Dear Mr. Cornwell,
I just finished your two recent books, Death of Kings and 1356, and the insight your writing provides into early and medieval English history and warfare continues with the most fascinating details. Details of weaponry, shield walls, personalities, and, perhaps uniquely, of "how to run a business". As in the pillaging of France, or protecting the frontiers of Wessex. How to manage the people who work for you and reward them, how to find good new hires, and how to train them. And, considering King Edward and his ecclesiastical counsellors, how not to manage a kingdom and a war.
Your books have such delicious detail, I often feel like Genevieve saying to Thomas "tell me again", wanting him to repeat the story of his getting rid of Cardinal Bessieres and Father Marchant. And even in her example at the end of the book - tell us more. They were such deliciously evil men, fully typical of far too many church leaders of the time, but indeed letting them off a volume or two back made me want to read the latest volume even more so.
There were two details that might bear further coverage later. One is the failure of the arrows to penetrate Sculley's armor in the Monastery. Was there a quality problem in the manufacture of the points, and if so what might it have been and how might it have been fixed? It could have just been quality control with so many aspects and "subcontractors" involved, as the text mentions, or it might be metallurgical.
I am peripherally involved in the metallurgical business and am aware of groups that explore the subject of early iron manufacture in England, for example. There are impurities that might help (manganese or nickel) and those that might not (phosphorus). In this era, the iron foundrymen could barely understand what they were dealing with, so depending upon where the ore came from being used by one iron master vs. that for another, they might or might not make good metal for arrows.
This was not trivial. For example, Bessemer, the great developer of the art of making steel from iron, succeeded only because the iron he was using did not have phosphorus in it. And he did not know that. Iron in the book's time frame would have been made with charcoal, and charcoal can add phosphorus to the iron. If the charcoal has been made from the branches, say, of a tree it will be higher in phosphorus as opposed to charcoal made from the heartwood. Iron mongers became aware of this charcoal problem in the 19th century, but prior to that it would have been a matter of happenstance. Sorcery even!
Another was much less fascinating but might make a good "detail" for the reader. This is who was the inexperienced idiot that tried to manage the wagon train crossing the river at the beginning of the battle? Was he a monk like Edward might have sent 550 years earlier, or a favorite like several you mention, perhaps out of the Earl of Warwick's court? In any case, what happened to him? Did his incompetence come home to roost (as in maybe the wagon tipped over on him and he drowned in the river), or was he promoted! Maybe we can see him in a later book continuing his fumbling ways.
Thank you again for doing such a wonderful job researching and writing your books. I've read most nearly all of them, even those about sailing in recent times. Very good storytelling.
Sincerely,
Larry M. Southwick
Cincinnati, Ohio