This article critique examines and contrasts two articles
The nose, the lie, and the duel in the antebellum South by Greenberg and The Deadliest of Games: The Institution of Dueling by Kingston and Robert.
Similarities
The fact that both of these articles discuss dueling, a common way for males to settle disputes and defend their honor, is one of their obvious similarities. Both pieces go into great detail about the different facets of dueling in the 19th and 20th centuries.
Another similarity between the two articles is that they both heavily referenced secondary sources of information. While one of the articles has used citations, the other one uses footnotes to acknowledge content from other sources.
In addition, the articles have explored various forms of dueling but they have made analysis on how it related to honor. Further to this, these articles are similar in the way the authors present the information. While both rely on history, they give their inputs based on the analysis from various sources. In other words, they give a conclusive remark based on the data and information collected.
Importantly also, the articles are similar in that they have explored the causes of many duels within the society and how they were executed. Another similarity between these two articles is the use of images and figures to emphasize their arguments. Both articles have made use of this style as a method of enforcing their points.
Finally, these articles are similar in that they give past examples of dueling among men of honor to make their audience understand the context of their arguments.
Contrast
In contrast, the articles differ in the content presented on duels. For instance, Greenberg (57) concentrates on pulling the nose as a form of dueling. Extensively, Greenberg has explored the systems of meanings which surrounded nose pulling in the south. On the other hand, Kingston, and Robert explores a wide range of games used by men of honor to duel such as pistols.
In addition to this, the content provided in these two articles is two decades apart. The article by Kingston, and Robert details more of the recent 'games' used in dueling compared to the article by Greenberg.
Apart from this, these articles differ on the structure and organization. Following the article by Greenberg can prove quite difficult because no headings or sub-headings have been used. Greenberg has opted to present his research findings without inserting any relevant subheadings. However, for Kingston, and Robert, their article has utilized some subheadings which enable the reader to easily follow the arguments and the transition. Additionally, this article by Kingston, and Robert has utilized short paragraphs as compared to the article by Greenberg.
Another difference in these articles is that Kingston, and Robert has largely utilized statistics to prove their arguments. Moreover, they have used a repeated two-player sequential game to demonstrate their arguments. Moreover, these articles differ in that Kingston, and Robert used historical data to present a model which they suggest shows how dueling can occur when formal institutions to mediate are absent. Thus, Kingston, and Robert article relies on hypothesis to prove the point on dueling. On the other hand, Greenberg's article does not have primary data and only relies on secondary information.
Works Cited
Kingston, Christopher G., and Robert E. Wright. "The deadliest of games: the institution of dueling." Southern Economic Journal 76.4 (2010): 1094-1106.
Greenberg, Kenneth S. "The nose, the lie, and the duel in the antebellum South." The American Historical Review 95.1 (1990): 57-74.
