Good Fiction set in the time period

Im a big fan of Steven Pressfield's historical fiction on Greek warfare in Alexanders time and the Peleponesian wars. Also the Master of Rome series by Colleen McCullough. However can anyone recommend such novels written on ancient egypt and selecuids during their times of strength. Or on tribes in Europe and Britain. Id appreciate your knowledge on this. :book: :book:

P.S A great historical novel on the fall of the Roman Empire is Wallace Breems Eagle in the Snow. A great book which would make Gladiator seem trivial in comparision. Details on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eagle_in_the_Snow. :2thumbsup:

"Kill them all. God knows his own."
- Albigensian leader during their 13th century crusade against 'heretics'

Well I was going to reccomend Pressfield, so this post is worthless. I suppose a good read on Vikings (I know they are not what your looking for) would be Harry Harrison's Hammer and cross trilogy....

I must concur that Harry Harrison's Hammer and Cross trilogy is very fun to read- although hardly historical sometimes since it goes into a lot of 'what if' - the most impressive thing (besides his solid Germanic portrayal- I love how he explains that English champions were just as meat-head big as the Vikings, which some people neglect when thinking of English peasants who would be small- they barely eat) is that he has the Cathari (i think thats the name) religious sect and the Holy Grail near the Pyrennes before Dan Brown's whole deal with the Da Vinci code.

Gotta love Brand from Halogaland (total badass) - men grow big where he comes from... and his cousin is a troll :grin:

Well, if it is to any comfort, I'm writing some historical fiction on Surena, in which I have something in store for EB's own portrayal of the battle of Carrhae; Steven Pressfield is indeed a good author, but he is not a historian, and some people have brought scrutiny to the purported historicity in his works, but they border to pettiness, so, I think he knows when to take creative license.

Just stay away from Mary Renault's work; She wrote a series of semi-fictious works on Alexander The Great, while knowing absolutely dick about the Persians, whom she antagonizes. As a means of "balancing" the story she wrote a book, "The Persian Boy" which portrays the plot from the male catamite Bagoas' point-of-view. It was absolutely terrible to see so much creative license taken in lieu of giving the Persians a humane portrayal. She turns Orxines into a thieving demon, she gives us a vivid portrayal of how eunuchs actually were "made", and she turns Alexander into some saving grace. She even dismisses Curtius Rufus' biography of Alexander, by far the most sobering account available of Alexander, for "sensationalism". The movie "Alexander" was basing its entire failure around following significant portions of Renault's "canon".

So, in lieu of actually bringing up the good stuff, I at least mentioned the genuinely poor writings to stay away from, but to each his own, I suppose.

I know you didn't ask about Roman fiction, but Robert Harris' novel Imperium about the early political career of Marcus Tullius Cicero is well worth a read. I enjoyed it immensely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Persian Cataphract

Well, if it is to any comfort, I'm writing some historical fiction on Surena, in which I have something in store for EB's own portrayal of the battle of Carrhae; Steven Pressfield is indeed a good author, but he is not a historian, and some people have brought scrutiny to the purported historicity in his works, but they border to pettiness, so, I think he knows when to take creative license.

Just stay away from Mary Renault's work; She wrote a series of semi-fictious works on Alexander The Great, while knowing absolutely dick about the Persians, whom she antagonizes. As a means of "balancing" the story she wrote a book, "The Persian Boy" which portrays the plot from the male catamite Bagoas' point-of-view. It was absolutely terrible to see so much creative license taken in lieu of giving the Persians a humane portrayal. She turns Orxines into a thieving demon, she gives us a vivid portrayal of how eunuchs actually were "made", and she turns Alexander into some saving grace. She even dismisses Curtius Rufus' biography of Alexander, by far the most sobering account available of Alexander, for "sensationalism". The movie "Alexander" was basing its entire failure around following significant portions of Renault's "canon".

So, in lieu of actually bringing up the good stuff, I at least mentioned the genuinely poor writings to stay away from, but to each his own, I suppose.

