Historical fiction

Since no one has started a thread for this genre yet, I thought I would do so, as some of the current discussion on the fantasy/SF thread might interest historical fiction readers as well.

gwernin, I'm happy to see you here! I'm so glad Sonya made this group. Though I hope she's not too put out with me for agitating for it so 'voice-iforously' (as hubby would say). Yours is one of the names I had in mind when I first approached her about a group like this.

PS: Love your Author Page picture!

Thanks, countrylife. Sometimes "voice-iferous" agitating is the way to make things happen here! (Dripping of water on stone, etc. :)

Do you have any thoughts about supernatural elements in historical fiction vs. the historical fiction / fantasy boundary? I had some ideas yesterday, but I've slept since then...

Admittedly, I am uneducated about the times you write of. My sense of the issue falls in with what you stated in your post 7 of the thread you linked (in the OP): "if magic becomes an important part of the plot - if, for example, major conflicts are solved by active magic - then we have crossed the line between historical fiction and fantasy. On the other hand, I think that Early Medieval characters who do not believe in the supernatural - whether from a Christian or a Pagan point of view - are anachronistic, modern people in Medieval clothes."

Fantasy and science fiction are neither genres of interest to me, so I had red-x'd that thread without reading it. Thank you for starting this one on historical fiction and pointing me to your previous comments!

I am in wholehearted agreement with that "line between historical fiction and fantasy". Even with an interesting historical setting, I would not find the story to my taste, if it involved things that could not have really happened. I enjoy historical fiction for the opportunity to 'live' in another time and place, watching events that could actually have happened. I find historical fiction to be educational, making history real, and fleshing out what I didn't absorb through dry textbooks.

I absolutely think there's a place for the supernatural in historical fiction set in the ancient/medieval world. One of the most successful works like this that I remember reading recently is Black Ships, where the main character is a priestess and believes in everything that that entails. I was actually annoyed that this was classified as fantasy; I somehow don't think that books where a modern character believes in God or even acts on instructions that he believes he received from God in a dream/after using drugs would end up in the fantasy category.

5: I admit I was surprised and not totally pleased to find Storyteller classified as fantasy, as I had put a lot of work into making the characters and settings as historically accurate as possible (not easy to do in 6th century Britain). From that point of view, should all the Christian fiction being discussed on the "full disclosure" thread be classified as fantasy? I agree with you that this is unlikely to happen!

btw, all my books have an afterword which discusses historical accuracy and lists all the main characters with an indication of whether they were historical or invented.

That's an interesting point; who determines the classification of a book?

Storyteller sounds intriguing; it's now on my long list of books to check out one of these days. I love afterwords that discuss the historical accuracy.

"who determines the classification": I would guess in the case of WorldCat it's whichever library first catalogs the book, but that's only a guess.

Coming back to the question of where to draw that line, I'd like to try an experiment. Some time ago I put sample chapters from my first two books up on one of my blog sites. Here's a link to one with the sort of supernatural elements we've been discussing. Read it and tell me, based on that sample, in which category you'd put the book. (This chapter is from the second book in the trilogy, carefully chosen to be as un-spoilery as possible, and all the people and places except Gwernin and Claddedig are historical figures - or at least names in a genealogy!)

Historical fiction or fantasy?

Munchki are due home soon so I don't have time to read there now, but yesterday I searched out some selections from your first four chapters of 'Storyteller' (LOVED it, BTW). So, I can give my say on that one, if you'd like to include it in your experiment.

What I read of Storyteller sounds like it fits perfectly into Historical Fiction. Historically accurate historical fiction, for the characters do seem to have that sort of pagan spirituality, but there does not seem to be any actual fantasy/magic/reality-changing going on, from what I've read so far.

9: If you read all four chapters, then you read the one I linked to (which is Chapter 4, but from Flight of the Hawk rather than Storyteller). Glad to hear you loved it, btw ;-)

And I think you've put your finger on something here: "reality-changing" magic, as opposed to subjectively experienced magic.

Although this might still leave some of the Saints' lives in the fantasy catagory!

gwerin I agree with on your points it sounds like your book is set in celtic times and they were big believers in the supernatural and if a book is about Pagans and/or Celts there will be an element of "fantasy" but it was in fact their religion.

Hi Susie. Yes, many things properly described as Pagan religion seem to be classed as "fantasy" by some people. My books are set in mid-6th century Britain, after the Romans had left and just after King Arthur's period. The religious situation in Britain was fairly mixed at that point, with roughly the north, west and southwest parts of the island still being held by the British and the southeast and east parts being gradually taken over by the "Anglo-Saxons" (really a mixture of Germanic peoples). In the Roman-influenced areas of the west and south-west, a good percentage of the British population was at least nominally Christian, although clearly not everyone as St. David et al. were still busy converting the "heathen" there. Ireland was also partly Christian at this point, roughly a century after St. Patrick. The Saxons, however, and the Pictish areas of Scotland were largely if not entirely Pagan. And all of these people believed in one sort of "magic" or another, as well as their basic religious beliefs (now poorly documented).

One of the things I loved about Mary Stewart's Crystal Cave is the mix of dreams and magic and reality that such a part of the story. I wish I was home - she has a quote in the afterword that speaks to the mixture of beliefs and how it shaped the legends. I'll find it next week.

13: I love those books, too, and I'm sure it shows occasionally in my writing. Another book I like very much is Mary Renault's The Mask of Apollo, set in ancient Greece, where the actor protagonist hears and speaks to his God, Apollo, though the medium of a theatrical mask. I think most of us have the ability to be aware of these sorts of things as children, but it's trained out of us or beaten out of us as we grow up by our mundane society.

Happy to see others thought of Mary Stewart's Merlin Trilogy, I found it very compelling in its historical fiction, and found a way to bring in the magic without rupturing the style.

I recently began reading Merejkowski's Christ and Anti-Christ trilogy (see my review on LT for Death of the Gods). Less magic in that, but still there, and definitely the treatment of religion / theology / sacred that some would take to be fantasy.

