This week on Twitter, a famous historical romance author made the point that there are good reasons authors of historical romance break with convention. She argued authors do so not because they’re lazy or stupid but because they are deliberately making choices they feel better serve the stories they tell. I think she’s right. Authors write what they believe will best tell their specific story. Perhaps that’s why I’m not fussed when titles are wrong or language is off or characters behave in ways that seem at best unlikely. I read romance for plot, character, and believable HEAs . As long as a book has those, I enjoy it.
But I know many of you see this issue differently. And that’s fine. What I’m wondering though is are the examples of historical inaccuracy that work for you? And if so why? And, please, if you can, give specific examples.