---

Forgive my ignorance, but I was under the impression that accurate details about the life of Surena was speculative at best. Or have I just been reading out of date material?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Horst Nordfink

Forgive my ignorance, but I was under the impression that accurate details about the life of Surena was speculative at best. Or have I just been reading out of date material?

---

This is sort of correct; Scholars such as Bivar speculates that Surena might be the basis for the later Iranian embodiment of chivalry, Rustam of the Epic of Kings, while Plutarch provides us sketchy, but adequate clues in leaving the imprints of Surena's character. We know he was Orodes' most trusted general, in fact he owed Surena his crown for not only besieging and scaling the walls of Seleucia, but probably extracted Mithradates, Orodes' brother from Babylon, and brought him to his master for his execution; This was a period where Orodes' saw his ambition bloom at its earliest phase; He had re-united the Parthian empire from its worst civil war, and before the Romans set out for conquest under Crassus, he must have held a council with all client kings or their representatives to discuss the matters: We know how the Parthian court and indeed the council of Clans must have been like, given the feudal nature of the Arsacid hegemony, and very importantly, we know who these clients were, and of what line they descended from. Surena, being an easternly Clansmen (The Sûrên belonged to the easternly reaches of the empire, and he had been campaigning around Mesene-Susiana for some years in the civil war, meaning that he must either have brought a significant portion of the clan's bondsmen and later called upon reinforcements, or brought all of them in the first place), had an ethnically varied army, in which some were probably Yuezhi or Tokharioi/Tocharii, or Sakae/Sacae. This man of the East, not only engaged in battles in the westernly reaches, but he had done what Parthians otherwise were useless at; Siege warfare, and scaling the walls of Seleucia (!) must be quite a testament to this warrior-general; He must have known how to fight, and being the high chief of a highly influential clan, with the privilege of crowning the Arsacid monarch with the diadem, he must have possessed a talent for politics as well.

Importantly, we also know who the enemies besides the Romans were and in what political stage they were in; King Azes ruled the Indo-Scythian hegemony, and at the same time King Zoilos of the Indo-Greeks held bay to what little there was left to cling upon; Only a few decades later would a Sûrên conqueror, Gondophares, come to cause a tremendous ruckus and lead his triumphs as far as the city of Mathura, and very importantly, Gondophares claims independence (Though still very much so affiliated to the Parthians, as cited in the sources left to our disposal, though not as a mere petty client). He does not carry the Arsacid "Nêshân" (Coat of Arms) in his coins, but instead an evolved version of the Sûrên crest, later to be adopted by Shâpûr I The Great. The Sûrên are furthermore historically noted as supportive of the Sassanian cause, and along with Gondophares' previous exploits, there is a lot of room for intrigue. Physically speaking, we know how they dressed, and given Zoroastrian customs, we also have clues on how they spoke, and given the data available on Parthian military and architecture, and how the world looked like back then, all from the Sûrên holdings in Ariana, Drangiana, Arachosia and Sakastana, to the wealth of Mesene and Seleucia-Ctesiphon, the deserts of Assyria, and the transporting of ten-thousand prisoners to Mârv (Margiana), through the Susian-Elymaean and Medean landscape and the Kopet-Dagh mountain range... It depends on how you would like to portray the different perspectives.

The spy, Ariaramnes, and the "traitor" vassal king Abgarus, and how smoothly Surena's plan, indeed, a part of Orodes' even greater plan, proceeds opens up much more than what initially meets the eye. King Artavasdes' situation where he is practically sandwiched between two super-powers and how he finally submits to the Parthians through a humiliating treaty and a marriage between his daughter and Orodes' son, Pacorus; Pacorus is interesting to us, because he is a part of Orodes' great plan of not only defeating the Romans, but to overrun them. At the same time, there is some trouble brewing in Medea, where Mithradates III originally rallied his support during his co-rule there, which would come to dread Phraates IV, the notoriously cruel, ambitious and fratricidical character who historically succeeded Orodes; Orodes himself had wrested the throne through ugly methods, resulting in the killing of his father and of the brother who once aided him. Phraates makes for an excellent villain, Pacorus a good archetype for bravery and "Alexanderism", Orodes the harsh but wise and prudent, the brilliant Surena, his two allies and their dirty work with the Romans, Artavasdes the unfortunate, Osaces the elder grand retainer of Pacorus, and the rival Pharnapates... I for one, could not ask for anything more.

