) fight it out and winner takes all. Everyone else goes home in peace.

So, if Jeff Davis and Abe Lincoln were to duel, who would you think would win? In theory, the challenged party gets to select weapons and Abe being the challenged, he would (since fisticuffs or wrassling doesn't count) select rifles as he was suppose to be a pretty good shot with one. Jeff would probably be partial to the pistol or swords, especially since he was West Point trained.

If Abe picked rifles, I'd put my money on Abe.

Thoughts?

 

[ole]

Why don't bare knuckes and rasslin' count? A nod to tradition? Honor? Code of the gentleman? Both were getting a little long in the tooth for a tussle in the dust, but I'd still have to bet on Abe. The race is not always to the swift nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet it. Ole

 

[matthew mckeon]

Actually Lincoln was challenged to a duel once. The weapons he chose were cavalry sabers. While the seconds discussed a formula to avoid bloodshed, Lincoln whirled and slashed the saber in practice, apparently a formidable sight,
and actual combat was avoided. Given Lincoln's strength and reach sabers were a good choice. However Davis did have formal fencing training at West Point, so he would be a dangerous foe.
If I were Lincoln, I'd go with either axes, or bowie knives.

 

[ole]

Matthew, my recollection of the aborted "duel" has Lincoln slashing leaves and twigs from VERY high in a tree. The demonstration of vastly superior reach was sufficient to quell whatever resentment there was. (paragraph) Lincoln was far too gentle to use axes or bowies. A little rasslin, however, could be fun -- and nobody gets hurt. Ole

 

[traveller]

I don't know enough about either man to make an educated evaluation of the proposed contest, but I would probably put my money on Davies, even if only because of his West Point training. Good idea though! It definitely would have been a way to avoid a lot of death and carnage. I'm sure there would have been about 600,000 young men and their families that would have preferred the war to be settled in that manner. But, what would we all be doing with our spare time if that was the way it was handled?

Traveller

 

[Fifth Iowa]

Leaders at War

I believe it's been rare in history to find leaders (or even single "champions") going face to face in lieu of sending their full forces into combat. Somewhat more frequently (but still not common, especially during more recent centuries), rulers would actually lead their armies, placing themselves in a somewhat vulnerable position (and casting their lot, so to speak, with the warriors they were sending into battle). During the wbts, even if the role of the senior commanders was (appropriately) to lead from the rear, I think it would be interesting to study how many of them allowed their sons to serve in the combat ranks. I mean, did the generals allow their sons to lead companies into battle, or did the majority of them "pull strings" to have them assigned to their peers' staffs..?

 

[samgrant]

In 1842 Lincoln admitted writing letters to the newspaper in Springfield, IL satirizing the state auditor, James Shields. (Whether Lincoln wrote one, some, or all of the letters is unclear.) To uphold his honor, Shields, a crack shot, challenged Lincoln to a duel. As the challengee, Lincoln was to make the choice of weapons. He chose cow pies. Shields would not be deterred, however, and eventually Lincoln chose to duel with cavalry broadswords. When Lincoln and Shields met at the appointed place, Lincoln picked out a sword and, with his remarkable height and long arms, began slashing at tree branches that the shorter Shields could not reach. After this, an accomodation was reached and the duel never took place. Although humorous in retrospect, the affair was deadly serious. (Shields later became a Brigadier General and a U.S. Senator from Illinois, Missouri, and Minnesota.) [4v] [18]

-from: http://www.doctorzebra.com/prez/g16.htm

 

[FSPowers]

My money would have been on Lincoln. Growing up on the frontier would make a knowledge of weapons essential. On the other hand, Davis had actual combat expierence. Still, I would give Lincoln the edge, IMHO.