Just moments before fighting to the death, medieval duelists were required to grasp one another by the hand—a gesture that seems to contradict everything we expect about violence and enmity. This ritual act reveals a surprising attempt to create a final opportunity for peace, even at the very edge of combat.
By Lorris Chevalier
The renewed scholarly interest in the history of emotions has generated substantial theoretical and methodological debate in recent decades. Within this field, the affective dimension of human experience is increasingly recognised as a crucial, though not exclusive, component in the interpretation of historical actors and their behaviour. Emotions cannot be treated as directly accessible realities; rather, they are mediated through systems of representation, transmission, and social coding. Consequently, their study requires attention not to their supposed “true nature”, but to the ways in which societies perceive, structure, and mobilise affective phenomena.
A productive approach, therefore, lies in analysing the social effects of emotions and the strategies through which they are managed. This perspective shifts the focus from internal emotional states to observable practices (gestures, rituals, and institutional frameworks) that reveal how affect operated within specific historical contexts. Even sources that remain silent on emotions explicitly may nevertheless provide insight into affective dynamics when examined through this analytical lens.
The Judicial Duel in Late Medieval France
Within this framework, the judicial duel offers a particularly revealing case study. As a legal practice that gradually declined during the late Middle Ages, it has long been interpreted either as an archaic remnant of premodern justice or as part of a broader cultural history of customs and chivalric values. More recent approaches, however, have emphasised its embeddedness within systems of belief, social order, and symbolic communication.
Unlike ordeals by fire or water whose development and decline were closely tied to ecclesiastical authority, the judicial duel followed a more diffuse trajectory. Its origins appear rooted in earlier forms of conflict resolution, and its disappearance was not the result of a single decisive prohibition. Instead, it reflected gradual structural transformations, including the consolidation of royal authority, the expansion of judicial competence, and the increasing influence of Roman law.
Although formally restricted – most notably by the ordinance of Philip IV in 1304 – the practice persisted under regulated conditions. It retained particular importance within the nobility, where it was closely associated with honour, reputation, and the legitimacy of violence. Detailed procedural texts and narrative accounts allow for a precise reconstruction of the ritualised framework governing such combats.
Ritual Structure and the Centrality of Oaths
Judicial duel between the bourgeois Mathieu Cocquiel and Jacotin Plouvier in 1455, held on the Grand-Place of Valenciennes in the presence of Philip the Good – Douai, Bibliothèque municipale, ms. 1183 (tome II), f. 188v-189r – Recueil des antiquités de Valenciennes
At the heart of the judicial duel lay a sequence of highly codified ritual actions. Among these, the oaths sworn by the adversaries played a central role in establishing the legitimacy of their respective claims. These oaths were performed publicly and in the presence of sacred objects, most notably the cross and the Gospels, thereby invoking divine authority.
The ritual unfolded in a carefully structured progression. Initial oaths involved indirect contact with sacred objects, often mediated by gloves, which maintained a degree of separation between the participants and the objects they invoked. As the ceremony advanced, however, both the symbolic and physical intensity of the gestures increased. In the final stage preceding combat, the adversaries removed their gloves, knelt together, kissed the sacred objects, and – most significantly – grasped one another by the hand.
This escalation suggests a deliberate intensification of ritual engagement, in which bodily involvement became increasingly central. The transition from mediated to direct contact marks a shift not only in form but also in meaning, indicating a deeper level of commitment and exposure within the ritual process.
The Paradox of Physical Contact Between Adversaries
Scene from The Last Duel, where Jean de Carrouges (played by Matt Damon) challenges his former friend, squire Jacques le Gris (Adam Driver)
The presence of direct physical contact between individuals about to engage in violent combat presents an apparent paradox. In medieval symbolic systems, touch typically signified agreement, alliance, or reconciliation. Gestures such as the handshake or the joining of hands were commonly associated with bonds of loyalty, contractual relations, or the restoration of peace. Conversely, hostility and enmity were often expressed through distance, avoidance, and the deliberate absence of contact.
Within this context, the requirement that adversaries physically grasp one another immediately before combat appears contradictory. From a strictly legal perspective, such contact is not necessary to validate the oath or to identify the opposing party. Its inclusion within the ritual therefore calls for an alternative explanation.
