Historical fiction recommendations?

[arapahoepark]

So...what do you all read in the realm of historical fiction? Would like some recommendations.

 

[Logan]

The first ones that come to mind are books by:
John Buchan
Alexandre Dumas
Douglas Bond
GA Henty
Sir Walter Scott

 

[Phil D.]

Some time ago I enjoyed Paul L. Maier's Pontius Pilate and Flames of Rome. I haven't read it, but his The Constantine Codex also looks interesting (it seems like somewhat of a counter to The Da Vinci Code, of which he was an outspoken critic).

 

[Elizabeth]

Some time ago I enjoyed Paul L. Meier's Pontius Pilate and Flames of Rome. I haven't read it, but his The Constantine Codex also looks interesting (it seems like somewhat of a counter to The Da Vinci Code, of which he was an outspoken critic).

The Constantine Codex is free if you have Kindle Unlimited. Needed a new read today, so thanks for the suggestion.

 

[Phil D.]

Here is part of an interview Maier did on his take of the Da Vinci Code, in which he laid out his philosophy on good historical fiction:

​

Q. Why do you get so upset about a novel?​

I get this a lot –‘Come on! Chill out, Maier! It’s a novel!’ And that’s a valid challenge. The answer is simply this: in a novel, you have foreground characters and you have the background setting. Now, the foreground characters –you can do with them as you wish. I would never criticize Dan Brown for whatever he might want to do with his fictional characters. That’s his privilege as a novelist, and I’m not knocking that at all.​

​

But the setting and the background that are well-known from history should not be tampered with, in the interest of credibility… What Dan Brown has done is to fictionalize his foreground characters. Fine –have at it! But in the process he has also falsified the historical background, and that is what is absolutely unacceptable. …People who don’t know history –who aren’t aware of the past- might think, ‘Wow, what do you know? That must have happened. It’s in print!’ That’s the danger.​

​

Q. Dan Brown seems to have not maintained the historic foundation for his book. Is that right?​

Oh, yes, indeed. In the case of both my historical works… I was extremely careful. Every personality in the book really lived, and I used their actual names. Secondly, I never contradict known historical facts. Only where the facts leave off do I then provide fictional mortar to hold the story together. And I’ll own up with the reader at the end of the book. This is in total contrast to what Dan Brown did.​

​

Q. But that’s just a different approach, isn’t it? Does that mean Brown’s approach is wrong?​

Well, Brown’s approach is simply wrong because it lies about the facts. And you dare not lie about known historical fact.​

​

Q. When you see this as a historian, what does that do to you?​

…Actually, I am far more furious at The Da Vinci Code as a professor of ancient history than I am as a Christian. The church has been attacked for two thousand years now. What’s new? But I cannot stand it when universally accepted facts of the past are falsified… If a student of mine had written something like this, I would flunk him!​

​

Q. But as a Christian, doesn’t that bias your view of history?​

I try the best I possibly can to be objective in historical research. I think every true historian is digging for the truth. In the case of archaeology or ancient historical research, we look for the truth and let the chips fall where they may. And what is so incredibly interesting about the chips in the case of Christianity, is how they fall on the side of supporting the Biblical record.​

 

[RamistThomist]

Some time ago I enjoyed Paul L. Maier's Pontius Pilate and Flames of Rome. I haven't read it, but his The Constantine Codex also looks interesting (it seems like somewhat of a counter to The Da Vinci Code, of which he was an outspoken critic).

Flames of Rome is outstanding. Great use of Josephus. Constantine Codex is good, but nowhere near on the same level.

Also good is, as noted above, John Buchan.

 

[Andres]

Second those championing Flames of Rome. I couldn't put it down.

 

[RamistThomist]

My PB review
Flames of Rome

https://puritanboard.com/threads/flames-of-rome-Paul-maier.103913/

 

[0isez]

Authors:Anything by Conn Iggulden. I don't think I have read a Conn Iggulden series I didn't like. Bernard Cornwell, despite his disparaging comments about Christianity throughout his Far Kingdom series is still an excellent choice. Alexander Kent's series comes to mind along with C.S. Forester if you like British sea battles and adventures.
Books: Shogun by James Clavell is unforgettable. Requiem by Robin Young and Toby Clement's Kingmaker series are all first class at every level.

 

[Edward]

A modern high school history text.

 

[0isez]

A modern high school history text.

. Perfect!

 

[proregno]

"Rora: One Man, One Faith, One Stand against Impossible Odds", James Byron Huggins

Absolute must read about the 'Reformed' Waldensians of the Northern Alps in Italy in the time of the Reformation, the main character like a Joshua/David figure (Joshua Gianavel), Farel also mentioned, Cromwell etc:

Book Reviews: The Orthodox Presbyterian Church

We're the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Our purpose is simple: to bring glory to God through our churches and individual lives to make known to the world the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ

www.opc.org

Rora Review

Not historical fiction, but his Wolf Story also very good, Tolkien/CS Lewis allegorical fiction type story, war between light and darkness.

Also not historical fiction, but good action story: The Reckoning

 

[Ed Walsh]

Here is part of an interview Maier did on his take of the Da Vinci Code, in which he laid out his philosophy on good historical fiction:
Q. Why do you get so upset about a novel?I get this a lot –‘Come on! Chill out, Maier! It’s a novel!’ And that’s a valid challenge. The answer is simply this: in a novel, you have foreground characters and you have the background setting. Now, the foreground characters –you can do with them as you wish. I would never criticize Dan Brown for whatever he might want to do with his fictional characters. That’s his privilege as a novelist, and I’m not knocking that at all.But the setting and the background that are well-known from history should not be tampered with, in the interest of credibility… What Dan Brown has done is to fictionalize his foreground characters. Fine –have at it! But in the process he has also falsified the historical background, and that is what is absolutely unacceptable. …People who don’t know history –who aren’t aware of the past- might think, ‘Wow, what do you know? That must have happened. It’s in print!’ That’s the danger.Q. Dan Brown seems to have not maintained the historic foundation for his book. Is that right?Oh, yes, indeed. In the case of both my historical works… I was extremely careful. Every personality in the book really lived, and I used their actual names. Secondly, I never contradict known historical facts. Only where the facts leave off do I then provide fictional mortar to hold the story together. And I’ll own up with the reader at the end of the book. This is in total contrast to what Dan Brown did.Q. But that’s just a different approach, isn’t it? Does that mean Brown’s approach is wrong?Well, Brown’s approach is simply wrong because it lies about the facts. And you dare not lie about known historical fact.

I wonder what he would say about Quentin Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds.
Now, that was a historical farce--yes? Yes! But a box office hit.

​

 

[bookish_Basset]

I think this must be the third time I've recommended 1928 Nobel prizewinner Sigrid Undset on this board, but she is truly a hidden gem. My husband loved Kristin Lavransdatter as much as I did.

I really enjoy Herman Wouk's historical novels (especially The Winds of War, War and Remembrance, and The Caine Mutiny), and for lighter wartime fiction, John Biggins's Otto Prohaska novels.

I remember loving Lorna Doone several years ago, and of course there's War and Peace. Chaim Potok's novels are also pretty interesting.

 

[DanSSwing]

Harry Turtledove's "Guns of the South" was excellent. Neo-Nazis from the future time travel and give AK-47s to the Confederacy.