Mr. Cornwell, I thought it proper to drop you a note simply to say that I am an avid (more likely rabid) fan. I am a history teacher by trade and I devour historical fiction. Your Sharpe Series is amazing, and I devoured it at a rate of two books per week. The Starbuck Chronicles went just as quickly. I had the opportunity to co-teach a lesson on Napoleon with my Language Arts teacher this past year in the context of the events leading up to Hugo's Les Miserables. My knowledge of the Napoleonic Wars was immeasurably supplemented by Richard Sharpe, Patrick Harper and the rest of the cast. One of my best students asked the question, "So how DID the British manage to defeat Napoleon?" After a moment of reflection, I replied that there were four main reasons why the British secured their victory: 1. Wellington's leadership 2. British naval superiority 3. British training (platoon/company volley fire vs. the French column) and bulldog tenacity 4. Baker Rifles and soldiers like Richard Sharpe. I confess that I may have overstated my points, but I hold on to them nevertheless. There is a great recent non-fiction book entitled "Wellington's Rifles" that is currently sitting someplace on my bookshelf, unread as of this note, but I had to buy it instantly upon seeing it in my local BN store. A brief examination turned into a 20 minute read in the bookstore and I have to believe that the author is a fan of yours. Thank you for countless hours of the best historical fiction ever written! I eagerly await the continuing adventures of Sharpe, Harper, Starbuck, and Truslow. I will content myself with the Arthur Books, Stonehenge, the Grail Quest, and the rest of your books in the meantime. Sincerely, Jeffrey Burdge
Sharpe would probably give me a clout if I said that (2) was probably the most important factor. Naval superiority meant that Britain could strangle French trade, forever threaten the flanks of French territory, and send financial and material support to France's enemies. I suppose the lesson (reinforced in WWI and II) is that if an island nation doesn't rule the seas, then someone else will rule the island, a lesson the present British government seems to think irrelevant. Ah well. I think your four points are good - and add in Britain's financial strength that kept sometimes reluctant allies in the struggle.