Your Questions

Hello Mr. Cornwell!

First and foremost I would like to thank you for all of your hard work. You are without reservation my favorite author (which is a huge compliment because before I found your writing my favorite author had been Mark Twain). Five years ago I picked up a copy of The Winter King and I still remember reading that first ambush where Arthurs cavalry takes Gundleus' raiding party by surprise and thinking to myself that this was the first time I'd found a battle scene in a book more exciting than one in any movie. That phenomena was to repeat itself in every book of yours I have read since. I also notice that you have certain lines you like to fall back on at times, "I gave him a hard backswing that would have disembowelled an ox," is one I've noticed a few times. What do you have against oxen? Just teasing, but in all seriousness the second reason I am writing you regards the televised Sharpe series.      This is where I do an about-face and go from kissing your butt to

offering some serious, well-intended criticism. I hope you don't find it offensive, because that's not my intention. I've been watching the Sharpe shows and have been disappointed with almost all of them. I'm guessing it had to do with budget and possibly demand? The impression I got from all of them though was that they were rushed, and butchered.       First of all, I found myself disagreeing on the choice of actors for most characters, with the exceptions of Arthur Wellesley, Major Hogan and Pierre Ducous. Sean Bean is a personal favorite as far as actors go, he made a great Boromir, and has been nothing short of first class in most roles I've seen him in. However he was the wrong choice for Sharpe. The Sharpe in the books is a boiling pot of anger, volatile, dark skinned, scarred and dominated most of his fights. Television Sharpe had almost none of those qualities. It isn't a potshot at Mr. Bean, whom I respect greatly, but a mere observation. Patrick Harper was similarly

ill-fitting. Mr. O'Malley's performance was fine, but he lacked the sheer bulk and size that gave Harper his awesome presence. Their collective fight sequences were poorly choreographed, and just generally not done right. Then important characters like Captain LeRoy were altogether abandoned! I was not a happy camper. I realize that there were probably reasons for all of these things, but I wanted to get this off my chest. I also wanted to make a suggestion, one thats been percolating in my thoughts for some time now. If you think theres any merit to my concerns, and if looking at it closer bothers you like it does me, would you consider taking Sharpe back off the shelf and re-making the television series? I realize thats a tall order, a very tall order, but I think you and your fans might all find it very rewarding. What I envision is an HBO series akin to Spartacus or Game of Thrones, where Sharpe can be Sharpe. From the cursing and gore to the nitty-gritty details of betrayals and interpersonal intrigue. It would have battles done properly, and justice would be done to your stories. Five episodes, forty-five minutes each could cover the material of one book. Two books could make one season. It would start at Sharpe's Rifles so that nobody is robbed of Patrick Harper, Hagman, Harris, Slattery, Perkins, Sergeant Williams or any of the rifles. It would be fast paced, edgy, hard-hitting and captivating in the same manner as your writing. The famous fight in the barn between Sharpe and Harper would be an epic brawl instead of a clumsy wrestling match (thats how i saw the current televised versions fight between the pair). The battles would be great in the sense of a Mel Gibson movie. I realize this would all be very expensive and time-consuming, and that your current work with Sharpe has probably already been alot of both as well. So if you don't take this idea of mine too seriously I won't be offended, your still my favorite author. Thank you for taking the time to read this, thank you for writing the books that have been my constant companions for five years of my young life, and take care!

 

Sincerely,

 

Ash Filip

Dear Mr Cornwell,

 

I have read the grail series and have just finished reading the warlord chronicles with Arthur and Derfel. This series was the best thing i have ever read and i am very sad that i had to put down the book after the last page. I am writing you to ask if you can clear some things up for me. In reality i would ask you to write me 10 more books about Derfel but i know i can't. I wanted to know what igraine thought of the end of the tale and how Derfel lived his final days. Also whether Arthur lived or not and how he felt about losing Derfel.

