How are anything is to write totally depends on the story you want to tell and how familiar you are with the components needed for that story. As long as you have a comfort zone that allows the story to flow, I think you're good.
Personally, I don't find certain eras of history that difficult to write in. But, then, I was an odd child who would rather read a biography of Lucretia Borgia or Oscar Wilde than "Dick and Jane". I've been reading biographies and non-fiction for fun since I could read. I'd read most everything the literature classes assigned long before I reached the class for fun. Not to mention historical fiction. Thus, there are many times and places that I feel comfortable in my knowledge of. I don't claim to be a scholar by any stretch, but I'm not writing non-fiction and I'm not trying to educate--I'm trying to entertain. When the story is good enough, the facts are forgotten until later, but the story remains.
The DaVinici Code took tremendous liberties with history and facts and still told a damned good story that got people all over the world talking and investigating things they'd taken for granted before. Tremendous outcry against it on so many levels. Yet, people are waiting anxiously for Brown's next book. I don't think being inaccurate and outright false has hurt his career any since he delievered a really GREAT story.
Take a look at Wilbur Smith's Egypt books. It's Victorian England on the Nile. That concept of Egyptian culture hasn't been prevalent in scholarly circles for at least the 40years I've been paying attention to it. Can't even find it on the History Channel. The average person has access to the modern understanding of the facts yet, none of those inaccuracies has turned away readers or hurt his career. Last I checked, he was a NYT bestselling author and getting drop bins at bookstores.
From all that I've seen in 30 years of listening to readers and seeing what sells big, I believe that the average American reader--not scholars, not writers, not survivors of the era--but average American readers don't know historical details and, even more, don't care. They want to be entertained, they want to FEEL like they're in that time, and they don't want their misconceptions about what was corrected by facts. Give the reader what they want consistently and you'll have a career. Give a lot of readers what they want and you'll have a big career.
Every story has hard parts. Just the nature of the beast. Up to your knowledge, skills and vision which parts are harder than others. But history isn't inherently one of those points every time.
Good luck with your writing.
Not that historical fiction is much, if any, easier, but at least the world's been partway done for you.
All this just so I won't look like a hack with a penchant for stupid anachronisms.
