In the past you’ve expressed the view that you are a story-teller and not an historian.  With the release of your first non-fiction historical account I was wondering whether your sentiment has shifted?

Alternatively, what is your view that historians are at a fundamental level story-tellers?  That their examination of the past is essentially a re-telling of bygone events, all filled with their own heroes and villains.  Would you consider your historical-fiction approach is an extension of the ‘story-teller historian’ more toward the ‘story-teller’ than the ‘historian’.

When writing Waterloo, how different was the process compared to everything you have done previously?  Did you find that your day-to-day approach was different?

Cheers,

Ben.