This whole backdrop of intrigues, innuendos, generals, priests, scribes, princes, clients, and the theme of a preceeding civil war, and before it the so-called "age of the God Manifest" (The era of Mithradates II The Great), and at the eve of the battle of Carrhae... It's too exciting to forfeit all of this material. So, what I can do with the data is to make a soft parameter, a universe, a context, and with the skeleton provided fill in the gaps. The mystery works to the advantage of Surena. Plutarch does not provide us much dialogue, but given that we know of the topics spoken by both parts, and how the Romans behaved, we can make pretty reasonable estimations. It is speculation, but boy oh boy, I'd slap myself silly if I didn't write up something with all this stuff :wink:

There is an excellent book called The Eagle and the Wolf I think, written about some Roman Centurions post Conquest of BRitain. highly recommended. I think its a series,a ctually but I've only read one.

Quote:

---

There is an excellent book called The Eagle and the Wolf I think, written about some Roman Centurions post Conquest of BRitain. highly recommended. I think its a series,a ctually but I've only read one.

---

I think the author is Simon Scarrow, and yes it's a series but i have only read one of the, too ( "the eagles prey" ). ~:D

I like the books of Gisbert Haef's ( Troja, Alexander, Alexander in Asia, Hannibal, Caesar ) but i don't know if they have been translated to english ...

Lynchius by 'ancient egypt during their times of strength' do you mean the New Kingdom Period?

Do NOT read the Emperor series by Conn Iggulden. I read it when i was younger, and first getting into history. Boy have i learnt alot since then.
I recommend anything by Valerio Massimo Manfredi, his Alexander trilogy, Spartan, Tyrant, and Empire of Dragons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Horst Nordfink

I know you didn't ask about Roman fiction, but Robert Harris' novel Imperium about the early political career of Marcus Tullius Cicero is well worth a read. I enjoyed it immensely.

---

I concur

Try "Creation" by Gore Vidal. I think that's the spelling. It preceeeds the EB timeframe, but it is still a mighty good read. And as accuracy goes I think it is pretty much acurate. Maybe The Persian Cataphract will correct me if I am wrong.

new Kingdom period preferbly. Ive read a few of Christian Jacqs works on the old kingdom and Ramesis. Also does the Hammer and Cross series: where is it set?

Try Valerio Massimo Manfredi's : Alexandros, it is 3 books and it is quite historically accurate .....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Wicked

Try Valerio Massimo Manfredi's : Alexandros, it is 3 books and it is quite historically accurate .....

---

Yeah i second that. Very good books. I've read them all 3 in 2 days:yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anubis88

Yeah i second that. Very good books. I've read them all 3 in 2 days:yes:

---

lol, I read all three in two months:laugh4:

but to be fair I've also read The Last Legion and The Tower

The Moose approves of Mr Manfredi:jester:

@TPC - I hope you will let us know more about your upcomming book when it is ready. I am sure it will be a great reading.:yes:
May Clio by with you all the time! :2thumbsup:

The Simon Scarrow series (I think there is 6 now - although I could be wrong) is a good read. Not heavy stuff, but light entertatining stuff with some historical accuracy to it. I've read 4 of them.
@ Lynchius, I'm glad you started this thread. Sometimes "straight" history books can be dry and mind-numbing. In short, I can only take some much of Heradotus's "Histories" or Aurellius's (sp) "Meditations" before I need a break.

