The classic historical fiction novel. Couldn't put it down!

The best. Couldn't stop until I had read the entire series.

The Whiskey Rebels (by David Liss) should be on the list. Though I must say the list itself is sketchy. Just because a book takes place in some moment of time past does not make it historical fiction. The Kite Runner? What is that doing on here?

Good point, Charlotte.

For example, I love Pride and Prejudice, but I didn't vote for it, as it is not a historical novel - Jane Austen was writing about her own time.

Flags of Our Fathers. Definately not fiction.

Where are the Norah Lofts books? She writes great historical fiction.

I don't think people are understanding what historical fiction is. If a book was written in the 1800's and it is based in that time frame, then would you consider it historical fiction? I would not. Historical fiction takes historical events (or figures)and creates fictionalized stories either centering on them or surronding them.

Agreed. Historical fiction refers to a time not your own featuring people, events & movements of the time & place re-created in a fictional story of your making. A generation before is time enough, IMHO.

Win Blevins's STONE SONG dserves to be recognized as a great book

I am ashamed that I even have read historical fiction.

I came here to vote after finding so many brilliant works of art on The Worst Book list. And here I find so many books that are in no way "historical." As already said, many of the above books (and many I love) were written in and of their times. So I could not vote for them. I read all genres (pretty much) but what to me is the best of that genre, so I am in no way embarrassed to read this one.

Middlesex? Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell? Like Water for Chocolate? Who made this list? Oh well, I enjoyed perusing it and found many new books to add to my "to-read" list.

It was made by the people, or at least the people here on this site who bothered to take the time to contribute. Obviously a massing of individual minds isn't going to match your personal tastes. These lists would be boring and hardly worth looking at if they did.

Rusty wrote: "I am ashamed that I even have read historical fiction. "Why? Have you read any Shakespeare? Or perhaps Homer?

I (and my husband) read, or actually listened to audio recordings, of all the Sharp series, and just loved them. Cornwell is the only author who ever made me "see" a battle.

"Night" is NOT historical fiction. It's not even fiction ... it's the true story of Elie Wiesel's experiences during the Holocaust. So historical non-fiction would be a better category for it, evne though it doesn't technically exist. Please remove it from this list- I LOVE that book, but it doesn't fall in this category.

well I saw several historical fiction books I've read and though not my favorite I understand why they are on the list and I see a few I plan on reading shortly, I think it's great that someone compiled this list.

I really like the concept of the book cementary and given the responasbily to keep the books safe..

Manuel wrote: "I really like the concept of the book cementary and given the responasbily to keep the books safe.."

Are you talking about the Cemetary of Books in the "Shadow of the the Wind"?

Lordy Lordy but this list is well out of kilter.

ETA I am talking about the objective scoring, not the subjective comments. *waves white flag at Alice, who thought I was dissing a viewpoint* lol

And here I find so many books that are in no way "historical."

Lola, I noticed that too. Despite the clear definition/description of "historical fiction" at the top there, I'm seeing all kinds of odd books here - Alexandre Dumas, for example, while one of my favourites, was writing not all that long after the Napoleonic War.

Books written during or shortly after the period in which they were set, but 50 years before our own, are generally termed "classics", not historical fiction.

I don't know how these lists work - is there a way of editing it?

Well, some of Dumas is historical fiction - like The Three Musketeers - but a lot of it isn't. The Count of Monte Cristo, for example.

Shannon - I think only the creator of the list can edit it (excluding changing one's own votes, of course).

Any librarian can edit the list in order to remove books. However, GoodReads is REALLY strict about only removing books that without a doubt don't fit the category, as they don't want people to just remove books they don't like.

I've removed "Anne of Green Gables" and "The Little House" collection. While both great books/series, they were written close to the time they took place and therefore don't fit the definition of historical fiction. There are a LOT of others I'm unsure about though.

Count of Monte Cristo was the one I was thinking of, Susanna, and his book on Napoleon. I actually forgot about the Musketeers!!

Since anyone can add a book to a list, it stands to reason it could be removed as well. I don't see that function but I'm seeing far fewer non-historical books here than yesterday. Some are more science fiction than historical fiction, not that you can't straddle genres, but a lot of these are giving me a double-take. I personally don't want to change anything, unless it was glaringly obvious.

Shannon, at the very top of the list, immediately following the list description, there is a small (edit) link - very non-descript, very easy to miss.

This link allows you to delete books one at a time.

I did see that, but I thought it was just for the intro description. Makes sense though!

All Quiet on the Western Front is historical fiction? It was written in the 20s, about the teens. Great book, but I wouldn't vote for it here.

What exactly is a "historical fiction" book? I thought all those books Courtney put down were historical and so I voted for the one I liked best. I don't really have a big vocabulary, so I am not sure what most of you guys were saying. =/

A work of historical fiction is a novel that is set in the past, Catherine.