In both cases, I found the marriage of "fantasy" and "history" to work quite well, and for each aspect of the story to enhance the other. When that happens, I'm not too concerned about how the book is categorised -- though I can appreciate that an author would be.

Fantasy like elements that correspond to the time and beliefs of the time are "ok" though not something I look for, or expect. Which is my answer after I saw that Storyteller had been classified as fantasy. And I was confused, until I recalled certain elements of the story.

I prefer historical fiction stories/books that are based in reality, as historically accurate as possible, baring in mind so much knowledge is missing, while still being readable and enjoyable. On the other hand, I am aware of the wide-spread belief in medieval times that dragons were real.

I read, have read many genres and so can pick up a historical fantasy book, and enjoy, but prefer that if I'm looking for history that it doesn't get sweeped up into only fantastical elements. But then, the fantasy that I enjoy best is the down to earth "real" feeling fantasy worlds. The kind where there are rules and the rules are followed. Otherwise I start to lose a grasp of the world, place, time, people (ie, George R.R. Martin's fantasy series, for the most part, feels like it is happening in a real world (James Clemen's witch series much more so, but Clemen's series is less well known), as opposed to Piers Anthony's fantasy series that seem to fall into mist).

One of my favorite series is that Soldier series by Gene Wolfe. Historical fantasy.

I am probably not conveying my thoughts coherently, as my thoughts on the subject are not coherent, more gut reaction to what I "like".

>7 _Zoe_: That's an interesting point; who determines the classification of a book?

B&N and Borders make their own decisions and they are often not based in reality.

Barbara Hambly is a longtime fantasy/SF writer. She then moved into Mysteries. They had her classified as a mystery writer and I will never forget seeing a hardcover with a full color dragon and swashbuckler being displayed cover out in the mystery shelves.

I pointed the book out to a worker, and said it was SF/F and was in the wrong place, "No" she said after looking it up on her computer - "She is classified as a mystery writer". Didn't matter that the SF/F audience wouldn't find the book there, or the cover might turn off her mystery readers that were unaware of her other 'life'.

And its probably some low paid, non-reader who makes the decision at data entry time.

gwernin: I just reread The Mask of Apollo for the umpty-umpth time. Such a wonderful story.

"But I loved you, Dion."

gwernin: having read all but the latest of Jack Whyte's Camulod series and am currently catching up with Marion Zimmer Bradley's Avalon series, it sounds like Storyteller may be the best of both worlds for me! I loved the historical accuracy of Camulod and from the Roman perspective, yet I also love Bradley's mystical Avalon. But I enjoy both genres so am not sure if I can be that objective? I cannot be the only one who doesn't mind the merging of the two in small doses. Maybe 90% Historical and 10% Fantasy?

I agree with countrylife in that I end my day with reading and look forward to my "trips" to Britain or Russia or wherever my storyteller is taking me.

I will look later this evening at your chapters for your experiment.

>8 gwernin: After reading the chapter that you linked to above. Historical Fiction, gwernin. (with barely a touch of supernatural)

Trying to catch up after being gone for three days...

15: elenchus: an interesting review. I need to learn a little more about Julian one of these days.

16: MikeBriggs: Certainly I've tried to make my books as historically accurate as possible in the details of everyday life and the structure of the societies. This includes knowing what things were *not* there: in Storyteller, for example, no rabbits in Wales, no hops in beer, no cash economy in most of Britain (or only Roman vestiges here and there), no potatoes in the stew, no cotton clothes, no wire-strung harps... you get the idea. Those are the sort of things that jolt me out of a story.

17: FicusFan: thanks for the mental picture of the dragon in the mystery section!

18: MerryMary: Yes, that book has so many wonderful sections. I particularly enjoyed the descriptions of some of his performances.

19: tc53591: I've heard good things about the Camulod series, but haven't read it as it's too near my period; I try not to read fiction from which I might unconsciously borrow. Some things, of course, I read before I started writing. Glad to hear you think the sample qualifies as historical fiction!

#16 and again at #20

I prefer historical fiction stories/books that are based in reality, as historically accurate as possible, baring in mind so much knowledge is missing, while still being readable and enjoyable.

Commenting as a copyeditor now, rather than a writer--where I've been working on memoirs for what seems forever--I particularly enjoy fact-checking the actual history of historical fiction. My own not unreasonable editorial guideline is that the history of record must be accurate. And sometimes in the manuscripts I receive (all of which have been accepted for publication by the publisher) it isn't. For instance, I edited an historical fiction against the backdrop of the Civil War that said slavery was dying out before that war, which I discovered was factually untrue. But it's my job to point this out, cite my sources, and suggest ways the text can be changed (sometimes the errors are so embedded, this isn't possible)--I'm not the last word on the matter.

21: The problem with fact-checking actual history for 6th century Britain, and especially Wales, is that there isn't much in the way of sources. I've read a lot of material on Roman Britain, Ireland, and the Anglo-Saxons, among others; also pretty much all the archaeological sources I can find. From there I make what seem to me to be reasonable extrapolations, especially regarding the material culture. I'm also familiar with the Medieval Welsh sources, including the early poetry - which leads to a different sort of fun. Since my heroes are bards, I get to write poetry for them to perform in the stories, hopefully in the style of the historical bards, including some features of early Welsh poetry which work in English (some don't). I love the research part of this, it's half the fun!

Yes, of course, the further back you go, the less solid evidence. An example of this: I copyedited a book last month by a prominent historical writer, Alison Weir, who writes about Henry VIII, Anne Boleyn, etc. I've edited two or three others by her. This time I was surprised to see that the manuscript had no footnotes; Ms. Weir usually has hundreds. (It should go without saying that copyeditors do not like footnotes.) Turns out, this last book was about Eleanor of Aquitaine (and Henry II), and since she didn't have the wealth of sources she usually does, she was not constrained to "prove" every interpretation she made. She says as much in the afterword--that she essentially wrote a work of historical fiction, because of the dearth of sources.

Alison Weir is very popular at my library.I've got her on my TBR pile.

