Ozy And Millie: Unacceptable weaponry

The original artwork for this comic is available for purchase.

Notes: White-out in panels 2 and 3.

  10 comments for “Ozy And Millie: Unacceptable weaponry

  1. Actually, the “Rules” state that the one who has been challenged to a duel gets to choose the weapons used. I believe there was a man who chose pitchforks of pig dung as the weapon (to show his contempt for dueling), but I can’t find the source…

    • I remember that someone who was challenged by someone to chose 2 sausages, with one being poisoned. Might have been somewhere else.

      • There was another man who chose two wood-axes too heavy for either man to lift as weapons, and a pitch-black cellar as place. You may deduce he was not keen on the duel.

      • The sausage duel was allegedly proposed by scientist and politician Rudolf Birchow, when Chancellor Otto von Bismark demanded satisfaction for an insult in Parliament; Bismark is supposed to have heard Birchow’s terms and withdrawn his challenge. It seems like a case of a good story running away with an actual event: letters suggest instead that Birchoff withdrew his remarks when he received the challenge.

        There are also a number of stories about poison duels ‘fought’ with pills: one harmless, the other deadly, the two indistinguishable. Details and veracity vary, although it seems at least one can be confirmed to have taken place (in 1882, in Poland).

        However, given that Llewellyn is the challenging party here and the DMV the respondent, the DMV’s representative is well within his rights to insist on cold steel and hot lead.

  2. The actual rules did limit the one challenged to actual weapons such as pistols, rapiers, and swords and the parties had to agree to the location. (came up in a book written by a historian, checked Wikipedia too). Choosing a weapon you couldn’t use would be saying your honor (which was what was challenged) was worthless.

    • I’m 99% sure that if both parties agreed, then any “weapon” could be used.

      you’re right though that choosing a weapon neither party could physically use would be frowned upon (differences in skill, however, were fine- indeed, that was the entire point of the challenged party getting to choose the weapons, since the idea was to discourage people from issuing duels) though the weapons chosen had to be fair- so choosing a weapon you could physically use but your opponent couldn’t would be deemed illegal- and would be sufficient dishonour to render the duel largely moot anyway. (duels were typically fought over honour- if you acted in bad faith during the duel, it was considered you had no honour to defend)

    • Not sure, and we aren’t given a lot of clues — long snout, pudgy ears, stripe along snout. However, as far as I know, the teeth are strictly human! Yes, I do know that this is a comic strip so anything goes —

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.