Your Questions

Q

Mr. Cornwell, I have read most of your books and love them all. My question is about the Arthur series. Throughout it there is reference to magic but I had always managed to pass it off as possible (possibly through my lack of knowledge in the area of science) and I actually rather enjoyed this 'magic' aweing the people of the Dark ages. So when it came to the final novel of the trilogy and the for want of a better description 'voodoo body', I must confess I was bitterly disappointed and I simply wished to know whether 'true magic' was your intention throughout the novels or whether you decided to throw it in at the end and if so, why?
John Emmit

Submitted January 30, 2006

A

You think it's magic? Fine. Magic is in the eye of the beholder. I didn't actually notice any effect of the 'voodoo', but perhaps I'm wrong. Yes, I think the 'magical' quotient was stepped up a bit in Excalibur, probably because as the situation became ever more desperate the characters (who do believe in magic) relied on it more. I didn't intend anything else.

Q

Dear Mr Cornwell, I am big fan of your stories and it's a pity you don't want people to give ideas for stories. But I can understand that. So that leaves me to only asking a question. In one of the Sharpe stories you've mentioned that he was one of the invaders of Walcheren (Zeeland). Are you going to that time of his life? Please don't you ever stop writing!
Rob Regter

Submitted January 30, 2006

A

Maybe in a short story one day, not as a novel, I've already gone backwards once, and it causes huge problems, so I'll try not to do it again!

Q

Dear Bernard, In a reply to the question posted by Chris on the continued French use of the column in David Chandler's book On the Napoleonic Wars he does mention a little known fact that in the Battle of Madia in 1806 the French fought in Line. And of course at Albuera they used a mix of both column and line which came very close to winning.

On a complete tangent in all the archer novels I noticed that most of the famous battles are set ala Crecy and the future Agincourt book you mentioned are against the French with Niveilles Cross made out as the exception rather than the rule. Yet the fighting with Scots was far longer/tougher and more bitter yet in Vagabond the English and Scots seemed to get on like jolly good chums after the fight. Robbie even became Thomas' side kick - I wondered if that was deliberate dare I say do you see the French as the politcally correct enemy that's ok to hate and fight?? Or have you ever considered writing about the Border Fighting and thought about writing about the Archer victory's at the Battles of Falkirk or Halidon Hill??????

I know one of the modern issues bought up in the country at the moment is the famous West Lothian question and the resentment this is causing in England which has suddenly turned Gordon Brown who wants to be the next PM into a Brit rather than a scot. I wondered what your thoughts were on the whole issue??

Finally on another tangent/recommendation - Have you read Frank Kitson's duology on Prince Rupert which cover both his fighting on Land and less known but argubly more enduring (for the navy at least) time at Sea and have you ever thought about the Dutch wars of the 1600's with the Napoleonic wars a bit saturated ???? Anyway all the best Tony P.S Others have mentioned the battle of Hastings. Let me say you are considered Britain's most famous writer of historical fiction what better topic to write about than Britain's most famous battle! Tony

Submitted January 30, 2006

A

The novels were really about the hundred years war, which means the French - and I didn't want to get side-tracked into the Scoytish wars too much - though I agree there's a huge potential there. And Robbie as Thomas's sidekick? Not entirely - a good deal of resentment there. But yes, the Scottish wars are tempting - but not yet.

I live in New England where our biggest problem is restoring the Patriots to their rightful place as Superbowl champions. I haven't lived in Britain for almost three decades (thanks to marrying an American), so I try to keep out of British politics on the ground that I don't have a dog in that fight. I suspect that the answer to the West Lothian question (which I think is an aggravation) is up to the voters - i.e you?

Hastings? Maybe. Prince Rupert? Maybe. Dutch Wars? Don't know. They're all possible - but I have to finish off the other series first, and life is short!

