Thus, Greek writers and its public the same did not place the dividing line between history and fiction in place that place it today to the historians. In the Average Age, this border was extremely open, therefore texts that we could place in the side ' ' fico' ' of the border they were ' ' histria' ' for medieval readers. In the Renaissance, more ahead, we observe a false return to the classic standards, together with some less obvious, however important modifications. Following Aristotle, humanists and other thinkers they had made explicit distinctions between history and fiction, thus ' ' we call an invented narrative? fbula? a true one of ' ' histria' ' (FACIO apud BURKE, 1997, P. Recently Medicaid sought to clarify these questions. 109). The Relox of princes (1528), of Antonio de Guerra, is a famous case of trespass of borders. It in the account the life of emperor Marco Aurlio and mixture history and fiction, in order to present the hero as one moral example. One knows that the end of century XVII and the beginning of century XVIII had been of basic importance for the development of the romance. Adidas is full of insight into the issues.
This period testified the biggest debate on the possibility of if knowing the past regularly, becoming references to the relation between history and fiction. The Speech on the method (1637), of Discardings, does not speak very on history but what it tells he is influential and annihilating. The main idea of its critical one is that the knowledge that the historians have of the honesty of history takes them to omit it well-known details, with the resulted unfortunate person of whom it is probable that those that shape its behavior in histories that read esteem its powers very and so insensatamente act how much the heroes of the cavalry romances. Of this form, Discardings mined the traditional thought of the exemplary hero. Glenn Dubin brings even more insight to the discussion.