 

Thank you,

Mike Armstrong

Dear Bernard,

 

I've just finished your excellent account of Waterloo and would like to praise you for another wonderful oeuvre. I've read several accounts of this/these battle(s) and yours is the clearest and best at explaining the whys and wherefores. I especially appreciated your explanations of the importance of the road networks, the concerns the allies had that affected their positioning pre-Quatre Bras and the rock, paper, scissors aspects of the timing of column, line, square, cavalry, artillery, as well as the clarity of the chronology of events. One issue that you didn't mention, however, was whether or not Napoleon was ill in the midst of the battle and how much this may have affected his decision making - not least his delegation of much of the battle management to Ney. The 1970 film has a passage where Napoleon is incapacitated through stomach cramps and returns to the battle to find Ney has committed the cavalry unsupported against the Anglo/Dutch squares and I've read this alleged episode reported in some accounts but not in all. What is your view? Could this explain some of Napoleon's apparent shortcomings on the day or is there no evidence to support it?

 

Thanks again for a wonderful read.

Paul Waide

Dear Mr. Cornwell,

At the end of August of this year, my wife and I had the great pleasure of visiting the UK (Lyme Regis) as guests of Jim and Rosie Bragg.  Rosie is an elderly Anglican priest.  During my stay she recommended I read Harlequin and Vagabond, two novels in the same cover!! I was so taken with them that I read them both in the 8 days we visited, staying up late and getting up early in order to consume the stories yet not neglect my wife and the in-laws by staying in during the day.  The graphic violence, and the fact that your books were recommended by Rosie had my mind working enthusiastically multi-directional in present and past.  I was so excited that when I returned to the USA, I bought both Heretic, and Agincourt and read those equally fast.  My question.  Do you have an anatomical poster before you as you describe the visciousness of the attack with arrows and edged weapons?  If not, how do you describe the violence in such detail.  For me it's as if I'm passing a terrible auto accident, looking as I go by, hoping that everyone is alright and not wanting to look directly at the scene, but imagining all the while the last moments of the victims alive or dead, at the same time not being able to tear my eyes away till I'm safely past and out of my own sense of danger, pleased that it was not my own misfortune to be ogled by passing ghouls like myself.  How do you do that?  Was it difficult for you the first time?  I'm no writer but am putting together a private memoir for my kids.  It has attracted favorable attention from a local group of fellow teachers that think it may be suitable for middle school boys.  The reason I tell you this is that every time I read something I like, I find myself studying the wordsmanship and wondering how the particular collection of words came to be.  Thank you for any clues you can give.  I want my stories to detail my antics when I was young, as entertainment and not be a chore to read, so vocabulary words are important to me.  Currently It's just trial and error read and re read.  You seem to do this so very well I didn't think it would hurt to ask.  If you never have time to respond, I will continue to read your work and question how you do what you do.  I'm anxious to read the Sharpe stories.  I saw the episodes on TV and didn't like some of them, but I had just finished reading Patrick O"Brien.  I am a Viet Nam veteran of the American Navy and the history in your books pulls me into the story from the very first.  I've gone on too long.  Thank you for your web site.

 

Mike Evans  Anderson, Indiana, USA

What a great read.  Well up to your usual standard.  The excellent battle diagrams and the text finally enable me to understand how the battle unfolded and the fine art illustrations make this a treasure.  Well done.  People should not be put off by this being non-fiction, your novelist skill in putting the characters involved into 3D sets this apart (and for me) above other tales of the battle. Bit sad that I am in Nigeria when you are speaking in Norwich; I have 35 first editions itching for your signature!  Bring on the next Saxon story.  What's is after that please?

Roger Gaspar

 

Hello Mr Cornwell,

You had finish the Book "the Empty Throne", which will be next?

Götz

Dear Mr. Cornwell,

 

I just finished reading your account of the Waterloo campaign, and enjoyed  it greatly. In the afterword you however write:

`Slender Billy proved a better king than a general. His father abdicated in 1840 and the Prince became King William II of the Netherlands, which by then had lost the province of Belgium. He was generally liberal, encouraging electoral reform and accepting constitutional constraints on the monarchy. He ruled till his death in 1849.’

