Your Questions

Q

I recently read your book "Redcoat". I never thought that I would find a book as good as any of the Sharpe ones, I was wrong. I just wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed it, and ask you if you planned on making any more additions to the Sharpe series. Thank you for all the great novels. I was wondering if you were going to write any books that take place during the War of 1812. There were so many interesting people on both sides of the conflict. Just a few were Laura Secord, James Fitzgibbon, Isaac Brock, and Tecumseh. I don't know too much about any American people (but I'm sure there were lots). I just wanted to share this idea with you.
Peter Gates

Submitted July 15, 2009

A

Sorry, no plans for the War of 1812.

Q

Hi Not sure if this actually goes to Bernard, but if so bravo on the Sharpe books! I (stupidly) saw them as a bit Mills and Boon, Sean just wandering around seducing women and occasionally shooting his gun. I was soooo wrong and have found the books so far fantastic and, best yet, I find myself finding the history parts as interesting as the fiction parts. Anyway, enough gushing, I actually have quite a quick question. I am currently reading the books in chronological order but am still fairly early on (so, not that you would, don't spoil anything in your reply!). Are the Sharpe books finished now and you have moved to other things (I notice you have other series' of books out)? Or will more books be added in between other books? I would check myself, but every time I try I see glimpses of later story points so, frankly, I'm scared to look for my answer myself! Many many thanks Rickie

Submitted July 15, 2009

A

There will be more Sharpe books, slotted in; but most likely not for at least another two years or so.

Q

Why do you change the name of Azincourt/Agincourt between the US and UK versions and is there any need to change the cover as well. Asa

Submitted July 15, 2009

A

There's a deep division of taste between US and UK publishers over covers, and I can only assume that each knows its own market and designs accordingly! But I do know they invest long hours in trying to get it right! The publisher also decides on the title of the book, which is why the US name is sometimes different than the UK book title.

Q

I love your many books and characters. So many are based on leading warrior figures, yet many of your more interesting characters are priests of one form or another. I could only imagine the brilliant series of books that could come from a priest wandering across Europe during the Hundred Years War or Napoleonic era. Any chance of that occurring?

Mark May

Submitted July 9, 2009

A

I suppose it could be fascinating, but I'm fairly sure I'm not the person who should write it! I'm not over sympathetic to priests . . . and why a priest? Maybe anyone wandering across Europe would be interesting, but they'd need to stop wandering long enough to get involved . . . .

Q

You are an awesome writer and I would love to be as successful as you are. I was just wondering if you are ever going to write about a welsh prince or the wars we had against england?

Chris Ford

Submitted July 9, 2009

A

I really think that's best left to a Welsh writer . . . truly!

Q

Hi. I just finished reading Sharpe's Fortress, and I have a quick question in regard to chronology: in which novel does Sharpe actually return to England and undergo Rifleman training?

Daniel Frater

Submitted July 9, 2009

A

That's not in any of the books - it happens after the close of Sharpe's Trafalgar

Q

I have just finished reading Azincourt for the second time. Outstanding. I am of course conversant with the Sharpe series. no one, to,date has written the definitive WW2 book and it always appears that the British weren't there. Can you not rectify this? Regards

Brian Wylie

Submitted July 9, 2009

A

I really don't want to write about recent history - and as I was alive (just) in WW2 it's much too recent for me!

Q

I truly enjoy your books and your comments. Today you mention that the right to keep and bear arms was tied to military training. Actually it started as a cheap way to equip an army. By definition at the time of the Revolution, a militia was comprised of people who owned and maintained their own weapons. Virtually all weapons were individually constructed. Each was unique. Even the ball ammo couldn't be shared.Assembly lines weren't invented until later. A bullet mold was specifically for the bore of an individual weapon, especially long rifles. So the Constitution granted individuals the right to own weapons so an army could be more easily raised. No need to arm it. As to the numbers of men in battle, I agree "rice paddy" strength was much less than full strength. A US rifle company typically has over 200 men assigned to it. In Vietnam few companies had more than 100 men in the field at a time. Often there were as few as 80. Medieval armies often were grossly overstated. But during Roman times they usually weren't. Hannibal apparently did kill at least 50,000 Romans at Cannae. Over 18,000 legionnaires died at TeutoBerg Wald. Over 20,000 died at Carrhae, with another 10,000 being captured. Yet by 370 a.d. the Eastern Roman army only numbered 15,000 when it was annihilated at Adrianople. Thanks so much for so much entertainment.

Don Conrad

Submitted July 9, 2009

A

It might have been a cheap way to equip an army, but I still think the right to bear arms is bound up in the need to keep a militia. I'd disagree with you slightly about the composition of the militia . . . certainly in Massachusetts (I don't have information for other States), every male between 16 and 60 was required to offer their services to the militia and those who didn't possess weapons were issued with muskets rented from the State at a rate of $1 per musket for six months. You're right, of course, about American-made guns of the period, but remember the rebels imported thousands and thousands of Charleville muskets which were made to a set pattern so that the standard issue ball would fit the .69 bore . . . . . the Charleville, like the British Brown Bess was made to a strict specification and, though the individual parts were made all across France (and barrels, for instance, were made in at least seven different places) the final assembly was centralised. One disadvantage of the Charleville was that its bore was smaller than the Brown Bess (.75) so that the British could use Charleville cartridges (with significant loss of accuracy because of increased windage), but the French couldn't use the British ammunition.

Q

Mr. Cornwell, I've read a few of your books, and I wanted to ask you a question about the Grail Quest series. Throughout the books, Thomas speaks of Latin that he was taught by his father, and of passages from the Bible and the book his father left him. At the end of Heretic, he's attempting to teach Genevieve Latin with a scrap from the book of his father's. Where did that passage come from? I've been trying to figure it out but all I could find similar was Psalm 22, but even it was not the same wording. Could you help me out? And by the way, all of the books that I've read of yours were very near the best I've ever read. Thanks much!

Taylor E.

Submitted July 9, 2009

A

I can't remember the passage and, forgive me, I'm too lazy to look it up - but I suspect you may be right and it probably is Psalm 22 - whatever it was - it was a passage taken from the Bible and the process is - I find a passage I want in the Authorised Version, which I then look up in the Vulgate, and then re-translate into English which deliberately doesn't follow the AV because that, as you know, wasn't written until the beginning of the 17th Century - so to quote it would mean being inundated with messages pointing out my errors!

Q

Mr. Cornwell, I am thrilled that The Burning Land will be hitting the streets in the not-too-distant future. When you wrote the first novel in the series, did you set out to model the Uhtred character after Richard Sharpe a little? Sharpe could be a reincarnated and only slightly more civilized version of Uhtred. Both are vicious and deadly in combat and possess the same "I'll kick your butt and steal your girlfriend" attitude. Everyone can use a little bit (maybe very little bit) of Uhtred and Sharpe in themselves.

Robb Mansfield

Submitted July 9, 2009

A

I guess they're similar because they both come from what passes for my imagination - in my head they're different, but both belong to warrior societies and the kind of man who thrives in that society will possess characteristics that persist through the centuries. We forget, I think, what it must be like to live in a culture that is permanently at war, and we have the luxury of civilizing people with our laws, but in Uhtred's time (less so in Sharpe's) that was a real luxury. The warrior was a necessity, and the best warriors were men we'd find very savage and frightening!