Q

Dear Mr. Cowrnwell, I'm a great fan of your writings and of all military history. But one thing I find when reading history is that I like to be able to see the battlefield from maps, pictures, paintings etc. Normally I find the maps in the Sharpe books enough to satisfy my vision of the battlefield, however with the Indian novels I simply can't picture it. Having seen your photo gallery I realise that the sites are well preserved enough to visit. I am soon to visit India anyway so I wondered if the major sites of the three novels were easy to reach and look around? Andrew Reyes

Submitted January 30, 2006

A

Seringapatam is easy (especially if you're in Bangalore), Assaye and Gawilghur are very hard. They can be done, obviously, but if I recall rightly I had to fly each way for both, then drive a fairly long distance - can't remember the details of the jouney now. They're all worth visiting - nothing much left at Gawilghur - the fort is deserted - but well worth the trouble, and there's a convenient hotel very close (it serves for the nearby tiger reserve). Assaye is miraculous - an unspoilt battlefield, and Seringapatam is just beautiful!

Q

Dear Mr. Cornwell, I have read all of your series and enjoyed them all (Starbuck being my favourite and I hope you will finish that series someday). However my questions concern the British cavalry throughout the Napoleonic era. While I understand how one became an officer of the cavalry, but the entire entity of the cavalry is often referred to as 'the Fancy Boys'. My question is therefore about the status of the common cavalry trooper. Were they richer men of the lower class who could bring their own horse to the army? Were they just ordinary men like those of the infantry who simply had some knowledge of horses? Or something altogether different?

My second question is about the status of cavalry officers in relation to infantry officers. For example was a Cavalry captain of any higher rank than an infantry captain? It seems unlikely to me, I only ask for the role of a squadron commander seems to entail a good deal more responsibilty than that of the commander of a company from a Line Regiment. Jimmy

Submitted January 30, 2006

A

Troopers were given horses - the men were recruits, just as they were in the infantry, but most probably had some existing connection with horses (not difficult in a rural society). They were certainly no richer than the men who joined the infantry, and no more privileged, but probably the real dregs - the jailbirds etc - went to the infantry.

The ranks were equal. I doubt a squadron commander had more responsibility than a company commander - though no doubt they argued the point! The one great difference is that cavalry commissions cost more than infantry commissions and there was undoubtedly a status imbalance - on the whole cavalrymen thought themselves a cut above footsloggers (though not the foot guards). Just snobbery, but no difference in ranks.

Q

Dear Sir. Have you considered doing a story on the great indian wars? Custer, Red Cloud, Little Big Horn etc? Yours truly Leif G.

Submitted January 30, 2006

A

I haven't, and probably won't! I enjoy reading about them, but am a bit daunted by the huge amount of research I'd need to do - enough on my plate already!

Q

I have read most of your books including all of the Sharpe's books. Are you planning another in the Sharpe's series? It seems like at least one is missing just before Sharpe's Rifles. I think he is still an Ensign and never a Quartermaster in Sharpe's Prey, but he is a Lieutenant and Quartermaster in Sharpe's Rifles. Mitch Roemer

Submitted January 30, 2006

A

I am working on a Sharpe now. It will follow Sharpe's Escape - it's not likely that I will go back and fill in one prior to Sharpe's Rifles.

Q

Hello Bernard, I'm a recent fan of yours and can't put your books down. I was wondering when the Pale Horseman would be released in paperback in the UK? Your help would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, Craig

Submitted January 30, 2006

A

I believe the paperback of The Pale Horseman will be released in the UK in early June - around the same time Lords of the North will be published in hardback.

Q

Hello Bernard, I read with interest in the latest SAS bulletin about your visit to the set of Sharpe's Challenge - given that it's not based on any of your books, what are your thoughts? Will it live up to expectations? Best regards, Lindsey

Submitted January 30, 2006

A

It is loosely based on Sharpe's Tiger and, I think, Sharpe's Fortress, but loosely is the proper word. Sean Bean didn't want to play a very young Sharpe, which is fine by me. Obviously I'd rather they filmed the books rather than a loose adaptation, but if the price of that is losing Sean then it's too high! The producers are really happy with the films so far, so my expectations are high - I'm looking forward to it!

Q