What Is Historical Fiction?
Quick answer: What is historical fiction? A working definition of fiction set in the researched past, the fifty-year convention, key examples, and how to write it well.
Historical fiction is fiction set in a real past, in which the period is rendered with researched accuracy and genuinely shapes the story. Invented characters may walk beside documented ones, and imagined scenes fill the record's silences, but the world itself, its politics, textures, beliefs and limits, belongs to history. A common working rule places the setting at least fifty years before the book's writing, or beyond the author's own lived experience.
The definition matters because 'set in the past' alone is not enough. A story wearing period costume over modern minds, or one where the year could change without consequence, fails the genre's real test: the past must function as a force in the plot, not as wallpaper behind it.
The longer answer: where the boundaries sit
The fifty-year convention, used by several literary prizes and writers' associations, is a guideline rather than law; the sturdier test is whether the author is reconstructing an era from research rather than memory. A novel written today about the 1990s sits in a grey zone some call recent-historical. The genre also has porous borders: add magic and you have historical fantasy, change a documented outcome and you have alternate history, centre a documented person's inner life and you approach biographical fiction. The pure form keeps the record intact and invents inside its gaps.
Within those walls the range is vast. Historical romance, historical crime (the Cadfael and Maisie Dobbs traditions), naval adventure, literary reconstruction: each imports another genre's spine and dresses it in a specific decade. What unites them is obligation. The reader extends trust that the world is substantially true, and the writer spends research honouring it.
Examples worth studying
Leo Tolstoy's 'War and Peace' (1869) set the standard ambition: fictional families threaded through the documented catastrophe of 1812, with history itself as antagonist. Hilary Mantel's 'Wolf Hall' (2009) renewed the genre's prestige by solving its stalest problem, the famous subject, through radical interiority: Thomas Cromwell in close third person, present tense, the Tudor court felt from inside one watchful mind. Mantel researched exhaustively and then dramatised only where the record fell silent, a method she discussed openly and which repays study.
For range, look at Toni Morrison's 'Beloved' (1987), history carried through haunting rather than chronicle; Patrick O'Brian's Aubrey-Maturin novels, where Napoleonic naval detail becomes character; and Amitav Ghosh's Ibis trilogy, which reconstructs the 1830s opium trade across three continents. Each demonstrates the same trade secret: the period detail that matters is the one that creates or blocks a character's choice.
How to write it: research that serves story
Research in two passes. First wide: histories, letters, diaries, maps, prices, meals, laws, until the era's logic feels inhabitable. Then targeted: the specific facts your scenes demand. Diaries and court records beat textbooks, because they preserve how people explained themselves. Watch especially for period interiority, what your characters would believe about medicine, God, class and marriage, since anachronistic attitudes break the spell faster than anachronistic forks.
Then bury nine tenths of it. The classic failure of the genre is research displayed rather than used; readers feel the index cards. Deliver period through the character's problems: the letter that takes three weeks, the debt that cannot be outrun, the diagnosis that is a death sentence. One precise, load-bearing detail per scene outperforms a costume parade. Write the story a person of that time would recognise as their own life, not a museum tour with dialogue.
Common mistakes
Modern minds in bonnets is the cardinal sin: protagonists who conveniently hold twenty-first century views on everything, sanded free of their era's assumptions. Characters can be ahead of their time, real people were, but the position must cost them something and be reasoned from inside the period. The opposite failure is fetishised accuracy, where the plot stalls so the narrator can explain rope-making. Accuracy is the floor, not the point.
Writers also misjudge dialogue, either full mock-Tudor ('prithee, good sirrah') or jarring modernity. The workable path is clean, slightly formal English salted with period vocabulary the context explains. Finally, check your objects ruthlessly: potatoes in the wrong century and trains before their lines are the errors readers write letters about.
What poets can take from this
- Anchor each scene with one researched detail that changes what a character can do.
- Keep a timeline of documented events beside your plot outline and collide them deliberately.
- Give every protagonist at least one belief you find uncomfortable but the period demands.
- Read a diary from your decade until you can hear its sentences.
- When research and story conflict, cut the scene, not the truth; there is always another scene.
Try it yourself
Pick a documented event you can read about in one evening, a strike, a shipwreck, a coronation, a quarantine. Write the story of someone history would never have recorded: the person holding the door, rowing the boat or washing the linen. Their problem must be one only that year could produce.
Questions
How far back does a story need to be set to count as historical fiction?
The common convention is at least fifty years before the time of writing, or outside the author's lived memory. It is a guideline, not a law; the deeper test is whether the era is reconstructed through research and genuinely shapes the story.
Can historical fiction include real people?
Yes, and it constantly does, from Tolstoy's Napoleon to Mantel's Cromwell. The accepted practice is to keep documented actions intact and invent only in the record's gaps, with living or recently living figures handled far more carefully for both ethical and legal reasons.
What is the difference between historical fiction and historical fantasy?
Historical fiction keeps the real world's rules: no magic, no changed outcomes. Historical fantasy sets invented magic inside a researched period, and alternate history changes a documented event and follows the consequences. All three share the research obligation.
By the Writory editorial team, reviewed by working poets. Updated July 2026.
Enter a Writory poetry contest
Enter the August contest and have your own poem read and scored.