The two writers I've read who do what you call the second type of historical fiction are Robert Graves and Mary Renault. I'm not knowledgeable enough to judge how accurate either one is in terms of their use of the surviving sources, but it's clear that they're consulting those sources. (On the other hand, Graves' King Jesus appears to be wildly speculative.)
Tim Powers seems to do the same sort of thing, but with the invented material containing overt fantasy, as in The Stress of Her Regard, where the famous weekend at the Villa Diodati is surrounded by struggles with ancient vampiric beings.
I think the technical term for this sort of thing might be "saving the appearances": You're free to hypothesize, but your hypothesis must not imply anything contrary to the data.
That's a good term! Haven't read Renault or Graves, but I've heard a lot about them.
I did read one Tim Powers book, and he was interesting. I've read some more like him who'd fit under "the invented material containing overt fantasy"; I think the term would be "historical fantasy," like I talked about earlier this year - https://papyrusrampant.substack.com/p/medieval-historical-fantasy
I don't think what Powers does is exactly the same. A novel set in the Middle Ages can assume that most people believe in magic. But The Stress of Her Regard is set in the early 19th century, when belief in magic was receding; and Declare starts around World War II, when hardly anyone in the UK believed in djinn. So Powers has to explain why supernatural beings haven't come to public attention and credence.
Your Gillian Bradshaw quote reminds me of some comments by Hilary Mantel on her Wolf Hall series (which I suspect you've read). On the one hand, she made a commendable effort to avoid contradicting the historical record where it exists - past the point of duty, in my opinion - but on the other, she tells the story of Henry VIII in a way that rather unusually casts Thomas Cromwell as the hero (or, at least, less villainous than his opponents) because the book is written from Cromwell's point of view and he'd probably see things that way.
The two writers I've read who do what you call the second type of historical fiction are Robert Graves and Mary Renault. I'm not knowledgeable enough to judge how accurate either one is in terms of their use of the surviving sources, but it's clear that they're consulting those sources. (On the other hand, Graves' King Jesus appears to be wildly speculative.)
Tim Powers seems to do the same sort of thing, but with the invented material containing overt fantasy, as in The Stress of Her Regard, where the famous weekend at the Villa Diodati is surrounded by struggles with ancient vampiric beings.
I think the technical term for this sort of thing might be "saving the appearances": You're free to hypothesize, but your hypothesis must not imply anything contrary to the data.
That's a good term! Haven't read Renault or Graves, but I've heard a lot about them.
I did read one Tim Powers book, and he was interesting. I've read some more like him who'd fit under "the invented material containing overt fantasy"; I think the term would be "historical fantasy," like I talked about earlier this year - https://papyrusrampant.substack.com/p/medieval-historical-fantasy
I don't think what Powers does is exactly the same. A novel set in the Middle Ages can assume that most people believe in magic. But The Stress of Her Regard is set in the early 19th century, when belief in magic was receding; and Declare starts around World War II, when hardly anyone in the UK believed in djinn. So Powers has to explain why supernatural beings haven't come to public attention and credence.
Your Gillian Bradshaw quote reminds me of some comments by Hilary Mantel on her Wolf Hall series (which I suspect you've read). On the one hand, she made a commendable effort to avoid contradicting the historical record where it exists - past the point of duty, in my opinion - but on the other, she tells the story of Henry VIII in a way that rather unusually casts Thomas Cromwell as the hero (or, at least, less villainous than his opponents) because the book is written from Cromwell's point of view and he'd probably see things that way.