This was very well written and engaging, but I wondered how rigorous it was. It would have been nice to have a clearer idea of which details were historical and which were from the author's imagination.

I would have appreciated more of the broader historical context, and a better explanation of why the duel was approved.

The author wrote as if it were certain that Le Gris was guilty. I kind of wondered if this is his legitimate take, or if it was a literary device based on the outcome of the duel.