Fascinating. There is a famous course at Michigan Law called Bloodfeuds, which takes a scholarly view of the old Icelandic laws of revenge as told through the sagas. The point of the class is that some of the customs and traditions seem unusual, until you begin to consider the cultural / environmental conditions.

Similarly with dueling. In an honor culture where litigation isn't viable recourse to an offense, what's the best manner of resolving disputes? The formality of dueling as we see from the rules probably provided a much-needed measure of social control over private violence.

Compare that to the situation today, where the state has the true monopoly on legal violence. Private disputes that escalate to killing tend to be unordered affairs that lead either to continuing down spirals of violence or to wounding or deaths of innocents.

Personally, I think violence is inherent in human nature and one of the blessings of society is that we regulate and control it. We have violent outlets in sport and increasingly video games etc., but I also think we should consider whether some manner of "dueling" should be implemented. Obviously I would propose something nonlethal, like boxing. Something similar to:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takanakuy