World Without End.

Feisty female characters are all the rage these days, since it's mostly women who are reading. Not that there's anything wrong with that-- in fact it's long overdue in popular fiction. However, I wonder at how much expense comes according to historical accuracy? On one hand, we know of from record and I think safe inference that there were strong women who pushed the envelope in the middle ages, and there have always been women who ruled, or who had great influence through the men around them.

Then again, it's "historical [i]fiction[/i]" so, I suppose we might forgive some liberties for the sake of story.

One of my more favorite authors in this genre, Bernard Cornwell, includes notes at the end of his books to detail where he took liberties with the known history, and why he takes one interpretation of events over others where the record is vague or contested.

I kind of missed that in "World Without End."

There have been works of historical fiction that have inspired me to do my own research, and find out more on the subject from more academic sources. Gore Vidal's "Julian" was one, and Colleen McCollough's series on Rome was another, and of course Bernard Cornwell's many books have sent me on searches for materials on Wellington, Waterloo, Alfred the Great and other assorted saxons.

But, as much as I could not put down "Pillars of the Earth" and "World Without End", I have never been so inspired by Follet. It could be because I've read material on the Black Death before, and because I've visited a few Cathedrals in England, which always supplies the tourist with historical materials.

If you get the chance ever in your life, take in the York Minster, in York. It's impressive, naturally, and-- unless they have had some policy change, there is no shortage of materials on the archeology of the site.