Gesture, Affect, and the Possibility of Reconciliation
The end of the duel between Jacques Le Gris and Jean de Carrouges in a 15th-century manuscript
A more satisfactory interpretation emerges when the affective dimension of these gestures is taken into account. When abstracted from the immediate context of conflict, the actions performed by the duelists closely resemble those associated with reconciliation rituals. This resemblance suggests that the gestures may have been intended not merely as symbolic affirmations but as active interventions in the emotional dynamics of the situation.
Contemporary narrative sources reinforce this interpretation. Accounts of spontaneous reconciliations – often triggered by unexpected physical encounters – indicate a widespread belief in the transformative power of bodily contact. In such cases, gestures were not passive signs but effective instruments capable of reshaping emotional dispositions and altering the course of events. Touch, in particular, was perceived as possessing a force that could transcend purely physical interaction and influence the inner state of individuals.
Within this cultural framework, the gestures performed during the judicial duel can be understood as creating a moment of potential transformation. Even within the rigid constraints of ritual, they opened a space – however brief – in which reconciliation might occur and violence might be avoided.
Legal Practice and the Management of Social Harmony
The significance of affective dynamics is further underscored by broader legal practices of the period. Mechanisms such as letters of remission reveal that the administration of justice was not solely concerned with establishing truth or imposing punishment. Equally important was the restoration of social harmony and the prevention of ongoing conflict.
In many cases, the granting of royal pardon depended upon prior reconciliation between the parties involved. This requirement reflects a recognition of the importance of managing emotional relationships within communities. Justice, in this sense, operated not only through legal judgement but also through the regulation of affective bonds.
Within such a system, the body assumed an active role. Gestures, encounters, and physical interactions functioned as tools for shaping emotional states and facilitating social cohesion. The ritual of the judicial duel must therefore be situated within this broader context, in which affective regulation formed an integral part of legal and social practice.
The Limits and Ambiguities of Ritual Efficacy
It would be misleading, however, to assume that these mechanisms operated with complete consistency or effectiveness. Contemporary accounts occasionally describe situations in which the emotional potential of ritual gestures failed to prevent violence. Individuals did not always respond in ways that aligned with the expectations embedded in the ritual framework.
Such failures were not generally interpreted as evidence against the system itself. Rather, they were attributed to the shortcomings of particular individuals, whose inability to respond appropriately disrupted the intended process. This distinction allowed the broader logic of the ritual to remain intact, even in the face of contradictory outcomes.
The coexistence of expectation and uncertainty highlights the complex nature of these practices. Rituals were not deterministic mechanisms but structured opportunities, whose outcomes depended on the interaction between prescribed forms and individual responses.
The physical contact between duellists can be interpreted as a clear indication that all possible avenues for peace had been explored prior to the combat. By requiring the adversaries to touch, the ritual symbolically suppresses personal hatred, affirming that the encounter is governed not by enmity but by the pursuit of justice. At the same time, this gesture constitutes a carefully staged moment of apparent concord at the very threshold of violence. Such a performance carries a strong dramatic effect, heightening the emotional tension for the audience and underscoring the gravity of a duel fought to the death.
Gesture as an Instrument of Social and Affective Order
The seemingly minor detail of physical contact between adversaries in the judicial duel thus reveals a significant dimension of late medieval social thought. When considered solely within a legal framework, the gesture appears superfluous or even contradictory. When analysed in relation to contemporary beliefs about affect and embodiment, however, it acquires a clear and coherent function.
Touch operated as more than a symbolic act: it was understood as a means of influencing emotional states and, by extension, social relationships. The ritual of the judicial duel incorporated this belief, embedding within its structure a final opportunity for reconciliation before the outbreak of violence.
By attending to such details, it becomes possible to move beyond purely institutional or doctrinal interpretations and to recover the complex interplay between gesture, emotion, and social order. The study of affect, far from being peripheral, offers essential insights into the functioning of historical practices and the ways in which societies sought to regulate both conflict and cohesion.
Dr Lorris Chevalier, who has a Ph.D. in medieval literature, is a historical advisor for movies, including The Last Duel and Napoleon. Click here to view his website.