To me a historical fiction novel is a success with me if it makes me what to learn more about the time period and/or people in the book.

copyedit52 and gwernin, I need to seek out the books you edit/write because historical fiction is my favorite genre and Dark Ages England/Late Middle Ages England are 2 of my favorite periods within the historical fiction genre. I also read nonfiction about history as well. :)

I'm currently reading another book set in the mid 5th century Briton so I'm on a kick of seeking more of those out!

23: I don't include footnotes, but my books do have an afterword on sources and a list of names of people and places with a pronunciation key and an indication of whether they are historical, mythical, or invented.

25: Hi Stacy, you might be interested in some of the references in my catalog. My collections ST1Refs, ST2Refs, and ST3Refs include a lot of the references I consulted in writing my first three books.

24: Susie: I missed replying to your comment earlier:

To me a historical fiction novel is a success with me if it makes me what to learn more about the time period and/or people in the book.

Interestingly enough, that's why I started to mix mythological material into Storyteller. Most of the book was originally written as a monthly serial for a local newsletter, and part of my intention was to sneakily educate my readers about early medieval Wales and the Mabinogion. And once I had established that pattern and my first readers liked it, I just kept going. But as I said earlier on the other thread, the most important magic in the books is awen, poetic inspiration. Most of the rest is perception, and the Storyteller's art.

Don't get me started on the implied third person point of view. I could go on forever about it.

28: Hmm. That's one I haven't seen before...

What I'm using is the framing device of the old Storyteller telling us in the first person about his adventures as a young man. He is not deliberately untruthful, but of course he tells us what he saw and experienced from his own point of view, and in addition he *is* a storyteller, so he tells it to entertain...

Is that "implied third person"? Or something else?

#27- I will definitely be getting your books the more I hear about them the more I want to read them .
I am a big fan of Juliet Marillier although some of her books have a little more fantasy in them but her books Foxmask and Wolfskin are more historical.

gwernin, for me the key difference is whether the supernatural elements are unambiguously real, within the context of the book, which would make it clearly fantasy (but please note I don't see that as a slur, or as a ghetto), while if it's just a character's beliefs or interpretations (as _Zoe_ suggests it is in Black Ships) it could be straight historical fiction. I'm an equal-opportunity-offender, here; "miracles" in a Christian context, shown as unambiguously real, would also make a book fantasy as far as I'm concerned. Yours in the example you link to aren't clearly one or the other -- if those same abilities recur, and affect the plot, and are demonstrated to be genuine, I'd call it fantasy. Otherwise, well, just because a character believes something is the work of gods or spirits or whatever doesn't mean the author necessarily agrees with him.

Why were you disappointed to see Storyteller labelled as fantasy? There's nothing that says fantasy can't be carefully historically researched -- just look at Guy Kay's Sailing to Sarantium, for instance.

Guy Garviel Kay has done several books like that, Lions of Alrassan is approximatle Medieval Spain, A Song for Arbonne is ~ Medieval France and Last Light of the Sun is ~ Vikings, (Sarantine is ~ Constantinople).

How do people here feel about Naoimi Noviks Temeraire?

31: Hmm. Lorax, I can see that we don't agree on where to draw the line, but I think it's as much because we have different ideas of what's possible in the world here and now, rather than just of what's fantasy as opposed to historical fiction. Looking at the books we share, I see a lot I think we would both call fantasy (Mary Stewart's Merlin books, for example) and a lot we would agree are historical fiction (the O'Brian books, for example). But what about the miracles at the end of A Morbid Taste for Bones? Was Ellis Peters writing fantasy? According to your definition, she was.

I do think that the presence of big, flashy magic - including, as I mentioned upthread, many things found in saints' lives! - makes a book fantasy. I haven't read Sailing to Sarantium, but judging by the reviews it's certainly fantasy, and not a type of fantasy I like. Clearly Kay's world is not this one, however well researched his model is. (I used to like Katherin Kurtz's Deryni books until I read a little more medieval history and recognized the sources. I got rid of the last of them a few months ago - Gwynedd to me is a part of Wales, not an invented place). And that's why I was disappointed to see Storyteller cataloged as fantasy - I'm writing about early medieval Wales, a place some of my ancestors may have lived, not some invented world - whether or not it has "supernatural elements" ;-)

32: Musereader: I'm not familiar with any of those titles, so I haven't an opinion.

33>

And that's why I was disappointed to see Storyteller cataloged as fantasy - I'm writing about early medieval Wales, a place some of my ancestors may have lived, not some invented world - whether or not it has "supernatural elements" ;-)

So you're considering only secondary-world fantasy as "fantasy", then? Nothing set in the "real world", regardless of the inclusion of supernatural elements, would be considered fantasy by your definition?

This seems to rule out basically all of what used to be known as "urban fantasy" -- things like Emma Bull's War for the Oaks, or most Arthurian fantasy which is at least nominally set in our world. I don't have problems with fantasy being set in our world, past, present, or future, but I have a hard time with something including impossible events and maintaining that, because it's not set in an invented Middle-Earth, that it isn't fantasy.

As for A Morbid Taste for Bones, that's a good point, and I'd have to think about it, but my gut reaction is that since that sort of thing doesn't keep happening throughout the series, considered on balance the Cadfael books aren't fantasy. I'm more willing to allow a one-off than repeated events.

I suspect you're right that where we draw the line isn't so much about "supernatural events" being the distinction as about what we consider "supernatural", however.

I am an avid reader of both fantasy and historical fiction, and love both.

The work of Guy Gavriel Kay, mentioned earlier, is just gorgeous - he has been influenced by history, and also by settings, AND in a recent chat where he was questioned, he admitted he drew a huge amount of his inspiration from poetry - his newest release in April, Under Heaven was inspired largely by Tang dynasty poetry.

I've read Juliet Marillier's works, and War for the Oaks - all these are stellar examples of story telling at it's best, with well crafted plots, great characters, and beauty in the language.

Marion Zimmer Bradley was well known as a fantasy writer, but she also did Mists of Avalon, which I consider historical - a view of the Arthurian legend told from the women characters' point of view, and set in the dark ages against a pagan backdrop.

