I greatly enjoy your historical ficition. Some of your books I am reading a third time! Concering Agincourt, have you seen the latest TV theories on Agincourt? I believe the show was "Battlefield Detectives" - but I am not sure. The theories are that the longbow was of almost no value because of the recent improvement in plate into true steel and that many of the French actually suffocated in the mud. If you do write about Agincourt, is this the kind of material you would take into consideration? Or would you be inclined to make the longbow more important in your version to make the story more entertaining? Douglas Gilliatt
And why were they suffocating in the mud? Not because swords and spears put them down there, but because the arrows did. And while it's true that plate armour was virtually proof against most arrows, how many men could afford it? I'm waiting for a new book - coming this autumn? - by Juliet Barker, which will doubtless be brilliant . . but I have my doubts about TV detectives.