Your Questions

Q

Dear Bernard, I heard somewhere that 100 longbowmen could beat 100 infantrymen equipped muskets. Do you know if this is true and, if so, would riflemen do any better? Thanks, David

Submitted November 17, 2005

A

A hundred longbowmen could defeat 500 musketeers - easy - longer range, much faster rate of fire and greater accuracy. No contest. Riflemen? More difficult. The riflemen have longer range, but a much slower rate of fire, so the longbowmen would probably do what they did to crossbowmen - take some casualties as they close the range, and after that they're going to win.

Q

I have just finished reading Sharpe's Escape and thought it was excellent. When will you be finishing another Sharpe book? Was that the last Sharpe book you have written? Thanks for writing the Sharpe books, they have kept me up for hours. Very much looking forward to your next Sharpe book.
Alex Lamond

Submitted November 17, 2005

A

There will be more Sharpe, possibly a new one in October of next year.

Q

Mr. Cornwell, A Few More Questions.... 1. Have you given any thoughts to creating a series from Patrick Lassan's adventures in the Crimean War? You could also have Sharpe appear in his golden years...maybe we could discover his fate? 2. I've read that you won't be setting anymore stories after Sharpe's Devil-But I was reading Forester's Lieutenant Hornblower recently- and towards the end Hornblower is promoted to commander for a brave act- but a lull in the wars prematurely ends his career so we find him living in a very spartan lodging house, unable to pay the rent and hustling more fortunate officers in games of whist until the war ramps up again. There was something very endearing about showing how Hornblower survived away from the war and it made me wonder what Sharpe would do in the same situation-though I suspect playing whist is not his style! It seems like you were going in this direction in the short story Sharpe's Ransom- any plans to explore it further? 3. I have read The Face of Battle, based upon your recommendation, until finally it is dog-eared and coming apart in my hands. I closely study many of the battle scenes in your books as a model for my own novel(s)- can you tell me a bit more about how I can write better battle-scenes? I know you are somewhat of a natural- but are there any touchstones or markers along the way in the writing process that make you realize you are onto something? 4. Finally, I think your greatest strength as a writer is the skill with which you create a scene and let the reader inhabit that scene in a very organic way. Other writers I read seem to skim over what should be the heart of a scene or weight it down with clunky exposition. What do you think are the essential elements to keep in mind when crafting a scene? Thanks again for your time and generosity R. Kulb

Submitted November 17, 2005

A

1. A Patrick Lassan book is not in my plans.

2. Not at the moment - I'm usually much happier when Sharpe is doing the Lord's work, i.e. fighting the French, and I think, for my peace of mind, if not his, I'll keep him at that for a bit.

3.I dunno! Honest. I suppose you start by making certain that the reader has the context well set in their mind, and then you zoom in like crazy. After that it's a question of working out what the protagonist sees, smells, hears and feels. I have to confess that I find them the easiest scenes to write - just finished one - and I don't really think too much about how to do it. I have a suspicion I'm not being very helpful, but this is probably the best I can do. Sorry!

4. Keep it moving! Again this is a difficult one to answer, because scenes differ so much, but essentially I think you have to let the reader do some of the work - in other words you don't describe everything, but put in the outline and let the reader's imagination fill in some details. Details set the scene (and convince the reader, you hope, that the fiction is 'real'), but after that they're only useful as delaying tactics - to increase suspense. But really - just keep it moving!

Q

I've seen you state it and other authors state it that sometimes their characters will say or do something in the process of writing a book, that changes the outcome of the book. Is there a book or instance in a book where a character did something that made the book come out different than what you envisioned? Do you try to make the book go back to your original vision or just go with the flow? Thanks, Jonathan Mullins

Submitted November 16, 2005

A

Just about every book! And you go with the flow - always. Sometimes that makes problems and you have to take a cattle-prod to the characters, but usually it works. I think a great deal of writing goes on in the subconscious!

Q

I'm sure you have a lot of mail to read, so I will make this as short as possible. I recently read your Warlord trilogy for the third time. I think it is the greatest Arthur tale ever told. I would just like to know if you have ever considered writing a novel or series set during the Wars of the Roses? I have long been a fan of that time period in England's history and believe it would be extremely entertaining to read. Well, thank you once again for the great work you do. I am currently awaiting the US release of The Pale Horseman. Best wishes, Lonnie Colson

Submitted November 16, 2005

A

I'm not planning anything on the Wars of the Roses

Q

Sharpe has valuable gems after his "tiger" but seems to be in poverty in "Rifles." Is there a story which explains what happened to the loot? I did see the order of creation of the series so if it is just a fluke, I'll live with it. Jerry Lester

Submitted November 16, 2005

A

Be sure to read Sharpe's Prey.

Q

hello Bernard, I am currently reading 'Heretic' and enjoying it thoroughly. I must ask you a question though. I am having an on-going argument with my friend Alan about which side of the bow the arrow would be. I say that an archer holding the bow in the left hand and the chord in the right would line the arrow on the right side of the bow (as in the illustration in the book). Alan says the opposite, please could you clear this matter up as we have 6 pints of Guinness riding on it. many thanks, Glen

Submitted November 16, 2005

A

You owe Alan six pints of Guinness. Lucky Alan. Imagine you've just shot the bow (holding the bow in your left hand). What you do now is turn your hand (and the bow-stave) ninety degrees clockwise, so that it's parallel to the ground. Lower it. Lay the arrow across it, then bring the bow back up to the shooting position and the arrow will, of course, be on the left of the stave. Easy when you know how!

Q

Dear Mr Cornwell, I just finished reading "The Pale Horseman", yet another excellent read. I feel that the first person view you decided to use in the Saxon stories works very well and just wondered what factors made you decide to let "Uthred" tell his story in first person? Looking forward to many more of your books in future or maybe I just have to read them all again... Chris Reichmann

Submitted November 16, 2005

A

Don't know. Wish I did know. First person worked for me in the Arthur stories and I think I just decided to use the technique again, but I don't really think about these things. First person is easier to write (for me), but more difficult to plot because you're trapped by a single point of view. So I switch-hit.

Q

I recently finished the Heretic series and I found it very enjoyable and educational. I have a quick question, the Discovery Channel recently did a thing on the English longbow, their conclusion was that the long bow shaft would not pierce French armor. Which is right ? Tom O'Connor

Submitted November 14, 2005

A

I saw it. Revisionist rubbish. Read Robert Hardy's great book (being reissued soon), Longbow.

Q

Dear Mr Cornwell, As you always seem to be answering questions about your books, I thought I would ask as to whom you think would have been capable of holding Napoleon at Waterloo if (God forbid) anything had happened to Wellington during or prior to the battle? Though the Earl of Uxbridge was the officer 2IC his speaciality was as calvary officer and did not have a great knowledge of the Infantry and Artillery arms. My own suggestion would be 'Daddy Hill' who had remmarkable success in an independent command in the Penninsular? Also at what battle would you of liked to have observed (at a safe distance of course) in the Napoleonic era? Thank you for all your informative novels. John Hart

Submitted November 14, 2005

A

I don't think any of them would have been able to do what Wellington did - nor did he - he said as much! Not very modest of him, but probably truthful. I suspect Uxbridge would have been a disaster. Picton would have put up a good fight, but whether any of them would have held their nerve like Wellington, I doubt.

Waterloo. Salamance, perhaps? Definitely not Albuhera or Badajoz. Trafalgar would have been interesting, but in the end, Waterloo.