To put the above in perspective, a bit, my favorite historical writers are Dorothy Dunnett, Mary Renault, Rosemary Sutcliff, and occasionally Bernard Cornwell.

>29 gwernin:. gwerin: The following is narrative text written in the implied point of view of a third person, in this case, the character Peter. The first sentence ("The old duke had never done anything to offend his father") is what tell us so. And here's the rule: When the narration is in the implied POV of a particular character (he or she is describing what we see), that character should not be referred to as an "other" or third person.

original:

The old duke had never done anything to offend his father. And when the duke had taken an interest in Peter’s education—since his own father could only afford to send the heir to school—that made everything worse.

edited version:

The old duke had never done anything to offend his father. And when the duke had taken an interest in his education—since his own father could only afford to send the heir to school—that made everything worse.

it could also have been edited this way:

The old duke had never done anything to offend Peter's father. And when the duke had taken an interest in his education—since Peter's own father could only afford to send the heir to school—that made everything worse.

34: So you're considering only secondary-world fantasy as "fantasy", then? Nothing set in the "real world", regardless of the inclusion of supernatural elements, would be considered fantasy by your definition?

No, not exactly. You're right, I need to rephrase that. For me, created worlds = fantasy (or SF), correct. But there are more categories.

I don't generally read "urban fantasy" - I don't read much fantasy or SF at all any more, although I used to read a lot - and I'm not familiar with War for the Oaks, although I take it that it would be comparable to Tam Lin or (better match?) Moonheart. Certainly those are fantasy in my opinion because of the presence of strong magic, even though they take place in our modern world. I also put The Crystal Cave in the fantasy category for two reasons, although the historical background is well researched (not perfectly, but whose is in that period?): strong magic, and the presence of Merlin, whom I don't consider a historical character (although that's another discussion). And yes, a lot of Arthurian stories are fantasy for these reasons, although not all (e.g.,Sword at Sunset).

I think the difference in where we draw the line is that while we both consider the presence of what I call "strong magic", i.e. magic that has transforming effects in the real world, to make a story fantasy, there is another category of phenomena which I consider possible and you don't. This would include internal conversations with gods (Mask of Apollo), some sorts of telepathic communication (Mary Stewart's Touch Not the Cat), and true dreaming (can't think of an example).

That being said, I freely admit there are passages in my books which are at least borderline on the modern reality scale. However, since like the Cadfael example they don't really affect outcomes or constitute more than about 10% of the story, I still consider that on balance I'm writing historical fiction, not fantasy. ymmv ;-)

A stimulating discussion!

edited thrice for typos

36: Thanks, that's clear. I take it you see a lot of this?

In Cleopatra's Daughter by, Michelle Moran
Octavian consults the Auguries (whether it be bones or entrails) then there is thunder so to Octavian it felt like magic and a sign to make the decision he asked about.
To me this is not fantasy it is historical because people believed in it at the time.

>38 gwernin:. Yes, all the time. In fact, it's the most common editorial change I make. The first time I do it in a manuscript, I explain myself in what we call a "flag," which is a comment attached to the text, in which I note the rule and then add: "As changed throughout." The author thus has the opportunity to ignore the changes, though few do, and I sometimes get thank-you e-mails. But once I was actually attacked by a well-known writer for making the necessary changes. Go figure.

37>

That's clearer, thank you.

Internal conversations with gods I could accept in straight historical fiction, depending on context; unless the character is shown as getting accurate information from the gods that they don't otherwise have access to, this could just be the character's interpretation or beliefs of what's occurring, rather than "real" events. It depends a lot on how the author portrays it. But you're right, it's not something that I consider possible, so it pushes something toward fantasy.

True dreaming shows up in another Guy Kay book, The Lions of al-Rassan (which is an incredible book, and I strongly recommend it); but since its version of Reconquista Spain has the serial numbers filed off, most people would consider it fantasy regardless of those elements. I'm afraid I can't come up with an example of true dreaming in something written and marketed as historical fiction either.

The only way for me to know how I'd classify your books would be to read them, of course; I just hope you wouldn't be offended if I ended up viewing them as fantasy!

The thing that makes Fantasy the same as historical fiction is that *there* is not *here*, its a different world with different rules. Fantasy aims to show you a world that is made up, but hangs together well enough for you to suspend your disbelief (and contrary to common conception doesn't have to have magic), and infuluences can be drawn from many scources. Historical fiction on the other hand aims to show you the world as it was. Either way it's a place you can't get to, with things that can't happen. In one you have to create a whole world and history which isn't easy, but neither is getting history totally accurate.

41: I just hope you wouldn't be offended if I ended up viewing them as fantasy

I think I could bear it ;-) Despite all my vehement arguments, individual judgments by readers don't bother me - I'm more interested in whether they enjoyed the story! A public label, however, which might keep people potentially interested in the books away from them, is something else.

For book sales, the Fantasy designation might be more effective. For "serious" reviews, I would think not so much. And I've never found a bookstore with an area labeled "Historical Fiction."

Janny Wurts, just noticed you were here. I loved the Servant of the Empire books - much more than the series as a whole! While definitely fantasy, they had some of the political complexity I very much enjoy in Cherryh's work.

43>

A public label, however, which might keep people potentially interested in the books away from them, is something else.

True, but as long as it's not a wildly inaccurate label -- like "cooking" or "mystery" -- it also means other potentially interested people might find it who otherwise wouldn't, and I suspect that fantasy might have a wider readership than historical fiction. Ideally, of course, both groups would be able to find it.

As online sales become more and more predominant, it will become easier and easier just to have a book tagged as both historical fiction and fantasy, and not need to worry about finding the most beneficial spot on the bookshelf for it. Until that happens, I sort of understand this argument, but I find it a bit annoying all the same. Genre boundries are inherently fuzzy. Trying to draw rigid lines about them is just an exercise in futility.

