Historical fiction

Chookie · Post by **Chookie** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 1:48 pm

Which authors do others here read?

Myself I prefer Bernard cornwell, Lindsey Davis, Nigel Tranter, Dudley Pope and Manda Scott.

Cornwell mainly concentrates on the land campaigns of the Peninsular war (the Sharpe series), but he also wrote the Starbuck Chronicles based on the American Civil War.

Pope writes about naval history in the Napoleonic period, based on events from the career of Thomas Cochrane.

Davis' books are based on a private investigator in Rome at the time of Vespasian. They give a different take than the official histories.

Tranter produced a great many books based on Scottish history, from the time of Somerled to the Highland Clearances. He wrote (among others) the Bruce Trilogy (The Steps to the Empty Throne, The Path of the Hero King and the Price of the Kings' Peace).

Scott is the writer of the Boudicca series (Dreaming the Eagle, Dreaming the Bull, Dreaming the Hound and Dreaming the Serpent Spear).

(You will note I have assumed everybody here can actually read).

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 2:46 pm

Well, I read the originals, I usually do not read historical fiction, not since I was a teenager. Then I read Renault for Alexander, and Plaidy for English period pieces. I had Appian out to reread this week for break.

(some of us read history rather than fiction)

One novel from off the bookstore's shelves while wasting time waiting at the dentist and ortho visits, finished it last night, nothing noteworthy. I am hard to please.

along-for-the-ride · Post by **along-for-the-ride** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:01 pm

I read Ken Follet's Pillars of the Earth a while back. It is set during medieval times. The book was very interesting...........looking forward to reading the sequel.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 4:32 pm

Chookie: Have you tried C.S.Forester's Hornblower series? Like Pope but much better.

If you like Cornwell, I recommend J.A.C.Weller's three Wellington books (Wellington in the Peninsula, ... in India and ... at Waterloo). They are military history, and a bit hero-worshippy, but cracking good reads.

I think the only novels I've really enjoyed in the last decade have been Iain Banks' Culture series (space based sci-fi, but don't let that put you off).

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 4:58 pm

Its not a genre I am very fond of I have to be honest, as I prefer my history straight, though of course their are outstanding examples that I have read, of course Robert Graves and his "I Claudius" and "Claudius the God" are outstanding works and became famous because of the excellent BBC series in the seventies. Also Umberto Eco's "The Name of the Rose" is also a fantastic book a medieval murder mystery set in a monastery.

Post by **spot** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:04 pm

Chookie;819556 wrote: Myself I prefer Bernard cornwell, Lindsey Davis, Nigel Tranter, Dudley Pope and Manda Scott.Dudley "there was a grey wind-lashed dirty swell in the Minch as dawn broke" Pope? He had everything but good fortune, he just happened to be writing in the same century as Patrick O'Brien.

Post by **spot** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 8:17 am

Chookie;819556 wrote: Pope writes about naval history in the Napoleonic period, based on events from the career of Thomas Cochrane.

I quite like coincidences. The book on my bedside table for the last week has been an abridgment of Thomas Cochrane's autobiographies. 300 pages of outraged Scot in his own words, and every few pages there's yet another episode out of 20th century naval fiction, bold as brass. Especially when it comes to taking prizes into Mahon or visiting Pashas and stealing privateers out of their ports. And lusting after condemned Xebecs that the Admiral won't allow him to use as an auxilliary.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 8:43 am

The thing that got me about Bolitho was that he was such a C20th liberal! Kept wanting to tie Pope to a grating, give him twelve dozen lashes, and say NOW will your characters adopt late C18th attitudes please!

Cornwell: 5,000 Sharpe novels, 1 plot involving snotty upper class twit opponent who gets his arse kicked on page 220.

Must get hold of some Patrick O'Brien. Was very dubious at first, but when I realised all these unbelievable incidents actually happened was converted.

Post by **spot** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 8:48 am

It's how he writes them. O'Brien. Very much in the same vein as Mary Renault, I thought for a while they were the same person.

