Your Questions

Q

Dear Bernard, With the recent publication of a book on why the UK is to blame for all the worlds troubles and should pay compensation for things from Gulags to Vietnam I was just curious if you had read it and what your opinion of it was????

In regards to the next Sharpe I hope this does not prejudice you either way but I have to ask will it be Albuera I doubt I exaggerate when that seems to be the battle most Sharpe fans would love to see Sharpe get to (bad for Sharpe though I guess).

And there has recently been some query on the battle of Monmouth on whether it was a US win (stood there ground) and British win (rearguard saved the bulk of the army and wagon train) or simply a draw I wondered what you thought and whether you will ever write about it??

Finally could Uthred find himself up against the Scots in the next one?? Yours sincerely Tony

Submitted March 14, 2007

A

I haven't read it, no, and I probably won't, but I thoroughly agree with the idea, just so long as it is expanded. The UK should pay compensation for all the ill-effects of it's history, but then so should everyone else, and the Brits could then sue the Romans, the Danes and various other people, for the slaves taken from Britain. At the same time the rest of the world should pay the Brits for the rule of law, parliamentary democracy and the introduction of cricket, football and rugby. Shakespeare is widely enjoyed, so I think they should pay for him too. On balance Britain will end up a lot richer, so I'm all for the idea, even though it is espoused by idiots, and only so long as it is applied fairly.

I honestly won't know til I get closer to writing the next Sharpe.

It really depends on which side you are. I'd vote for a draw, and don't think I'll write about it. The same clash of judgments is quite common; after all the French inscribed Fuentes de Onoro on the Arc de Triomphe as a French 'victory', which is stretching it a bit (like a lot), but it provides amusement. And remember that more than one general has turned a defeat, or at least a vicious draw, into a victory by writing the despatch imaginatively.

He's bound to get there in the end, but on the whole the series will run from south to north (that's not an inviolable rule) so the Scots will probably feature more prominently in later novels.

Q

I loved your book because it was told through the 'losers' perspective (Danes) and we all know that history is recorded by the winners (Saxons - usurpers themselves). I am anxiously awaiting the next book, please hurry! My passion is genealogy and I have completed over 80 generations through the Saxon and Scandinavian lines. I am descended through both Alfred and Ragnor Lodbrock. Their blood finally comes together in 1072 with the birth of Matilda Huntingdon, daughter of Judith De Lens (descended from Ragnor and the wife of David the Saint, King of Scotland)and Waltheof Earl Northumbria (descended from Ragnor). Waltheof was also in the room when McBeth was killed (imagine that). But Judith ensured she betrayed her husband to her uncle, William the Conqueror for treason and he suffered an early death himself. And that is not a plot suggestion, just history. I hope you will include Ragnor's son Sigurd Snake Eye (724), grandson Hardeknut (814), great-grandson Harold Bluetooth (935 )and great-great grandson Svein Forkbeard(965)in your tales. At least come up with a colorful explanation of their names. Hurry up and write - I am suffering anxiety! Vicky M Dixon

Submitted March 14, 2007

A

Wow! The names are wonderful! And if you're descended from Waltheof then you and I are distant cousins, so welcome to the family. All the history is so vague, though. I'm fascinated that Waltheof was in the room when Macbeth was killed - I did a lot of research on Macbeth last year and discovered, among many shadowy things, that he was probably A Good Guy, but one constant seemed to be the suggestion that he was killed in battle at Lumphanan in 1057. Which might have happened in a room, of course . . . but it's all part of the extraordinarily slippery nature of the history of Britain before the mediaeval period.

