In my last two espionage blogs, I presented the first and second parts of my three-part interview with Bernard Cornwell, the author of the Sharpe series and other historical fiction. Here is part three.
Davis: What was The Duke of Wellington truly like, and how significant were his accomplishments?
Cornwelll: He’s brilliant. He’s intelligent. He’s a snob. He’s cold to his men and he had no small talk, but they were extremely loyal to him because they knew he did his best to preserve their lives, unlike Napoleon. Wellington had an uncanny ability to spot ground, and he had a feel for what was on the other side of the hill. He stays calm in battle. He’s cautious, but capable of sudden flamboyant movements, such as the attack at Salamanca.
In the end he’s the only general who was capable of defeating Napoleon, albeit a close run thing. So, with Admiral Nelson, he’s the begetter of Europe in the 19th Century.
Davis: You admire Wellington, clearly, and you offer a fine portrait of him in the Sharpe series, but what do you think of Napoleon?
Cornwell: I don’t like the man. He was so careless with his men’s lives. He said scornfully “What are a million men to me?” Napoleon was one of those generals, a bit like Patton, who really didn’t care how many of his men got killed as long as he got his victory. He was a very ruthless man. He wanted to be the next Alexander the Great. He also had extraordinary charm and he was a fascinating man. He was a dangerous man because he was in love with war. Wellington was never in love with war. He didn’t like war. War had to be fought, you had to do it well, you had to win, but it was not by itself a good thing. For Napoleon war was a good thing, an exciting thing. I think that was the difference between them.
Davis: Are you fond of the Sharpe TV series and how do you feel about Sean Bean’s portrayal of Richard Sharpe?
Cornwell: I love both.
Davis: You’ve said that you’re not a historian, you’re a storyteller, a novelist, but how accurate are the major historical events in your novels?
Cornwell: I try to make them as accurate as possible, but the story takes precedence, so I do change things, but I confess my sins in the Historical Note at the book’s end. The obvious example is Sharpe’s Company. No British soldier got through the breaches at Badajoz – the feint escalade on the castle worked, against all odds – but the drama of that awful night was in the breeches. And so Sharpe had to be there, and if Sharpe is there he will get through the breach. So I changed reality for fiction, but I confessed afterwards.
Davis: Lastly, do you plan to write more about Sharpe?
Cornwell: Definitely.
Paul Davis also writes an American crime blog for Great History. Visit his Web site. He can be reached at daviswrite@aol.com.
Related Articles |
Jon Guttman said:
With all due respect to Mr. Cornwell (from a hardcore Sharpe fan, be it book or TV dramatization), brilliant though Arthur Welleley, duke of Wellington was, there are some contenders to the claim that he alone could defeat Napoleon. It was not Nosey, for example, who ultimately drove the Grande Armee out of Russia. Wellington did not defeat old Boney at Leipzig. And even at Waterloo, Wellington’s brilliance necessarily coexisted with the excellent teamup of bravery and brains that was Marshal Blucher and his chief of staff, General Gneisenau.
April 9th, 2009 at 11:55 am