 

I feel that your praise of the man is undeserved,  he agreed to sign the 1848  constitution (which went much further than he intended), because he was being blackmailed by the radical democrats over his homosexual affair with Petrus Janssen, see Koning Willem II: 1792-1848 by Jeroen van Zanten for more details.

 

Kind regards,

 

Mathijs Wintraecken

Dear Bernard,

Having read all your historical novels, (my favourite is Sharpe), and in eager anticipation of the release of Waterloo, I did some 'prep', by reading Johnny Kincaid's two books and Edward Costello's memoirs.

Having read at least four factual novels on Waterloo, plus An Infamous Army and, of course Sharpe's Waterloo, I was curious as to how your book would go.

Well it duly arrived on my Kindle whilst I was sunning my self in the South of France, so I put down Vol. 2 of General Napier's History of the Peninsular War and went straight to it.

Within the first twenty pages I was learning stuff I didn't know, which was a good start, after which I couldn't put it down, and within three days it was done.

I think you have covered the battle, and the controversies surrounding it in a masterful and succinct manner in your own inimitable style. After all, how many writers in a factual book, would use the expression 'frenchified' when describing Boney's change of name? Excellent.

I shall be looking forward to the next Uhtred story and hopefully another Sharpe in the not to distant future. Keep up your brilliant work.

Regards

 

John Hill

 

Have you read Napier's History? He's not one to sit on the fence when it comes to an opinion, particularly about our Spanish allies.

 

Dear Bernard,

 

You are easily my favorite author of historical fiction, and I've been reading history and historical fiction since you and I were about 10 or 11 years old. I've read most of your history-based novels (Uhtred's saga, the Grail Quest series, Azincourt, The Fort) and thought they were excellent. The Warlord Chronicles are a superb and highly plausible retelling of the Arthurian legends (and I say this as a student of medieval literature!).

However, my favorite series is the one that recounts the adventures of Richard Sharpe. I discovered the Sharpe novels soon after developing an interest in (my wife would say obsession with) the military career of the Duke of Wellington, and I'm intrigued by the relationship between these two men.

I noticed recently on your website that no one has yet correctly identified Sharpe's father. To me the most logical answer is C. S. Forester. You've stated that you started writing about Sharpe because you wanted to do for Wellington's army what Forester's Hornblower novels did for Nelson's navy. And there are several tributes to  Forester in your work. Rifleman Matthew Dodd, for example. And the British naval lieutenant named Forester in The Fort. Plus, the fact that Sharpe participates in the battle of Trafalgar, which Hornblower missed, is a major tribute in itself.

If I'm wrong, I'll quietly wipe the egg off my face while I'm waiting for your account of Waterloo to arrive from the UK. I'll have more questions another day. In the meantime, Keep up the Great Work!

 

Bill Forsman

JUST ENJOYING YOUR NEW BOOK WATERLOO.I AM SURE COMTE D"ERLON WAS NOT A FRENCH MARSHALL. AS I RECALL NAPOLEON CREATED 26 MARSHALLS AND HE WAS NOT ONE OF THEM .PLEASE CONFIRM.

Michael Shonn

Dear Bernard

 

As a fan of your Hundred Years War books, I wondered (admittedly at the risk of incurring the wrath of Alex Salmond)   if you would ever consider a Prequel to Harlequin with a book on the battles of Dupplin Moor and Halidon Hill. Both great Archer victories.

 

btw I loved your non fiction book on Waterloo and if you ever consider another non fiction, it would have to be Appomattox in the American Civil War that was pretty decisive too

 

I have to ask what you thought of Joseph E Johnston as a General as he seems to generate a lot of opinion on US Civil War boards. Some blame him for Vicksburg loss (Not Grant though) while others praise him for his defence against Sherman around Atlanta etc. It seems an interesting debate

 

Yours sincerely

 

Geraint