Your Questions

Q

Dear Bernard,

I so enjoy the Saxon Stories, and I am wondering when the next one will be out? I am re reading them now, got to the last one, and would love to know another is on the way.

It is marvellous to have one's own historical roots brought to vivid life, and reading these books has made me want to visit and revisit a lot of places. Much better than history classes at school.

Jill Thraves

 

 

Bernard,

many thanks for your novels, they have certainly brought some history to life for me.

A quick question about the Warrior chronicles - or is it Saxon stories? I've read all the series and just bought the kindle version of 'the empty throne warrior chronicles' which is shown on amazon as book 8. I was also surprised to see 'The empty throne book 9 Saxon stories' - I read the prologue and it appears that book 8 and 9 are the same thing.

Is this correct - and if so why the confusing numbers?

Whats the difference between Warrior Chronicles and Saxon stories?

Bill Harmer

 

Hello Mr Cornwell

Is there a release date yet for Warriors of the storm?, brilliant books thank you.

Yvonne

 

Just finished "The Empty Throne". Is there a next book in the series available now or near in the future?

David Shaeffer

Submitted June 29, 2015

A

The ninth book of the Saxon Tales/Warrior Chronicles (no difference!) will be called Warriors of the Storm and will be released in the UK in October and in the US in January.

Q

Dear Mr Cornwell,

Someone told me you are currently writing a new Sharpe book (I think they heard a radio interview).  Is this true?  I very much hope so.  I have read EVERY book you have written (including the wonderful sailing ones) so am a huge fan, but Richard Sharpe is my favourite.  Thank you for the enormous pleasure your writing has given me.

Yours sincerely,

Carolyn.

Submitted June 29, 2015

A

No, sorry!  I am currently writing the 9th book of Uhtred's story, not a Sharpe book.

Q

Hi

I just wanted to write to say I love the Uhtred books, I have easily read them front to back 4 or 5 times. I used to do historical re-enactment and I love your flair for historical accuracy, although when you let the characters off the leash of battle it is also highly entertaining, especially Uhtred.

I was so happy to hear the last Kingdom is getting a tv show, it was the first book of yours I read and I am really looking forward to the show, is there any word on when it will be out?

Regards

Thomas Shannly

Submitted June 29, 2015

A

We don't know yet, but keep an eye on the homepage of this website.  We'll post the information as soon as we receive it!

Q

Dear Mr Cornwell,

I've read your inspiring article on writing, and became curious about your writing routine and process. Being a constant and versatile reader I became to have writing aspirations myself. I research how my favorite writers write in order to have an idea of the different ways in which imagination is brought to page. I know I should develop my own way, but learning about this helps me.

Ken Follett outlines the story, Stephen King doesn't. Jeffrey Archer writes longhand, Frederick Forsyth uses a typewriter. Each one of them have a different approach to the craft.

I was curious to learn yours,

Thanks in advance

Moacyr Campos

Submitted June 29, 2015

A

An outline?  No, I don't.  I have a very broad idea of where I want the book to go, then just let the characters sort it out amongst themselves.  I'm not saying this is the right way to do it - some writers plot very carefully, and their books are great, but others, like me, leave it to instinct.  I think writing a novel (for me!) is like climbing a mountain - I get a quarter of the way up, look back and see a better route, so it's back to the beginning and start again and that better route takes me halfway up, I look back, and so on and so on.  Once that 'first' draft is finished I rewrite the whole thing maybe two time, and it's then that I add lots of detail.

 

Q

Historian Andrew Roberts recently wrote the the world would be a far better place today if Napoleon hadn't been defeated at Waterloo.  I take this to mean not embarking on the campaign that led to the battle but governing France as a benevolent ruler for his remaining years.  Have you read the piece and do you care to comment.

Bill Brockman

Submitted June 27, 2015

A

I have read the piece and talked to Andrew about it too! I have some sympathy for his view, but dispute whether Napoleon could have been trusted to keep the promises he made on his return from Elba in 1815 . . . . we’ll never know, of course! We do know that Andrew Roberts is wonderfully provocative and his biography of Napoleon is simply superb.

 

Q

Would it be possible to ask for advice on some books and refinements to the question i pose which is, In context to the period 1789 to 1918 how far did British military tactics adapt to a modern warfare fighting style?

Thank you

Brandon

Submitted June 27, 2015

A

Read John Keegan’s History of Warfare and Richard Holmes’s Redcoat…and follow their bibliographies if you need to!

 

Q

Waterloo - Enjoyed you piece  and its apparent accuracy even given the anti-war slant. Ageed, war is hell and there is really nothing "glorious" about it. But really, did you have to be so politically correct that you found some woman who died in the battle so you could use the phrase "men and women"?

