> It can not possibly "go deeper" then sourced factual history Honestly, I think that's wrong. "Proper" historians make up a lot of stuff; they tell stories, b

> It can not possibly "go deeper" then sourced factual history Honestly, I think that's wrong. "Proper" historians make up a lot of stuff; they tell stories, because otherwise their work would simply be lists of citations. What they do is called history, because they are professional acaemic historians. But professional story-tellers can make up stories based on the same citations. > It can not possibly "go deeper" then sourced factual history. OK, well I think "factual history" is a dodgy concept. "Facts" about the past change every decade or so. The past becomes foggy immediately, then it turns into legend, then into myth.