Top Image: A 1540s depiction of a judicial combat in Augsburg in 1409, between Marshal Wilhelm von Dornsberg and Theodor Haschenacker. Dornsberg’s sword broke early in the duel, but he proceeded to kill Haschenacker with his own sword.
Just moments before fighting to the death, medieval duelists were required to grasp one another by the hand—a gesture that seems to contradict everything we expect about violence and enmity. This ritual act reveals a surprising attempt to create a final opportunity for peace, even at the very edge of combat.
By Lorris Chevalier
The renewed scholarly interest in the history of emotions has generated substantial theoretical and methodological debate in recent decades. Within this field, the affective dimension of human experience is increasingly recognised as a crucial, though not exclusive, component in the interpretation of historical actors and their behaviour. Emotions cannot be treated as directly accessible realities; rather, they are mediated through systems of representation, transmission, and social coding. Consequently, their study requires attention not to their supposed “true nature”, but to the ways in which societies perceive, structure, and mobilise affective phenomena.
A productive approach, therefore, lies in analysing the social effects of emotions and the strategies through which they are managed. This perspective shifts the focus from internal emotional states to observable practices (gestures, rituals, and institutional frameworks) that reveal how affect operated within specific historical contexts. Even sources that remain silent on emotions explicitly may nevertheless provide insight into affective dynamics when examined through this analytical lens.
The Judicial Duel in Late Medieval France
Within this framework, the judicial duel offers a particularly revealing case study. As a legal practice that gradually declined during the late Middle Ages, it has long been interpreted either as an archaic remnant of premodern justice or as part of a broader cultural history of customs and chivalric values. More recent approaches, however, have emphasised its embeddedness within systems of belief, social order, and symbolic communication.
Unlike ordeals by fire or water whose development and decline were closely tied to ecclesiastical authority, the judicial duel followed a more diffuse trajectory. Its origins appear rooted in earlier forms of conflict resolution, and its disappearance was not the result of a single decisive prohibition. Instead, it reflected gradual structural transformations, including the consolidation of royal authority, the expansion of judicial competence, and the increasing influence of Roman law.
Although formally restricted – most notably by the ordinance of Philip IV in 1304 – the practice persisted under regulated conditions. It retained particular importance within the nobility, where it was closely associated with honour, reputation, and the legitimacy of violence. Detailed procedural texts and narrative accounts allow for a precise reconstruction of the ritualised framework governing such combats.
Ritual Structure and the Centrality of Oaths
At the heart of the judicial duel lay a sequence of highly codified ritual actions. Among these, the oaths sworn by the adversaries played a central role in establishing the legitimacy of their respective claims. These oaths were performed publicly and in the presence of sacred objects, most notably the cross and the Gospels, thereby invoking divine authority.
The ritual unfolded in a carefully structured progression. Initial oaths involved indirect contact with sacred objects, often mediated by gloves, which maintained a degree of separation between the participants and the objects they invoked. As the ceremony advanced, however, both the symbolic and physical intensity of the gestures increased. In the final stage preceding combat, the adversaries removed their gloves, knelt together, kissed the sacred objects, and – most significantly – grasped one another by the hand.
This escalation suggests a deliberate intensification of ritual engagement, in which bodily involvement became increasingly central. The transition from mediated to direct contact marks a shift not only in form but also in meaning, indicating a deeper level of commitment and exposure within the ritual process.
The Paradox of Physical Contact Between Adversaries
The presence of direct physical contact between individuals about to engage in violent combat presents an apparent paradox. In medieval symbolic systems, touch typically signified agreement, alliance, or reconciliation. Gestures such as the handshake or the joining of hands were commonly associated with bonds of loyalty, contractual relations, or the restoration of peace. Conversely, hostility and enmity were often expressed through distance, avoidance, and the deliberate absence of contact.
Within this context, the requirement that adversaries physically grasp one another immediately before combat appears contradictory. From a strictly legal perspective, such contact is not necessary to validate the oath or to identify the opposing party. Its inclusion within the ritual therefore calls for an alternative explanation.
Gesture, Affect, and the Possibility of Reconciliation
A more satisfactory interpretation emerges when the affective dimension of these gestures is taken into account. When abstracted from the immediate context of conflict, the actions performed by the duelists closely resemble those associated with reconciliation rituals. This resemblance suggests that the gestures may have been intended not merely as symbolic affirmations but as active interventions in the emotional dynamics of the situation.