War was then surely a man's game.

Love to continue this discussion but I know you are innundated. Pity. Intelligence is hard to find.

Richard Frauenglass

Submitted June 27, 2015

A

We’re supposed to forget that some women died?  That isn’t political correctness, it’s an historical truth. I agree that very few died at Waterloo, but there were some and I find that interesting.

Q

Just finished Waterloo -- two days early.  I started it last night and planned to finish on the 18th, but I couldn't put it down.  You have treated "Slender Billy" badly in both this book and in 'Sharpe's Waterloo.'  I note that the new book has no contemporary commentary on Billy's actions.  Was he really that bad?

Jeff Garrison

Submitted June 27, 2015

A

I could have quoted Ompteda . . . and there is the Duke’s one dismissive comment. I think he was that bad, yes.

Q

Dear Mr Cornwell,

I admire your books

I am greatful for your remarkeble writings when do you publish the 9th book of the war chronocles?

I hope to hear from you

with kind regards

dirk m.kwantes

 

Hi Bernard

Have you given a name to your 9th book in this series , and also will it be the last in the series ,l hope not its the same with Thomas  , Derfel  and  Nick Hook l know its not possible but you just cannot write them fast enough for me ,I enjoy them so much

Thank You

Dave Buck

 

A friend loaned me The Burning Land just over a week ago and I took it on holiday with me to East Devon. Such a gripping story, I was captivated and had finished the book in three days. It is my birthday at the end of June and I have placed none too subtle hints with my family, to get their heads together with a view to my possibly receiving the rest of the books in the Warrior Chronicles!

Such compelling story lines Mr Cornwell, and my own research into early tenth-century Anglo-Saxon history, spiced up the experience !

I have recently finished and uploaded to my Academia web space, an interesting article on the Battle of Brunanburh, which I have suggested may have taken place on the Fylde Peninsula.

This leads me on to ask you Mr Cornwell, if you have in mind any future story based around the Brunanburh conflict ?

Best regards and Thank you !

Michael Deakin

 

 

Submitted June 27, 2015

A

The next book, to be called Warriors of the Storm, should be available in the UK in October and in the US in January.

Q

When looking up Wellington, I believe it may have been on Wikipedia.  One of the comments on there was that there is very little recognition or acknowledgement given to Wellington or the British Army for helping to liberate Spain.

When reading Sharpe you actually do get the impression (even though I’m told anyone can make adjustments to Wikipedia) that that statement could be accurate.  Would you say it’s a fair statement?  If so would you be aware of the reasoning?

I can only really think of it being 2 possible reasons:-  But my the reasons I can think of surely cannot be even close to being right………..

1 – Pride.  Being ashamed that had to have some help from another nation to liberate their own country.

Or

2 – Embarrassment.   Because they allowed/invited a nation they thought of as an ally into their country (to deal with Portugal?) and felt foolish because they were turned on by that ‘ally’ and it took help from a country that had previously been considered an enemy to help them.

I cannot believe I’m even close to being right because my thinking is far too simple and my I.Q is way to  for me to be anywhere near being on the right lines.  So I need to rely on much more clever people like yourself for advice (sorry for bending you ears with such trivia) and like I say, is it really true about the lack of acknowledgement; and if so why do you believe this to be the case?

Am sorry if this is too delicate for you to answer in case it causes offence and for that reason I’ll understand if you choose to not answer.

Yours sincerely

Lee

 

Submitted June 27, 2015

A

I think it’s fair to say that Spain doesn’t wholly celebrate Britain’s part in the Peninsular War, though there are some magnificent memorials…a very lavish one in Vitoria and plenty of battlefield markers. It had always been a ‘sticky’ relationship, remember Spain was fighting Britain at the time of Trafalgar! And the past history of the two countries was distinctly unfriendly. Relations were awkward; Spain was a very Catholic country and the British army brought a good deal of Protestant prejudice in its baggage (Wellington had to forbid Masonic marches by his officers), and Spain was, rightly I think, a very proud country that resented its dependence on a former enemy. But at the same time Britain has never really acknowledged the part played by the Spanish guerillas who were every bit as responsible as Wellington’s army for the French defeat. It was an awkward alliance, and would have been a lot worse if it hadn’t been for Wellington’s tact and Miguel de Alava’s good sense (he was the Spanish liaison officer to Wellington).  I think Britain and Spain were natural enemies who were forced by circumstance to become allies and neither was comfortable with the situation, however well that alliance worked in the end.