History vs Literature

The difference between history and literature

The key difference:

History promises to tell the truth.
Literature includes fiction, which by definition is not the truth.

for example:

Kurt Vonnegut's
Mother Night 

Kurt Vonnegut wrote Mother Night based on a real person: an American who lived in Berlin before and during World War II and who did broadcast Nazi propaganda on the radio.
Vonnegut believed that this man was really an American spy, and he wrote his novel to demonstrate the point.
But ... this is the key point ... Vonnegut may have been right or wrong on this matter. His novel does not promise us to be the truth and nothing else.

Fiction has no place in history.
But history can have a place in literature, both fact and fiction.

Main Difference – History vs Literature

History

Literature

History and literature are two important sub-disciplines of Humanities and Social Sciences. In simple terms, the difference between history and literature is that history is the study of the past while literature is the study of the written work. Knowing the difference between history and literature can help a student to choose a subject that is better suited to him.

Content

History deals with information and facts.

Literature mostly deals with fiction, the imagination of the writer, literary devices, etc.

Methodologies

In history, methodologies like source criticism, statistical inference, the arguments from analogy, etc. are used.

In literature, methodologies like reading, decoding, and critical appreciation are used.

Accuracy

In history, the written records are considered as accurate sources.

In literature, written work often contains fiction, and therefore, cannot be considered as accurate sources.