Personally, I read both so I don't even have a personal dividing line between the two. Just for the record, however, I'm unlikely to tag a book in my library as "fantasy" if all it has are a few prophetic dreams, true visions, minor miracles, ghosts, or other low-key religious elements. I wouldn't drop a "fantasy" tag on either Hamlet or MacBeth, for example.

I wouldn't label most kung-fu manga as "fantasy" either. Even though the fighting is... well, utterly unreal. The one with the main character who is half dog-demon and spends all his time fighting other demons, ghosts and ghouls, on the other hand... that one I would call fantasy.

L. Shelby

Hi everyone. I love historical fiction. Both Alison Weir and Mary Stewart are in my TBR piles. I will be watching this thread. Thanks for starting it.

44, 45, 46, 47: Good points! And I do think that people who predominantly read fantasy will also enjoy my books. I guess I'll just keep writing, and hope both groups find them!

On the other hand, this has been an interesting discussion. Anyone else want to offer their ideas on the (fuzzy) dividing line between fantasy and historical fiction, ideally with examples?

#45, freecyclor - thanks! How wonderful to hear of your enjoyment.

gwernin - I'll be taking a look, and no question, we share quite a few favorites, and I read back and forth across many genres, all the time. A choice writer shines in any venue. Often I find that the people who are most against 'fantasy' have the very least concept of what's available across the boards. Imagination has no boundary - and neither does excellence.

For people who think fantasy is only vampires (I don't care for them, either) or kids stuff, there's a very wide range of well regarded, literate work.

Where would we be now without Beowulf, the Eddas, Kafka, The Odyssey, and the list goes on ...

Many of the most likely crossover authors have been mentioned here - Marillier, Kay, Bradley, etc. You may also want to look into Judith Tarr - who is also an academic historian, who's written both historical and 'historical' style fantasy. Stephen Lawhead wrote an alternate Arthurian and several celtic/historical style fantasies that centered around the bronze age.

Regarding the fuzzy dividing line (49>), I quite enjoyed Eric Shanower's Age of Bronze series, at least through the first volume. Tonight I'll start the second installment (in book form, I don't buy the serial installments as they're issued), so I'll see if he keeps my attention, but I have every reason to anticipate he will.

I find this an interesting example because though he deals with all sorts of Greek myths, including those featuring the gods, it's done in a fairly straightforward way. Similar to earlier comments about the character believing in supernatural forces, but it being left open as to whether other characters or the reader need to. At the same time: clearly in many of these myths, the gods intervene directly in human events! So the storm which leads to the deaths of Castor and Pollux (sorry, I forget their Greek names) ... was that an instance of deux ex machina, or natural circumstance?

Regardless, Shanower's book is in my opinion high quality storytelling.

ETA: ah, that'd be "fuzzy" not "fuzzing"

51>

I'm really enjoying the Age of Bronze series, though I'm not optimistic about ever seeing the end of it. It's an odd case -- a non-mythological retelling of a myth? There's certainly far less overt divine intervention here than in Homer -- I think I've read an interview with Shanower where he said he was trying to keep out all such events. So I went in with that in mind, and have been reading it as straight-up historical fiction; so far I've seen nothing to counteract that.

Whew! The "giving books away" thread seems to have exploded.

I'd just like to say that I'm enjoying, er, "hobnobbing" with other people here, without worrying about being accused of spamming when I mention my books!

"Age of Bronze" sounds like an interesting exercise. I must admit I'm very found of stories set in ancient Greece. For a more in-depth look at Homer, I recommend The War that Killed Achilles, which I got for Christmas and enjoyed.

(edited to fix html)

34: Oh, and lorax: regarding miracles in the Brother Cadfael series again: young Rhun in The Pilgrim of Hate. (I thought of it a day or two ago, but had to consult my copies to check the title, as the CK character entries for that book are incomplete.)

#53 - gwerin - if you are fond of Troy, David Gemmel did a fine trilogy on that subject.

I forgot to mention, another of my favorite historical authors is Lindsey Davis' series that begins with Silver Pigs.

Barbara Hambly did a brilliant take on a mystery in ancient Rome, too, titled Search the Seven Hills.

55: JannyWurts: I'm very fond of Lindsey Davis's Falco series - in fact my two cats are named Falco and Titus! That being said, I was disappointed in See Delphi and Die. I can see why Falco would have been unimpressed with Greece, but after Mary Renault's version it was a letdown. I think actually her book that I like best is The Course of Honour, the one she wrote before the Falco series.

There seems to be something wrong with your David Gemmel touchstone - any combiners reading who can straighten this out?

#56 - well, that touchstone is a mess, isn't it?

How does one fix such things?

David Gemmel wrote many works, the Troy series was his last. He passed on before it was done, and his wife finished it off (seamlessly)....now it appears that in adding the wife to the link, it's screwed up the access to David Gemmel by touchstone.

The Troy books were a trilogy. One was titled Shield of Thunder - that should connect you to the correct set of books - hopefully!

Did you ever check out Barbara Hambly's historical mysteries set in New Orleans? They are brilliantly researched, edgy, and excellent. The first one was titled A Free Man of Color

Another very odd and interesting historical mix is a little know book called Killer collaborated by David Drake and Karl Edward Wagner - it concerned an alien, caught by the beast catchers who sold exotics to the arena - and an (if I recall) ex gladiator hired to run it down - the reader realizes it's no ordinary beast - and the tension as it makes its nest in ancient Rome makes for a fun, thriller style tale.

I know I keep listing crossover writers - I read everything, and some of these takes were very original and fun.

I've read just one of Hambly's New Orleans series, and I didn't start with the first one only because a free copy was dropped in my lap (Die Upon A Kiss, I believe it was). I recall admiring very much the sense of place and cultural mores, the mix of cultures and how that changed (or: didn't change) attitude toward race, and clarifying the laws in place at that time. The setting is after Emancipation so there are Free Men of Color, but friendly relations across race lines occurred less frequently or perhaps did not run as deep as the law might suggest they could have been.

The mystery part was not as compelling for me, but I do prefer the combination of historical and genre fiction to a straight-up mystery. I plan to read others as I come across them / the mood strikes.