Q

Dear Mr. Cornwell, As a reader of your books over a decade or two, I was delighted to find one of your books in a second hand bookshp on Sanibel Island. The proprietor had met you in the States somewhere, and she mentioned that the ending of one of your earlier books was different in the US version ( a happier ending). Has this happened since? Are there any subtle differences between the UK and US versions? ( and when does Uhtred ride again?)
Dr. Chris Pearson

Submitted March 14, 2007

A

Is that true? I have a half memory that I was asked to add a page to an American edition and, being venal, I did, so it is probably true, but I completely forget which book it was. Other than that the only subtle differences are that the Americans use US spelling. The unsubtle difference is when they change the title, which drives me mad, but there's very little I can do about it other than resort to Jameson whiskey.

Q

Mr. Cornwell, Hello, it's been a while since I've last written. I have been busy preparing my manuscript for consideration at this year's HSN conference and have had time for little else. I thought I'd take a break from all that to put a few questions to you that have been bubbling up in my mind lately.

First, I was wondering if you have ever read the work of F. Van Wyck Mason? He was a wonderful, prolific writer of historical novels during the 1950's. He wrote a book called "Golden Admiral" about Sir Francis Drake and the Armada, another book called "Cutlass Empire" detailing the life and exploits of Henry Morgan in the 17th century Caribbean, as well as a quintet of books about the American Revolution. In the forward to one of his books he states: "The writer of a novel which employs an historical setting is, I believe, to the careful historian somewhat as a landscape painter is to an architect. While a painter is at liberty to present and emphasize those details of a scene which attract and interest him, an architect must present the most minute details of his plan." That seemed like one of the best definitions I've ever come across for what you do and I just wanted to get your opinion on it.

Second, I was curious to discover that the character in one of your sailing novels, "Wildtrack", shares his last name (Sandman) with that of the protagonist of your other novel Gallows Thief. Is this just a coincidence or are they meant to be descendants, or was it just a wonderful accident?

Also, are the Gallows Thief stories in any way inspired by Ernest Hornung's character A.J. Raffles? They are both first class cricketers. Are you familiar with the Raffles stories? I always loved the idea that Hornung was Conan Doyle's brother-in-law and so created a gentleman thief to counter Doyle's immortal Sherlock Holmes.

Third, I was interested to read your comment about C. S. Forester's "ka-bob method" of story construction. I was wondering where you read that? I have been looking for anything Forester wrote on the craft of writing and never do I have much luck. The longest collection of his thoughts seem to have been recorded in the Hornblower Companion- where he compares the stimulus for a story to a waterlogged timber sinking to the bottom of his subconscious.

Last, I wanted to ask if you had ever read the works of Talbot Mundy? His books "King of the Khyber Rifles" and "Tros of Samothrace" are some of my favorites. His works are credited with having inspired a legion of early pulp adventure writers like Robert E. Howard. Did his work influence you at all? Anyway, thanks again for you time and good luck with the online book club through B+N. I think it's a great idea and puts me in the mind of a master craftsman who is unafraid to present his work for the close examination of others. R. Kulb

Submitted March 14, 2007

A

That's great! I will probably use it! I did read him years ago, but confess I'd forgotten about him till you reminded me, for which many thanks, and I'll try to renew my acquaintance.

I don't believe they're related - I think I just liked the name!

I read Raffles many, many years ago, and had quite forgotten that he was a cricketer. Rider Sandman's love of cricket is essentially drawn from me! In my dreams I have scored many a century at Lords, but then, that's what dreams are for. Dull reality makes me confess that in the last game of my entirely undistinguished career, I was c & b for a duck, third ball. That was it. Time to draw stumps.

And that book - The Hornblower Companion - is where I found his kabob simile! I think it's in the chapter about the novel in which HMS Sutherland is the skewer - but it is there!

Never read him, but I will look him up. Thanks!

Q

Dear Mr.Cornwell, me Luke just writing again to thank you and unfortunately have a few more questions if you have the time. #1 in sharpes Escape you mention a gun that from my point of view sounds like a shot gun and in the movie Srg.Harper carries around a similar gun as a shot gun just older and it has a lot of barrels how would you load a gun like that with a ram rod. Luke

Submitted March 14, 2007

A

It isn't really a shotgun ('fowling piece') because essentially a shotgun fires a lot of pellets from its single barrel - the blunderbuss did that, but the blunderbuss lacks the stopping force to be really useful in battle. Harper's gun is the Nock Volley Gun and has seven barrels clustered together, and it would need to be loaded one barrel at a time - seven bullets that had to be rammed separately, which must have been hugely time consuming!

