____
Hi there. I'm a casual Honorverse fan, in that I've read the entire series to date through only once.
In advance of Shadow of Victory's release, I'm slowly "re-reading" the entire series, though this time I'm going the audio route, gaming the Audible credit system as much as I can and getting a couple of the books from the library on CD. I just finished listening to my favorite of the mainline series (favorite overall is "Ms. Midshipwoman Harrington" as you might guess from my sn), "Field of Dishonor." I've actually read FoD three times now counting my most recent listen, and one plot element always stuck in my craw about it. It's a sublime book, standing out for how it builds things to come and really introduces us into Manticoran leadership, good and evil, as I'm sure you all recognize. However, and maybe this is something someone can explain to me, but there appears to be a plot hole. If Sgt. Maj. Babcock and Col. Ramirez conclusively identified Summervale as a professional duelist, why on Earth did they allow Capt. Tankersley to go through with the duel? I understand Tankersley, while recognizing Summervale's provocation, genuinely wanted to uphold his honor nonetheless, and may have been determined. I further understand that in Manticoran society, unless you have a VERY good reason, you simply CANNOT refuse to duel someone who has a direct claim against you for violation of honor, no matter how that claim came to be established. If you do, you basically admit you're both a coward and that whatever your accuser says about you is true, that's why North Hollow has no choice but to face Capt. Harrington at the end of the book, and certain death, death being preferable to such a status for anyone with any interest in remaining part of society.
But Summervale's inner monologue after Harrington beats him up in Dempsey's seems to undermine this otherwise well-explained dichotomy. Summervale knows that he must challenge Harrington and face her on her terms, or else society will know him to be a professional duelist, and nobody would ever have to accept a challenge from him ever again. All fine and well, BUT... if Ramirez and Babcock are conscious to Summervale's reputation as a legal assassin, when Ramirez had not PERSONALLY dealt with Summervale before as Babcock had, how are they helpless to warn Tankersley off? There's a missing scene here, I feel, where they tell Tankersley what they know and, for some unknown compelling reason, he chooses to face Summervale anyway. It's not as if Summervale is not someone who can't be indicted; he got cashiered for sketchy, if unprovable, dueling practices. That's a public fact. Why was Tankersley unable to cite that fact and refuse to face him?