Southern Honor is a myth

First off, I find the Southern defense and heroizing of Preston Brooks' vicious and unprovoked assault on Senator Charles Sumner to be particularly appalling.  How could any man of honor, as all Southern men claim to be, find honor in the beating of an unarmed man nearly to death?  If Brooks felt that Sumner's political speech, critical of slavery, and given publicly before Congress, was an affront to the section of America he called home, then he should have called him out and challenged his fellow Senator to a duel.  Southerners placed great store in their long tradition (one still occurring in 1857) of handling affairs of honor with duels, then why didn't Brooks challenge Sumner to one?  My answer is that a duel is a meeting of equals and Brooks didn't consider Sumner his equal at all.  Also, a duel gives both participants an equal chance for both victory and death, something that Brooks didn't want to risk happening.  He wanted to be ASSURED a victory, so he attacked Sumner unprovoked and while the man was unarmed and unprepared (really, how could he be since he was attending a meeting of the Senate, little expecting to be attacked) and kept beating on him, long after his victim had ceased to even try to protect himself and probably long after Sumner had lost conciseness.

Southern honor is not just a myth, it is complete and utter bullshit.