Have not heard of many of the titles listed here. Based on the titles I do recognise, I am sure to pick up one or another!

Edited for clarity

I just came across this discussion today, and I've found it really interesting. Gwernin, I have a rather different viewpoint from yours: I love fantasy books, but when it comes to real life I'm very much a skeptic when it comes to supernatural influences. So something like the clear psychic connection between characters in Mary Stewart's Touch Not the Cat throws me right out of the story when I'm expecting a 'mundane' romance rather than a fantasy; likewise the identical twins who are mystically aware of each other's situations that turn up in works like Georgette Heyer's False Colours. But when I read the Cadfael mysteries, A Morbid Taste for Bones and The Pilgrim of Hate, I wasn't bothered at all: my recollection of both works is that they involve Lourdes style miracles which can be explained by a spontaneous improvement in something which was not (in spite of appearances) actually an irredeemable condition. So it was very much in character that Cadfael would see these miracles as clear proof of divine grace, while they're still within the bounds of plausibility in terms of modern medicine.

In the light of what you said, I've had another look at the end of A Morbid Taste for Bones, and I see that the miracles there are not witnessed by Cadfael, but reported by his friend Bened, who is clearly keen on promoting Saint Winifred's works in her home village, so they're not being presented as part of the factual narration. Soothing childbirth, sudden restoration of sight (dislodged cataract, anyone?), a child in a fit who appears dead, then suddenly breathes again - those are very much conditions which have traditionally been susceptible to 'miracle' cures, and I think were very carefully chosen by the author. If Saint Winifred had cured a bad case of gangrene in those pre-antibiotic days it would have thrown me right out of the story, but as it stands the story can be equally pluasible to someone who considers that the cures are actually miracles, and someone like me who reads it as 'these are miracles in Cadfael's view of the world, but there's no need for a supernatural explanation'.

I read the extract you linked from your own work, and I'd definitely class it as historical fiction, not fantasy. Interestingly, one of my favourite authors seems to have had the opposite treatment: Judith Merkle Riley published six books that are an interesting mix of historical fiction and fantasy, with a strong romantic element, but they seem to have been marketed very much to the historical fiction market. The amazon description for The Master of All Desires starts "Fans of Antonia Fraser and Margaret George will love this witty, intelligent page-turner from Judith Merkle Riley." Considering that the plot turns on Menander, an immortal head in a box that grants people's desires, Nostradamus making true prophecies, and the interference of an angel who is the Spirit of History, the idea that because it's set in the time of Catherine de Medici it will automatically interest readers of historical fiction seems a bit optimistic to me.

Hi All,

My historical novel, The Quickening, takes place between the world wars as two midwestern farm matriarchs battle to survive the Great Depression. It is due out this June. You can find more information at www.randomhouse.com or www.michellehoover.net. You can also visit my author page on librarything.

Best,
Michelle Hoover
The Quickening

59: EveleenM: Thanks for your very interesting post, and apologies for not replying sooner.

I don't think we're actually disagreeing on principles; it's just that, as with lorax upthread, we have different ideas of what's mundanely possible (and therefore acceptable in historical fiction). Touch Not the Cat with its very clear telepathic communication certainly pushes (if not crosses) that boundary for me, though I enjoyed the story. The vague, non-verbal sense of unease one of the twins experiences regarding his brother in False Colours, on the other hand, doesn't bother me. To be honest, it's analogous to something I've experienced once or twice myself, and therefore something I consider acceptable in non-fantasy fiction. I agree Cadfael's miracles are in another category, and what you make of them depends on your viewpoint. Certainly they are susceptible to modern medical explanations.

The Master of All Desires sounds like another example of the mixed genres we were discussing upthread, and I would agree that marketing it as straight historical fiction would leave some readers unhappy. The more you look at this sort of thing, the fuzzier the lines seem to get.

I think in some ways my investment in the classification of my books is a reflection of the amount of background research I've put into them. Why worry about minute archaeological details - how tall the horses were, what month you planted your grain (and which grain you planted) in various localities, what foods and drinks were served at the king's feasts and in what containers, when Viroconium was last occupied and by whom, whether or not sixth century Britons were wearing trousers and if so what was their cut and fiber content (the trousers, not the Britons), etc. - when you can just invent things? That, for me, is as important as the presence or absence of the supernatural.

61>

While it's certainly not common for fantasy to have the level of research and attention to historical detail that you've put into your work, I suspect it's not universal in historical fiction, either! (So tell us, were sixth century Britons wearing trousers?)

So tell us, were sixth century Britons wearing trousers?

The short answer is, no one really knows. The Saxons probably were. Some of the Roman military units in Britain a couple of centuries earlier definitely were. The Irish probably weren't (though that isn't certain). The early medieval Britons unfortunately didn't leave us any clothed bog bodies or illustrated manuscripts, and soil conditions in their inhumation burials aren't favorable to the preservation of textiles. Even in cases where fabric textures are preserved as mineralized replacements on things like brooches or belt fittings, we only get information on external clothing, not underwear. I made a (reasonably) informed guess that they were. Certainly breeches are mentioned in the (10th to 13th century) Welsh law manuscripts, but that's as good as it gets. If they did exist, they were probably of either wool or linen in a moderately coarse twill or tabby weave.

(edited to correct typo and add detail)

I am fascinated. Thanks, gwernin.

It's not like fantasy writers don't do any research, one writer apparently had a whole arsenal of weapons at home which he was trained to use so that he knew what was and was not possible for the characters to do. Writers still have to research logistics and economics to create beliveable support systems for thier city or country. See here http://www.larseighner.com/world_builder/government_worldbuilder.html, they really have to put just as much thought into putting worlds together as it is to research one.

I like Historical Fiction to see what the world may have been like, and fantasy to see the breadth of someone's imagination. But like I said before - they are both fiction about somewhere else that we are literally unable to travel to.

Well said Musereader!

#66 Thank you, Musereader!