Thank you for the comment I guess. =D

I didn't read through everyone's comments, so I'm not sure if this was mentioned already, but Elie Wiesel's "Night" is not historical FICTION. In fact, it was based on his own experiences in the Holocaust. It is a very touching, beautifully written book for anyone else who likes WWII non-fiction.

Most all of these are NOT historical fiction, IMO. Historical fiction novels are fictional accounts about real people in historical situations. Most mentioned here are simply period pieces.

Examples of historical fiction include Mary Renault's The Persian Boy about Alexander the Great's chamberlain and catamite Bagoas; Family Favorites by Alfred Duggan, a fictional biography of Elagabalus; I, Claudius by Robert Graves about the 1st 5 Caesar's and Julian]by Gore Vidal about Julian II, a 4th century CE Roman emperor...

Some like The Mists of Avalon mentioned above and many other modern Arthurian tales are mythic fiction, not historical fiction.

Definitions vary; they clearly have here.

Susanna wrote: "A work of historical fiction is a novel that is set in the past."

Not just our past but the past of the author too. Many of the examples in the list are simply books that are not contemporary to us and are, by no stretch of the imagination 'historical fiction.' The works of Jane Austen, for instance, are not historical fiction because she was writing about her own times. For a work to be historical it has to be set by the author in a time that precedes their own. It is arguable too that a book set in the author's imagined future does not belong in this category, like 1984. Such works are wholly imagined and not related to an historical reality.

As so do I Susanna, but maybe the author of this here list put Pride and Prejudice in because it is history to us now. I think that is something authors of the past and future sometimes forget funnily enough, unless you mock whole nations, the works you create will be around for a very long time.
Susanna wrote: "Good point, Charlotte.

For example, I love Pride and Prejudice, but I didn't vote for it, as it is not a historical novel - Jane Austen was writing about her own time."

Antonia Fraser's The Wives of Henry VIII isn't even fiction! It's straight biography, and a very good one.

I look to historical fiction to take the facts (Henry VIII had 8 wives, most of whom died) and put real faces and real people behind those facts, explain how a real person could do the things they did or make the decisions they made

Which historical fiction book is this an outline of please?

The Devil in the White City is NOT historical fiction. Eric Larson writes NON-FICTION!

And some of these others I question whether they are "historical fiction" - they take place at a certain time in history and they are fiction. But that doesn't make them "historical fiction."

Maybe I just take my historical fiction too literally.

Jan wrote: "The Devil in the White City is NOT historical fiction. Eric Larson writes NON-FICTION!

And some of these others I question whether they are "historical fiction" - they take place at a certain ti..."

Well, Larson does write fiction as well...

:O)

... but I get your point on this particular work - 300+ readers have it on the fiction shelf. I bet he's nearly as mad about it all as you are.

I guess it's sort of a compliment, as people "who don't read non-fiction" always want "non-fiction that reads like fiction."

To the best of my knowledge (and Wikipedia's as well) Erik Larson does not write fiction.

He has worked for newspapers, he has taught non-fiction writing and, as far as I can tell, as only written non-fiction.

People may well read him as though he is fiction. Many think that non-fiction is dry and dull. I know many though Seabiscuit by Hillenbrand was fiction. But maybe these books can help bring people into the light. (jk)

Jan wrote: "To the best of my knowledge (and Wikipedia's as well) Erik Larson does not write fiction.

He has worked for newspapers, he has taught non-fiction writing and, as far as I can tell, as only writ..."

Jan , is his profile on GR wrong? It states that he writes mysteries and thrillers as well but I cannot see any publications along those lines.

Colonel Charles Dahnmon Whitt has a new (Historic-Fiction) out. It is a 580 page hardback relating to the years from 1836 to 1900. It is based on an appalachian and his family as they live in the 1800's in Virginia and Kentucky. It also covers his service as a Confederate in Company H, of the 29th. Virginia Infantry. It is a day to day history where the folks come to life and keep you wondering, What's next? "Legacy, The Days of David Crockett Whitt" is the name of this narrative. Get it at dahnmonwhittfamily.com

WILL SOMEONE WITH SMARTS AND SKILLS PLEASE PLEASE PRUNE THIS LIST DOWN TO HISTORICAL FICTION. Without limitation, no definition. As Alan Turing famously said, Information is Entropy (Boundless information eventually becomes no information at all).

Sadly, we must either cut The Crucible and Inherit the Wind......or let in ALL of Shakespeare's history plays.

Animal Farm is historical fiction?

I cleaned out a lot of the non-fiction.

Stephanie wrote: "Middlesex? Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell? Like Water for Chocolate? Who made this list? Oh well, I enjoyed perusing it and found many new books to add to my "to-read" list. "

Jonathan Strange and Mr.Norrell is historical fiction. The fictional elements including the historical use of magic in Britain, and the use of magic at that time in Britain. But the rest of the book is historical in setting and events, including the Napoleonic Wars. Remember, these aren't history books, but works of fiction that use history as a basis.

Is it historical fiction if it was contemporary at the time it was written? Some stuff on this list really confused me.

To my mind - if it was contemporary at the time it was written, it is not historical fiction.