The focus of this study is to analyze in what way the historical novel can be convincing and if the interaction between fictional and factual narration within this genre influences the degree to which it can be convincing. The three novels chosen are Les Naufragés De L’Île Tromelin by Irène Frain, Les Enfants d’Alexandrie by Françoise Chandernagor and Bison by Patrick Grainville, for which all three authors received Le Grand Prix Palatine. In the introduction are presented the general characteristics of the genre as well as its capability of being convincing, outlining that there is a possibility for a fictional work to seem more convincing than a purely factual one. Also defined are differences between the contemporary and the classical historical novel. This is done in order to take into account in the analysis what might be learnt from the contemporary historical novel. The theoretical framework consists of the semantic definitions of fictional versus factual narration as presented by Jean-Marie Schaeffer, as well as theory of how the reader’s immersive experience enables ontological crossings. What the analysis is able to show is that all three novels include four types of truth claims, that the reader can be convinced of all four and that this conviction is connected to the context to which the reader associates the historical/literary character. The analysis also brings forth what can be thought of as the historiographical pact, a term analogous with Philippe Lejeune’s term ‘the autobiographical pact’, which establishes a referential link with history. What is in the end considered the most convincing literary device is the inclusion of factual markers referencing real-world sources. In all three novels, it is also possibly to identify truth claims concerning human nature.