I know many fantasy writers who do mountains of research - even in areas where they use their imagination. The whole field isn't all playful fluff. And 'reality' can look very different, between cultures, based upon different belief systems.

That's what makes it fun.

The Whiskey Rebels is a story post Revolutionary War and gives some very interesting insight to issues of taxation, a national bank, exploitation, and many other topics.

I just finished Blackout which is a cross between historical fiction and sci fi (a real oxymoron). These folks go back in time to observe and immerse themselves in history and this novel focuses on England during World War II (bombing, Dunkirk, and invasion fears)

My first post as an author. I was drawn to this thread because my new novel Daughters of Time is a blend of historical fact and fantasy. At some point while describing the feel of the book I used the phrase "historical fantasy." It has touches of magical realism yet is placed within actual historical events, including my own family's history. Not sure if this phrase is of my own making or I read it elsewhere...has anyone else used this phrase to classify a historical novel?

P.S. I would love reviewers for Daughters of Time and will send a copy to the first four readers/authors within the United States or in Ireland who contact me. Teens welcome!
Thank you!

#70 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_fantasy

Thanks, SaraHope, for the definitions. Looks like I will need to find another descriptor! Perhaps simply "historical fiction with touches of magic realism."

It is nice to have a forum to introduce new novels to avid readers. I appreciate this opportunity to share a bit about my novel, "moon dance". My novel is classified as historical fiction and Christian romance. It is, as one of my favorite Kris Kristopherson songs says, partly truth and partly fiction.
Moon dance takes the reader back to a time that was less rushed than today's world, but it is also very relevant to what is happening in our world today. It is a story of falling in love for the first time, of growing from childhood to womanhood, and of overcoming the dark side of life through faith and forgiveness. It is a story that many people will be able to relate to, and hopefully many people will want to read again and again.
I loved writing "moon dance" and I really hope that you will love reading it.

#70
Densallee, where and when does DAUGHTERS OF TIME take place?

To try and get this thread going again, I'd like to ask people what their reactions are to errors or anachronisms in historical fiction. (I think this has been discussed in the historical fiction group, but that was a while ago, and we have a slightly different mix here.)

I think the more you've read about or researched a period, the more likely you are to spot errors. Sometimes this is just because an author can't check everything; sometimes it's because archaeology and history have progressed since the book was written. The history of horseshoes in Europe is an example. The last time I checked, current theory was they were introduced around (I think) the 8th or 9th century CE, although the Roman Empire *may* have had something analogous. If this is so, then any mention of horseshoes in Arthurian stories (5th-6th century CE) is (probably) an error.

Another common mistake involves rabbits in the British Isles. To the best of my knowledge, they were introduced by the Normans, who essentially farmed them. Certainly there should be none in Arthurian Britain or early medieval Ireland, although there *were* hares. It's another touchstone for authorial diligence.

When I see these sorts of errors in historical fiction, it damages my belief in the world that the author is creating (for as Musereader truly says, all fictional worlds, whatever their basis, are places we can't physically visit). One or two errors I can live with if it's a good story, but more... What do other people think?

I don't care what kind of book it is, carelessness shows.

Off the cuff: I get ripped when it's plain the author didn't care enough to put the time in - a book that requires use of horses, or period weaponry, nautical, or period travel - that is basic stuff, easily checked out and done properly.

For the tiny nitpicks - they won't bother me terribly, when it is evident the author put in the effort to try. These people are storytellers, not historians or archaeologists with degrees (except in a few cases.)
I'm not going to blink if there is a little fragment of trivia out of place. Particularly as new finds upsets the status quo in social sciences all the time. And particularly since packs of academics don't always agree.

Bad or nonexistent research will kill a story just as fast as a plot with logic gaps, or terrible writing.

I prefer things to be accurate, though give room for use of things like horseshoes if there might be something similar but under a different name (annoying if they keep referring to a "equi solea ferrea" when everything else is in plain English). If I notice, it annoys me. If I do not notice, I get inaccurate information stuffed into my brain. Both situations annoying.

Reminds me of reading books set where I live. In time and location. I down rated one book rather deeply because of the inaccurate description of my home town (ie, Springfield mall food courts do not have televisions!, metro cars seat backs are not hard against the sides of the train (except for two to four next to the door)!, etc.).

76>

I think the more you've read about or researched a period, the more likely you are to spot errors.

I'm sure that's true, not just for history but for any subject -- my science background means I'm a lot more likely to spot scientific errors in SF, for instance, while anything other than the most grotesque historical errors are likely to elude me.

Your example of "rabbits" is an interesting one, in that it's something most authors probably wouldn't even think to check. Horseshoes are obviously technological, and any author writing historical fiction would be remiss if they didn't check to make sure they weren't anachronistic, but rabbits aren't obviously so. (I would hope that it's common knowledge that corn and potatoes and tomatoes and so forth are New World plants, and shouldn't be featured in pre-contact Europe, so that's an exception to the "non-technological changes are easy to miss" idea). I certainly wouldn't have known that rabbits weren't native to the British Isles. (But now I do, and will no doubt notice.)

What do you think about what Jo Walton has called the Tiffany problem -- when a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and in her words "you're right about something but the reader thinks you're wrong anyway." (The specific example refers to the use of "Tiffany" as a medieval name -- according to Walton, as a short form of Theophania it's attested back to the 12th century, but authors who know this still can't use it because readers will think it's wrong.

79: Regarding rabbits etc. - the thing is, the author has to have done enough research to be aware of the potential for a problem. This is not always obvious even if you're writing about the place where you live. Not everyone is aware of the extent to which flora and fauna change over time. In the case of the British Isles, most of what's there moved back in after the last ice age, and before the ensuing sea level rise cut off land access. Hares made it back to Britain and Ireland. Rabbits didn't. Hedgehogs only made to Britain. Rabbits were introduced later. (A good reference for some of this is Reading the Irish Landscape.)

Regarding the "Tiffany problem" - yes, that would be even more frustrating for the author who *had* done their homework! I'm sure I'll meet my own version sooner or later.

