I've always been a bit anal about historical accuracy, no matter what genre is being read or written. However, if a bit of literary license is needed to perk the interest a bit, I'm for that too if it doesn't dwell in the realm of the completely unbelievable. 

Well said.  Historical fiction can stimulate interest into further investigating "history". We all can remember too that many voices of the past have gone undocumented. 

I am loving these responses.  This is exactly how I feel.  Whew, the other discussion I was participating in was brutal.  Since the discussion revolved largely around Tudor stories, I started my response with, "I willingly submit myself to the headsman's block as I defend the other side!"  People were literally heading off to change their novels into history books.

And yep, agreed all around.  I love a novel that makes me think and makes me want to LEARN more about the true history, but I don't trust that everything in the novel IS the true history.

LOL I hadn't thought of that, but I think for the most part you're right :)  Although, the discussion I referred to above I think the issue was I was that there seemed to be a lot of (mostly female) history teachers who were really annoyed at their students quoting "The Other Boleyn Girl" as fact :)

Yes, we are talking fiction. I see it as fiction writers job to use imagination to bring the historical events and time period to life for the reader, to help bridge gaps, omissions, and to elucidate different angles of history.  

Agreed-- the author's note at the end, the disclosure is the key!

I agree with you completely that it's okay to give a real historical character's motivations a new twist, or to add a new and unproven dimension to a relationship to make it more psychologically complex and interesting.  Even professional historians merely conjecture what a historical figure's motives were or what some relationship was really like under the surface.  I also think it's okay to switch around the order of some events in the historical figure's life, or compress a series of events that actually happened over a longer period of time, for the sake of dramatic punch.  But if you do any thinkering with the timeline like that, I think it's a good idea to add an author's note at the end of your novel to explain that you did so.       

I agree Kristen. After all we are talking about fiction. If one is writing about an actual historical event or person as nonfiction, then of course one must be accurate and be able to document their findings. The novel gives a writer the license to "bend" the truth and I'm find with that as long as it is a novel.  One of the best books I read in 2012 was The Secrets of Mary Bowser by Lois Leveen, a historian. She only knew that Mary Bowser after being freed, voluntarily went back into slavery to spy in Confederate Jefferson Davis White House during the Civil War. The way she weaved the story was intertwined with a great many historical occurrences. Yes, we need historical accuracies by why write a novel if you cannot use your imagination?