Your Questions

Q

Bernard, I am a big reader of your books especially Sharpy. I have now completed your latest "the Fort" I must say how disappointed I am in you view point as an Englishman. The book was bias towards the colonials and never really saw the British point of view. yes, we kick some bums and characters went to notoriety in other campaigns. The you went on to say to your book dedication Col John Wessmiller and he would Know what to do. This statement hurts as an Englishman and an ex Serviceman. I am happy that Brigadier McLean was portrayed as he was in your book but deeply down I strongly believe he would have made a good stand and the British would have come away from this action as Victorious for defending a piece of earth so well. you mention Moor in this book and it would be very interesting for you to write about him. I have still got a lot of your books to read in your Arthurian series but look forward to your next book Dave

Submitted March 1, 2011

A

I really don't understand that. I changed very little and the book's undoubted story line ends in a crushing victory by the Scottish infantrymen under McLean. And I'm free to dedicate books to whomsoever I like, including gallant old soldiers who are close friends. In truth I think the rebels experience was more interesting, which is why I concentrate so much on it, but only as a prime example of how to screw things up.

Q

Dear Mr.Cornwell, I love your books from the medieval period and Uhtred's adventures leave me glued to the pages you wrote no matter what. I would like to ask you, whether you agree with the claim that Uhtred is the "ultimate anti-hero"? To me, all the priests, christians(including Alfred) are the anti-heroes. Maybe it is because I come from a quite atheistic society(Czech republic) and the life of a so-called "pagan" sounds much more fun and rational to me(drinking, feasting and women) than a life of piety and asceticism. Uhtred's conflicts with Christian priests are simply a delight to read! Could you comment on this? Greetings from Czech republic and keep up the great work! (apologies for the mistakes in my English)

Jan

Submitted March 1, 2011

A

I agree with you - paganism seems a lot more fun! Is he an anti-hero? I don't think of him like that, but he is the personification of a process that was happening fast in the 9th and 10th Centuries - the Christianization of northern Europe. I do think Alfred is a hero, though his piety and fear of sin make him a very puritanical character and I'm definitely not fond of puritans in whatever disguise they adopt. Christianity, of course, offered a better after-life to a wider cross-section of society, which probably explains its appeal, though the price you pay is much less enjoyment in this world.

Q

Hi Bernard, Have just finished Sharpe's Regiment as part of a full tour through the series. Must say I really liked it. It was a nice interlude to the activities in Spain/France. But I didn't quite get the ending. I can't figure why in Fenner's office and with the ledgers and the Dowager by his side Sharpe did not strike a harder bargain. Why did he not demand the lieutenant-colonelcy of the regiment rather than insisting on Girdwood going to Spain? It can't be that Sharpe didn't see the opportunity. He looked after Lawford and Girdwood was ready to resign. Why did he not seize the moment and return to Spain as lieutenant-colonel himself? Kind Regards Willie

Submitted March 1, 2011

A

I don't remember, to be honest. I think (I wrote the book long ago, and it's a hazy recollection) that Sharpe wanted Girdwood in command because he was already planning his revenge. He's not a nice man.

Q

Hi Bernard.. I am a huge fan.. read most of your books in the last year or so.. cant believe I was unaware of you for so long..two quick questions: (1) Is there now or might there be an overlap between Sharpe and Moore and

(2) I live in Massachusetts and plan a visit to "The Fort" - wondering how much there is in the way of historical markers beyond the actual site of the Fort itself. Keep them coming. I have introduced you to 3 friends. All the best. John Smolenski

Submitted February 27, 2011

A

I doubt it, but I've learned never to say never!

There are a lot of historical markers all over Castine - the half Moon fort is marked, though not the seaman's redoubt. The American landing place ought to be marked, but isn't. It's easily discoverable - go to the light-house at the peninsula's western end and there's a footpath that leads down the bluff (it will amaze you that the American forces assaulted the bluff so successfully). It's really worth a visit!

Q

Dear Bernard, I'm travelling through Australia at the moment and have brought the Last Kingdom and the Pale horseman with me and have read them both already, I love them now as much as the 1st time I've read them. One thing that I keep wondering about is why Wessex's army/warriors seemed more formidable than the other English kingdoms? Wessex was never conquered, they resisted the vikings and won many battles such as Cynuit, Ethandun, Ashdown, Farham etc. whilst the other kingdoms fell much quicker. In your books and in the many documentaries I've seen it is stated that the Danes were better at warfare than the saxons and we learnt how to fight from them, but Wessex was strong enough to resist and eventually conquer the northern kingdom's and I'd love to know why?. thanks for your time. Ian Parkhouse

Submitted February 27, 2011

A

There are various reasons. First, I think, the Danes are quintessentially disorganised, so they rarely make a concerted and long-lasting effort. One defeat and their armies break up into their constituent parts and go looking for easier prey. Second, Wessex was farthest away and so had more time to prepare. The Danish invasion started in the north and worked south, so the west Saxons could see what was happening and had more time to ready themselves. Third, of course, is the intelligent response initiated by Alfred - the burh system. He didn't originate it, but copied it from continental Europe, but he applied it brilliantly. The Danes, being a light mobile force, were never equipped for sieges and the burh system stymied them totally. And, of course, though undoubtedly the Danes were considered better warriors at the beginning of their incursions, the Saxons learned fast and were certainly as good by the beginning of the tenth century.

