Historical novels give us the opportunity to travel back in time. And although everyone knows that the basis for the narrative is mostly the author’s fiction, we easily close our eyes to the fact that somewhere the facts are not entirely true, but somewhere they are obviously fabricated. After all, it is much more interesting to follow an exciting plot than to look for mistakes. In an ideal world, this is often not the case at all.
Conventionally, the first historical novels can be called works about Alexander the Great and the Trojan War. They were written at the very beginning of our era and became widespread in the Middle Ages.
The truly “canon” of the historical novel was formed and developed by Walter Scott. His works remain the standard of the genre, and he is its main representative. The graceful interweaving of fact and fiction, romanticism and realism made him a real star. Walter Scott‘s novels aroused the interest of the general reader in the study of history, and also contributed to the romanticization of the Middle Ages.
Difference between a historical novel and other fiction
The most important difference between a historical novel and other fiction is the timing of the action. The narration can take place in any era in whole or in part. And the era itself can be either completely far from the present, or be closer to the present. The second important feature of the genre: the interweaving of the author’s fiction and historical accuracy. Often real personalities and events go side by side with fictional ones.
It is the presence of factual data that makes the book especially interesting. It allows you to better feel the era, inspires confidence and allows you to immerse yourself in the world of the work. Description of everyday life and clothes, specific events against which the plot unfolds, the characters and actions of those heroes who have a real prototype – all this allows the author to create an incredible atmosphere that readers like so much.
Over time, there has been a tendency to complicate the plot and the depth of its elaboration. Both writers and readers were not enough just heroes in knightly armor, they needed historical accuracy. The authors sometimes spent years in preliminary research. Traveled to another country, learned new languages and read sources in the original in order to write, it would seem, not a scientific work. Umberto Eco described the preparatory process for writing “Islands on the Eve” as follows:
Preparing for the creation of “The Island of the Eve”, I really went on a journey to the South Seas, to the very geographical point where the novel takes place, in order to see with my own eyes what color the water and the sky are at different times of the day, what fish and corals look like. in their natural habitat. In addition, I spent two or three years studying the drawings and diagrams of ships of that era, in order to know for sure what size the wheelhouse or cockpit was and how to get from one to the second.
But Eco was first and foremost a scientist, so we can say that the passion for such a long collection of material was his professional trait. But Lyon Feuchtwanger, a recognized classic of the historical novel, was primarily a writer, although he also spent a long time preparing to work on his works. He collected materials for the novel “Success” in prisons, and in his trilogy about Josephus. It is clearly noticeable that he was familiar with the works of Flavius himself, who lived in the first century AD, firsthand.
Such a deep elaboration of the plot makes the story incredibly realistic. Indeed, many books by the same Feuchtwanger, Eco, Senkevich and many others are filled with reliable facts and can be a good help for studying history. Still, fiction should remain a form of art. Where the inner world of the author and his ideas, writing style and a unique vision of the world, which attracts readers, are in the foreground.
Historical prose as a reliable document
It is not at all surprising that the audience often perceives historical prose as a reliable document supplemented with dialogues and details, which can even be referred to in an abstract or scientific article. But this way of thinking is harmful and unfair. Conflict ensues when readers present a novel with demands and a degree of credibility that are more appropriate for a serious monograph or dissertation. Dan Brown suffered the most. Although the Da Vinci Code is a very partial historical novel, it still contains a fairly extensive “historical reference”. The book again raised a wave of interest in the conspiracy theory about the cunning connection of the Templars, the Holy Grail, Leonardo da Vinci and the most important events of the New Testament. Many considered it dubious long before the publication of the work, but nevertheless.
It never excited the minds of the masses so much and was considered quite harmless in the scientific community. But now the number of those who believe in what is written in the novel has increased dramatically. This was facilitated by the author himself, who stated that the historical part is based solely on facts. The work was severely criticized for a lot of inaccuracies, Brown was accused of slander and blasphemy. The number of lawsuits was overwhelming. This did not affect the popularity of the work in any way, but it certainly caused a lot of trouble. And although Brown himself was largely the cause of his headache, nevertheless, such attention to the details of an obviously massive work, which is primarily entertaining in nature, suggests that once again it would not be superfluous to link to the source in his novel.
But is it fair? Should you be so scrupulous about the historical accuracy, or is it better to just read and enjoy? On the one hand, such a reverent attitude to facts on the part of the reader makes the author more responsible. But is there a place in fiction for such a harsh test? What can you close your eyes to, and what exactly cannot be allowed? There are many questions, but it is difficult to give an unambiguous answer. Someone will say that such details are paid attention to when the language of the book is poor, and the plot is not the most original. That is, if the artistic value is low, then all the flaws and doubtful facts come to the fore. But if we are to give an assessment of the reliability, then to present the same requirements to all. But who will determine them and whether they are needed is the most important thing. Still, a work of fiction is not a textbook. What do you think?