Does anyone know the book "Sword of Carthage" or some such title? I bought it/ read it/ liked it/lent it to a friend and haven't seen it in 3 years. And I can't remember the title.

Anyway, keep the recommendations coming in!

Stay away from the 'Boudicca' series. I've flipped through them when I'm killing time in Waterstone's. Basically it's big on druidic hocus-pocus, it turns the Romans into caricatures, blows Boudicca's revolt out of proportion, makes claims about equal-sex society in Celtic Britain, and it's history is, well, it's not that impressive.

Has anybody read Household Gods by Harry Turtledove and Judith Tarr? If so, what did you think of it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gaivs

Do NOT read the Emperor series by Conn Iggulden. I read it when i was younger, and first getting into history. Boy have i learnt alot since then.

---

100% agreed. Interesting read, sort of. But wildly inaccurate. Brutus being some total bad-@** general in one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Horst Nordfink

I know you didn't ask about Roman fiction, but Robert Harris' novel Imperium about the early political career of Marcus Tullius Cicero is well worth a read. I enjoyed it immensely.

---

i concur. it's better than pompeii and having done a load of cicero as a finals paper, i felt it had managed to capture a lot of what was in there. license taken could also be put down to the fact that harris plays it out through the voice of tiro - excellent approach to cicero.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morte66

Has anybody read Household Gods by Harry Turtledove and Judith Tarr? If so, what did you think of it?

---

Quite frankly, I terribly enjoyed that book. It's one of my all-time favorites.

As for historical accuracy for that period, i have no idea. My focus is Byzantium :embarassed:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moosemanmoo

lol, I read all three in two months:laugh4:

but to be fair I've also read The Last Legion and The Tower

The Moose approves of Mr Manfredi:jester:

---

I've never read a Manfredi's book, but I cannot forget when in a italian TV program he said that the spanish and portuguese explorations of the New World were caused by the fear of the protestant reform :skull:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bonny

I like the books of Gisbert Haef's ( Troja, Alexander, Alexander in Asia, Hannibal, Caesar ) but i don't know if they have been translated to english ...

---

ASFAIK, not.

You know, if I were some billionaire, I'd start a company publishing the untranslated works you guys read; and be putting out bribes to uni's to allow me to publish their peer review historical findings. They would of course get credit, and a profit cut. The main thing would be to get as much literature out of the library's, and into the publics hands as possible.

I found Scarrow and Igguldson very lightweight, both historically and in storytellingnessness.

McCullogh is great, and she's written a Anthony and Cleopatra novel released just recently which I haven't read. Not exactly what you've asked for, but certainly also worth a read.

Manfredi's books are a bit . . . different, but that's what we're here for, right? They're almost mystical, in a way, which might be due to the fact that they're not written in English, but translated. Certainly worth a read too, but don't try to watch the movie about the last legion with Mr Darcy...

I would recommend the historical fiction of John James, I doubt if any of his work is still in print (he wrote mainly during the early 1970's), but you may be able to pick up old copies on Abe or Ebay etc.

It was John James who introduced me to my namesake Decimus Iunius Iuvinalis in his book Bridge of Sand, set at the time of Agricola's campaign of conquest in Wales.

I have found many insights in his works, he helped me to imagine how different the world-view of people in ancient times must have been, but that despite this they were still people with the same drives and capabilities as people today.

I have also enjoyed very much Gene Wolfe's "Soldier of the Mist" trilogy which is set in ancient Greece. In fact I would recommend anything written by Gene Wolfe.

Today I had this one on the novis list for English Books:

Quote:

---

Saylor, S: Roma
The epic novel of ancient Rome
pb. 669 pages
Constable & Robinson Ltd. 04/2008

This is the paperback of the novel that was acclaimed as a major and "wonderful" epic as it tells the story of republican Rome from its
foundation up to the death of Caesar. Saylor is a scholar whose subject is ancient Rome but he writes in a beautiful and accessible way.

---

Does anyone know the book from the 2007 hardcover?