Q

Hello Mr. Cornwell, I enjoy your Saxon series very much and look forward to the next book with great anticipation. In the meantime I am reading Agincourt. I have two quick questions. I am trying to envision the archers and I am unfamiliar with late medieval armor. What sort of helmet did you intend Nick Hook to don: the English bowl shaped helm, a form fitting skull cap, a conical helm with a nasal guard, or something else?

Also, how large is the livery he wears? I have looked this up online and I have seen depictions ranging from the Monty Python-esque to a small patch in the center of the chest. Thanks, Joe

Submitted February 27, 2011

A

It would have been a very simple bowl-shaped helm, nothing fancy at all, and almost certainly no nose-guard. I have a suspicion that many archers didn't wear them anyway, and it does seem likely that they discarded a lot of armour before the battle (to increase mobility). Anyway - their armour would have been very ad hoc, probably the cheapest available, and of dubious quality.

The illustrations I've seen show it to be fairly large, large enough to be visible at some distance. Say enough to cover the chest?

Q

I have been reading your books for some time now and love the way you blend history with real to life characters. I was wondering whether you had any plans for writing a series similar to the Sharpe's series but based in Imperial Rome, it would be a fascinating backdrop full of great history. Regards, Ian Bass

Submitted February 27, 2011

A

I don't; I'm happy to leave the Romans to others.

Q

Dear Sir, Just a quick question as I do not want to take too much of your time away from writing the books I enjoy so much. In the Saxon Stories is Serpents Breathe going to turn out to be the Bamburgh Sword? thanks in advance David

Submitted February 27, 2011

A

Oh, it can be if you want! I described Serpent-Breath before the sword was discovered - but I like the idea, so why not?

Q

Hi Mr. Cornwell, I recently read Sharpe's Battle, excellent as usual. Some questions, which you might not be able to answer as it has been awhile since you wrote it. I don't know if you remember me, still looking for a publisher for my Napoleonic series from the French perspective. Book 2 is nearly done! Anyway, I know it is fiction but you refer to French cuirassiers being at the battle of Fuentes de Onoro. I have been able to find no references to cuirassiers being at the battle. For most of the Peninsular War there were no cuirassiers in Spain except one regiment with Suchet in southern Spain. I'm not even sure if the British ever faced French cuirassiers except at Waterloo. You also mention the rifleman rate of march of 108 steps per minute (which the retreating 7th Division was using) as being faster than the French and the standard British step but the French rate of march was 120 steps per minute. The French were noted for their mobility. I don’t think the 7th’s escape was due to steps per minute but a well done withdrawal. Wellington considered Fuentes de Onoro a draw and noted that if Napoleon had been there, he would have lost. (I would submit that would have occurred far more often if Napoleon had bothered going to Spain). I agree with him that it was a draw and wouldn't chalk it up as a victory. Also, the British did try and stop the French breakout from Almeida, they didn't sleep! Their pursuing forces were ambushed by troops from the French VI Corps.

I sense in your replies about Starbuck that he is more on your mind of late, and that he might be the next book after this Uhtred that is coming out in October. Am I reading too much into your words? PLEASE put him at the top of your list. Just think of the happy readers and how you would stop being pestered about it! One last thing. Do you know why the Sharpe TV series is so expensive in the U.S? $236 even on Amazon. I bought it brand new from the UK for less than $30 including shipping, then bought a region free DVD player and saved $170! Granted you don't get the letter opener and wooden box but that's not worth $170 extra, I'm afraid. I hope fans who've wanted to buy it but are put off by the cost take that route. Plus having the region free DVD player means you can play all kinds of DVDs from Europe unavailable here. (like the original Four Feathers from 1939) Sorry about the length of this missive. Art

Submitted February 27, 2011

A

I wrote the book so long ago that I don't remember it that well, and I couldn't tell you off the top of my head what my source was for the cuirassiers, or if I even had one. I'm not sure we'll ever agree about victory/defeat - the french aim was to resupply Almeida, and it failed, and that smells suspiciously like a defeat to me!

Sorry, I don't know anything about the pricing of the Sharpe films.

Q

Thank you for your rapid reply. Sorry my question got garbled. I was asking about Wasp's Sting, Uhtred's Seax. (I didn't know he gets an axe- hopefully Ubba's.) Is Wasp's Sting straight-backed and straight-or nearly straight-edged, with a point in line with the edge, in the later Viking/Saxon style? Maybe 18 inches or so long in the blade? I apologize for the confusion with my previous question.

Jeremy Start

Submitted February 27, 2011

A

That sounds about right! Definitely a symmetrical point as you describe.