Contemporary narrative sources reinforce this interpretation. Accounts of spontaneous reconciliations – often triggered by unexpected physical encounters – indicate a widespread belief in the transformative power of bodily contact. In such cases, gestures were not passive signs but effective instruments capable of reshaping emotional dispositions and altering the course of events. Touch, in particular, was perceived as possessing a force that could transcend purely physical interaction and influence the inner state of individuals.
Within this cultural framework, the gestures performed during the judicial duel can be understood as creating a moment of potential transformation. Even within the rigid constraints of ritual, they opened a space – however brief – in which reconciliation might occur and violence might be avoided.
Legal Practice and the Management of Social Harmony
The significance of affective dynamics is further underscored by broader legal practices of the period. Mechanisms such as letters of remission reveal that the administration of justice was not solely concerned with establishing truth or imposing punishment. Equally important was the restoration of social harmony and the prevention of ongoing conflict.
In many cases, the granting of royal pardon depended upon prior reconciliation between the parties involved. This requirement reflects a recognition of the importance of managing emotional relationships within communities. Justice, in this sense, operated not only through legal judgement but also through the regulation of affective bonds.
Within such a system, the body assumed an active role. Gestures, encounters, and physical interactions functioned as tools for shaping emotional states and facilitating social cohesion. The ritual of the judicial duel must therefore be situated within this broader context, in which affective regulation formed an integral part of legal and social practice.
The Limits and Ambiguities of Ritual Efficacy
It would be misleading, however, to assume that these mechanisms operated with complete consistency or effectiveness. Contemporary accounts occasionally describe situations in which the emotional potential of ritual gestures failed to prevent violence. Individuals did not always respond in ways that aligned with the expectations embedded in the ritual framework.
Such failures were not generally interpreted as evidence against the system itself. Rather, they were attributed to the shortcomings of particular individuals, whose inability to respond appropriately disrupted the intended process. This distinction allowed the broader logic of the ritual to remain intact, even in the face of contradictory outcomes.
The coexistence of expectation and uncertainty highlights the complex nature of these practices. Rituals were not deterministic mechanisms but structured opportunities, whose outcomes depended on the interaction between prescribed forms and individual responses.
The physical contact between duellists can be interpreted as a clear indication that all possible avenues for peace had been explored prior to the combat. By requiring the adversaries to touch, the ritual symbolically suppresses personal hatred, affirming that the encounter is governed not by enmity but by the pursuit of justice. At the same time, this gesture constitutes a carefully staged moment of apparent concord at the very threshold of violence. Such a performance carries a strong dramatic effect, heightening the emotional tension for the audience and underscoring the gravity of a duel fought to the death.
Gesture as an Instrument of Social and Affective Order
The seemingly minor detail of physical contact between adversaries in the judicial duel thus reveals a significant dimension of late medieval social thought. When considered solely within a legal framework, the gesture appears superfluous or even contradictory. When analysed in relation to contemporary beliefs about affect and embodiment, however, it acquires a clear and coherent function.
Touch operated as more than a symbolic act: it was understood as a means of influencing emotional states and, by extension, social relationships. The ritual of the judicial duel incorporated this belief, embedding within its structure a final opportunity for reconciliation before the outbreak of violence.
By attending to such details, it becomes possible to move beyond purely institutional or doctrinal interpretations and to recover the complex interplay between gesture, emotion, and social order. The study of affect, far from being peripheral, offers essential insights into the functioning of historical practices and the ways in which societies sought to regulate both conflict and cohesion.
Dr Lorris Chevalier, who has a Ph.D. in medieval literature, is a historical advisor for movies, including The Last Duel and Napoleon. Click here to view his website.
Click here to read more from Lorris Chevalier
Further Readings:
Klaus Oschema, “Toucher et être touché : gestes de conciliation et émotions dans les duels judiciaires,” Médiévales, 61 | 2011, 142-161.
Top Image: A 1540s depiction of a judicial combat in Augsburg in 1409, between Marshal Wilhelm von Dornsberg and Theodor Haschenacker. Dornsberg’s sword broke early in the duel, but he proceeded to kill Haschenacker with his own sword.
Subscribe to Medievalverse
Related Posts