I didn't intend to sound patronizing, Patricia. It's been demonstrated some female citizens of RoP are quite knowledgable in military matters. (There's at least one "gunner's mate" amongst them.) At the same time, I've experienced a lack of knowledge in such nuances even from people who otherwise seem to be knowledgable about the period. (In one instance a very dumb question from an employee of a government site, who was supervising we reenactors - sorry I'm getting started again).

As for Galleon's question, the idea was that neither party had an advantage over the other in terms of the weapons used. There was a bit of an arguement at the time about how accurate the weapns should be. I can't lay my hands on the information right away. In some respects the whole rationale behind duelling is a bit skewed, but going out with the intention of killing your opponent would be considered ungentlemanly, even if that could well be the result. BTW, the old bit about one party firing wide, or in the air, was also frowned upon in some circles. The Clonmel Code stated either the challenge should not have been made, or an apology given, before the parties took the field: "Therefore children's play myst be dishonourable on the one side or the other and is accordingly prohibited."

I remain, etc.
Jason E.

Were they specially accurate, or just an identical pair
> (just in case we need them, y'know...)?