This paper focuses on the influence that an almost unknown Afrikaans novel, Mlungu Mungoma by Oswald Pirow, (published in 1949) had on aspects regarding characterisation and plot in the popular historical novel Vuur op die horison by Engela van Rooyen (2000). The connection between these two novels and the questions that are raised concerning certain characteristics of the historical novel - more specifically the popular historical novel as opposed to clearly postmodern novels - is investigated. The principal problem statement is the following : in what way or ways do authors of popular historical novels (and in this instance Van Rooyen in particular) give recognition to and admit indebtedness to a text or texts that were used as sources - either as sources of inspiration (which is the case here) or for the historical presentation of the novel? Questions that the author addresses are the following: What is the nature of the historical novel - how can it be characterised and distinguished from other kinds of fiction? Does the popular novel show an awareness of the complex relation between historiography and fiction? Is there an existing convention regarding the use and recognition of sources in the (late twentieth, early twenty first century) popular historical novel? The author argues that the delicate balance between text and source should perhaps be admitted by authors of popular novels, even though the self-conscious way in which postmodern fiction approaches this relationship is absent from typical popular fiction discourse.
In die artikel word gekonsentreer op die invloed wat uitgeoefen is deur die haas onbekende roman Mlungu Mungoma deur Oswald Pirow (in 1949 gepubliseer) op die historiese roman Vuur op die horison deur Engela van Rooyen (2000). As sentrale vraagstelling geld die volgende: hoe doen outeurs van historiese romans (en hier Van Rooyen in die besonder) verantwoording van en betuig hulle hulle skatpligtigheid teenoor tekste wat as bronne in die roman gedien het - óf as inspirasiebron (wat hier die geval blyk te wees) óf ter wille van die waarheidsgetroue historiese inkleding van die roman? Vrae wat gestel word, is die volgende: Wat is die aard van die historiese roman - hoe kan dit getipeer en van ander fiksie afgegrens word? Word die verhouding tussen geskiedskrywing en fiksie in die populêre historiese roman geproblematiseer? Is daar sprake van 'n konvensie rakende brongebruik en -erkenning in die (laattwintigste-eeuse, vroeg-een-en-twintigste-eeuse) historiese roman? Die onderskeid tussen historiografie en fiksie word kortliks bespreek voordat die twee romans vergelyk word. Laastens toon die outeur aan dat die delikate balans tussen teks en bronteks miskien duideliker aangedui kan word deur outeurs van populêre historiese fiksie, selfs al word dié saak nie op die selfbewuste wyse as in postmodernistiese fiksie gehanteer nie.
