Separating documentarism, fiction, speculation and the "alternative".


Ad Honorem
Jan 2012
Northern part of European lowland
The viewpoint here is separating historical documentarism, fiction, speculative history or alternative history may be a matter of "common sense" and up to discussion. I guess even the most "realist" historians make some guesses sometimes. That historians in general make some assumptions about what happened. Something that they see as most probable course of events. So there may be a small opening up to "fiction". Then when looking at "historical fiction" I find it hard to see there is any "iron curtain" that separates it from fiction in general. Even the "average person" can, in a way, be seen as a figure made up.
And the distinction between "normal fiction" and "alternative" (or "speculative") history may be even much more fluid. Or can anyone here come up with a separation that is usable and above discussion?
Similiar History Discussions History Forum Date
European History

Similar History Discussions