So, I've got most of Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe series now - just missing a couple of the later ones (Sword and Waterloo, that I can remember), and they turn up for 50p in the charity shops on a regular basis.
So far I've only read the original, Sharpe's Eagle, which hooked me enough to seek out the rest of the series. So, the question is, now that I've got enough of them to take a good run at, should I
a) Carry on with Gold, then loop round to the prequels, all in publication order.
b) Start with Rifles (which after all was meant to bridge the TV show and novels, and I watched the TV show first) then continue otherwise in publication order.
c) Start with Tiger and go through the whole thing in chronological order.
My normal instinct would be chronological, but I want to be sure that doesn't leave me open to either spoiler/continuity issues, or indeed quality issues (as they were written when Cornwell had more experience than when he wrote the original run. Or conversely when he was less fresh.)
So, what's the consenus on the best way to experience the adventures of Richard Sharpe?
So far I've only read the original, Sharpe's Eagle, which hooked me enough to seek out the rest of the series. So, the question is, now that I've got enough of them to take a good run at, should I
a) Carry on with Gold, then loop round to the prequels, all in publication order.
b) Start with Rifles (which after all was meant to bridge the TV show and novels, and I watched the TV show first) then continue otherwise in publication order.
c) Start with Tiger and go through the whole thing in chronological order.
My normal instinct would be chronological, but I want to be sure that doesn't leave me open to either spoiler/continuity issues, or indeed quality issues (as they were written when Cornwell had more experience than when he wrote the original run. Or conversely when he was less fresh.)
So, what's the consenus on the best way to experience the adventures of Richard Sharpe?