Oh... historical fiction, who do I think is head and shoulders above all the competition. Georgette Heyer of course. Totally on her own perch.

Joint second place, Jeffery Farnol and Raphael Sabatini.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 9:38 am

chonsigirl;819616 wrote: Well, I read the originals, I usually do not read historical fiction, not since I was a teenager. Then I read Renault for Alexander, and Plaidy for English period pieces. I had Appian out to reread this week for break.

(some of us read history rather than fiction)

One novel from off the bookstore's shelves while wasting time waiting at the dentist and ortho visits, finished it last night, nothing noteworthy. I am hard to please.

I love "The Campaigns of Alexander" by Appian a fantastic book, of course Caesar was no slouch at the old writing game either, pretty impressive it has to be said.

Post by **spot** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 10:00 am

Both Appian and Julius Caesar would presumably scowl at the "historical fiction" tag, even though your modern professional historian might pat you on the back for perception.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 10:55 am

spot;820196 wrote: Both Appian and Julius Caesar would presumably scowl at the "historical fiction" tag, even though your modern professional historian might pat you on the back for perception.

Actually, its Arrian, I missed Chonsi's mispelling there, as for the fiction part, well at this stage who knows, it would be quite difficult to determine the validity of the sources.

Though you can be sure that there was a lot of self-promotion in both authors, but Ceasar most of all, as he had a political career to promote, still "The Gallic Wars" and "The Civil Wars" they are cracking reads, and of course its amazing to be able to read about Caesar from Caesar himself. All in all, I would recommend anyone to have a read of Caesar's books, they are quite amazing really, very easy to read as well, takes a little while to get the author's style.

Post by **spot** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 11:08 am

Who was the Way named after??

"His work (Ῥωμαϊκά, known in English as the Roman History) in twenty-four books, written in Greek before 165, is more a number of monographs than a connected history. It gives an account of various peoples and countries from the earliest times down to their incorporation into the Roman Empire, and survives in complete books and considerable fragments. In spite of its unattractive style, the work is very valuable, especially for the period of the civil wars.

The Civil Wars, five of the later books in the corpus, concern mainly the end of the Roman Republic and take a conflict based approach to history."

I knew I'd read some Appian.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 1:32 pm

I like vacation time, when all those fine volumes of friends can be started again.

Chookie · Post by **Chookie** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 1:44 pm

chonsigirl;819616 wrote: Well, I read the originals,

So do I

I usually do not read historical fiction,

I would suggest (from hiding of course) that the originals are fiction.

(some of us read history rather than fiction)

The Annals of Tacitus and Caesars' Gallic Wars were the Mein Kampf of their time.....

Possibly I should have said propaganda rather than fiction when referring to Tacitus and Caesar..........

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 2:28 pm

I do not think they are fiction, but they most definitely might have a political slant.

Tacitus and Caesar, they sure did write their adventures from their own perspective.

And some of the great annalists, who compiled years worth of history/legend/lore into their multiple volumes. But I would rather read these, then the political propoganda on the local bookstore shelf. They don't even write them nowdays, but many have ghost writers!

Ah, then where would you classify me, who is the historian, and writes in areas where usually no one has before-a hint, a whisper, a law or treaty, then nothing else. I think modern historians try to be non-biased, but some are not and have an agenda. I am starting out on the next medium sized project, and there is nothing recent written for over fifty years. It is fun to find the bits and pieces, put them together, then mull it over for quite some time. The advantage for me, I do have living descendants to talk to, with oral history recollections. But then, I must distance myself and write as unbiased as possible, the tale I wish to reconstruct. I think no matter how you write history, some "bias" shows through, from the premise of your thesis you present. Whether that is biased or not, is for other historians to evaluate.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 3:56 pm

along-for-the-ride;819624 wrote: I read Ken Follet's Pillars of the Earth a while back. It is set during medieval times. The book was very interesting...........looking forward to reading the sequel.

A good book, admittedly, but have you considered Edward Rutherford's Sarum or Dublin - far better read if you ask me (which you didn't :-6).