Q

Hi, so excited to hear that there will be more "Saxon" books as I thought it might be just a trilogy (before I finished "Lords of the North"). That got me thinking, though - I know Arthur's story was completed in his trilogy, but Derfel's story certainly wasn't. How did he end up at the monastery from which he tells his stories of Arthur? Any chance of more from him? John Myhill

Submitted March 14, 2007

A

Well, he probably kept his vow! Which is all I can suggest, because I'm not going to finish his story . . . that tale might be told by Derfel, but it is about Arthur, and with his disappearance the tale loses its interest for me. Sorry about that!

Q

dear Sir, I was wondering why in the peninsula war the British army only consisted of British and German troops, and none from the empire, as happened in the world wars, just thought that it would boost numbers a little. Thank you greatly for your time and I love your books! Chris G

Submitted March 14, 2007

A

Really was not an empire! India remained a battlefield, and any troops deployed there were fully engaged against enemies, and certainly that was true of the East India Company's army. Australia (New South Wales as it was called) was still a penal colony, so needed troops rather then being able to send any. No South Africa. Canada also needed troops to deter American invasions (which were to come in the War of 1812). So there really is no empire from which to draw troops! The Irish might disagree, and certainly Irishmen made up a significant (and very effective) proportion of Wellington's army. The other distinguished 'foreigners', though much fewer in number, were the Loyalist Americans who fought in Britain's army, mostly immediate descendants of Tories who fled the US at independence and mostly settled in Canada. de Lancey, Wellington's quartermaster at Waterloo, was one, as were the famous Baby brothers, and dozens of others.

Q

I have read all your Sharpes Books and just read Redcoat. I was wondering, do you have plan to write more rev war books? Also I was not a big reader till I can across your work. Thank you For the great stories. George Ryder

Submitted March 14, 2007

A

Yes, I'm considering another book set during the time of the American Revolution.

Q

mr Cornwell I have read and enjoyed Sharpe and Starbuck and I was wondering who you would back in a fight, one of Sharpe's redcoats/riflemen or one of Starbuck's rebles? Also which gun was more accurate, the baker rifle, or whatever gun Starbuck used (cannot find name)? I would dearly like to know your opinion. Joe

Submitted March 14, 2007

A

I wouldn't back either! Probably equally nasty in a fight, so it wouild really depend on the leadership, and in a notional fight between say, Wellington and Robert E. Lee, well, who could choose? I suspect Starbuck's weapons have the edge. Technology has moved on half a century and the Minie bullet is a great advance on the Baker rifle's ball, but the weapons of the American Civil War varied hugely in their effectiveness and reliability. Think of the Springfield 'Trapdoor' rifle, which was a horrid thing, but which the Union insisted on supplying. If Sharpe had the newer Enfield rifle he would have fought on equal terms.

Q

Dear Mr Cornwell, I'm a huge fan and I was just wondering about 'snuff'. The officers of Sharpe's time appear to have loved the stuff. What was it? Is it similar to any modern drug? Thanks your for hours of joy. Lee from Australia

Submitted March 14, 2007

A

You can still buy it! It's nothing but powdered tobacco. In the States the term seems to be used mainly for tobacco taken orally (i.e. kept in the mouth), but in Britain it was always sniffed. Wilsons of Sharrow Mills in Sheffield still produce it (as do Fribourg and Treyer), and it's a splendid alternative to smoking, especially on long flights. It also defeats the health Nazis who are so intent on eradicating our pleasures. The tobacco is often scented or otherwise flavoured, but essentially it's tobacco stems dried and powdered.