(edited for coherence)

I think it's very difficult to generalise about this - we probably all get most worked up about errors that happen to fall within our own particular areas of knowledge and interest. I probably wouldn't have noticed the rabbits, but I do tend to get distracted from my enjoyment of a novel if the writer makes a mistake about something I do happen to have read up on at some point - titles of nobility, for instance. I don't see how an author can deal with that sort of random distribution of expertise, other than by concentrating on being accurate at least in the areas that most readers of this particular book are likely to be knowledgeable about.

I should think the "Tiffany problem" is something you can deal with (and possibly even exploit) as a writer, by planting an explanation in the narrative soon after the problem word first appears. If it's handled well, you could perhaps even make the reader feel guilty about having doubted you!

>81 thorold: we probably all get most worked up about errors that happen to fall within our own particular areas of knowledge and interest.

Errors in botany and natural history (my field of study many years ago) will definitely catch my eye, but I'll give the author some leeway if the topic is sufficiently obscure, from their point of view.

titles of nobility, for instance
This one really bugs me! At the age of 12, reading Georgette Heyer, I was confused enough by the titles to look them up in a reference work. Ever since then, I've noticed authors who mix up the Lady Wimsey/Lady Mary Wimsey/Lady Peter Wimsey distinctions. How someone can write a whole series starring members of the English aristocracy, and get the titles wrong, is something I don't understand.

>82 EveleenM: Titles

Yes exactly - you can forgive an author for not being up on the latest esoteric developments in palaeobotany if that's not directly related to the subject of the book, but to learn how titles are used in Britain would only take a couple of hours of research. Probably less, now that we have this internet thing.

81 > "I think it's very difficult to generalise about this - we probably all get most worked up about errors that happen to fall within our own particular areas of knowledge and interest."

True - as it happens, I would have spotted the rabbits, but might not have noticed problems with titles or horse shoes, and about twenty years back once 'flung with great force' a novel which contained glaring (to me) anachronisms concerning the intricacies of 16th-century clothing.

Had the writing been better, I might have gritted my teeth and continued, but as it was I gave up on the whole thing. (Now that I think of it, another book by a different author, which I read about the same time, had just as glaring a set of clothing errors, but as it was much better written, I merely rolled my eyes and kept going.)

I'm delighted to see this thread. I just completed a work of Historical Fiction called The Raven & the Wolf: Blood Oath, which is set in 10 century Britain. Its a tale of brotherhood rivalry and conflict during the Viking age.

A lot of readers cannot truly appreciate the complexities involved in writing historical fiction. It was especially daunting for me when I undertook the challenge some three years ago. I essentially wrote the book three times when all was said and done. This was owing to me trying to find a style appropriate to the era. I wanted to use the most authentic-sounding 'voice' possible. Avoiding anachronisms was of primary importance to me thus having to research subtle details proved vastly time consuming. I think I came out of it pretty well. But it took 1500 pages, which eventually came out to 460 in the final product.

I'm not a writer, so forgive my ignorance. Is the 1500 pages a different unit of measurement from the 460 final? Manuscript size vs. printed book size? Or is that equal-sized, but edited down that much?

Were you happy with how the editing was done? Are you self-published? (I couldn't find any publishing details on the book in your catalog.)

Have you read the rest of this thread? How does your book fit on the fantasy / historical fiction debate here?

And - Welcome to LibraryThing!

Have really enjoyed reading this thread and all of your different view points. Just wondering what you all think about merging historical fiction with time travel? Although introducing time travel instantly makes it fantasy, the time traveled to might be extremely well researched, creating a very realistic view of that time in history.

This thought comes from reading Diana Gabaldon's Outlander series. Although Claire time travels from the 1940's back to the 1740's, once there, Gabaldon creates a richly realistic Scotland of the past. Do you guys have an opinion on this type of device? How about on Gabaldon's version of historical fiction in general?

I have to admit, I began reading this thread at first because (you guessed it), I wrote a novel about time travel that is extremely historically accurate. I don't want to offend any readers by talking about my work too much, so I'll just say that it's called The Muse of Edouard Manet and the "historic" parts are set in the 1860's & 70's in Paris, France.

I'm more interested in your general thoughts about this hybrid genre though!

I'm generally a straight-up historical fiction reader. Haven't read Diana Gabaldon, though it seems like I've read quite a lot of discussion about that series, maybe in the Historical Fiction group. Sounded interesting. The only book I've tried along that line is Timeline by Michael Crichton, but surprisingly found it to be something that I enjoyed. Your book sounds very interesting, too.

I loved Timeline too and it's been a while since I read it, so maybe I'll take a new look at it soon too. I love re-reading books. It's amazing how many different and new nuances you pick up the 2nd (3rd, 4th...) time around! The Gabaldon series is stunning. I would highly, highly, highly recommend it. I can't imagine how many countless hours that woman has put into painstakingly researching every ounce of what goes into her novels. The historical accuracy and depth of information is utterly astonishing. And although they begin in Scotland, she also makes it around to France, the Caribbean and the Americas throughout the course of the series. I'm still reading her most recent one (An Echo in the Bone -- 7th in the series) and it's smack in the middle of the American Revolution. Very entertaining work!!

>78 MikeBriggs:. It is interesting, and informative, to read something we've actually experienced and see how inaccurate and often misunderstood generally accepted reporting is. It's another thing to contend with concerning historical accuracy, since who knows how accurate the source reportage is?

>86 countrylife:. I'm not sure I understand the question, but I do know that the page length of a published work is two-thirds the length of a manuscript--with 250 words, 12 point type, per page.

To me Diana Gabaldon's Outlander series is way more historical fiction than fantasy the time travel is secondary.
Yes I know its an integral part of the over all story but the historical fiction is so much more important.

I've only read the first in the Outlander series but I was impressed with Gabaldon's historic landscapes. Where most authors take the time travel aspect as going back or forward in time from the present day, I thought it was clever that even the opening of the story was historical fiction.

And I haven't read Timeline but I probably should since I went so far as to see the not-so-good but still somewhat entertaining movie that it was made into.