This week over at one of my favorite Internet spots - Romancing The Blog - there was an interesting discussion about the importance of historical accuracy in romances. A Fine and Dandy Problem was posted on the site on October 13th by literary agent Emmanuelle Alspaugh. Check out the post if you can - Ms. Alspaugh used a specific example from one of her clients to highlight the issue and she did a fine job of tossing a meaty bone for blog followers to chase. I chased it and lost on the site, but (cue music) I stand by my stance.
I think historical romance is any romance that takes place in a previous era. In other words, if it's not contemporary, then it's historical. To me, the period of a piece sets the mood. Beyond that, I think details are pretty much fair game. Okay, a Regency novel where the heroine e-mails a friend for advice might be (are you sitting down?) a little over the top even for me. But precise details like whether the railroads ran a specific route, intricate details about heirs to a particular title, the names of places and people -including dukes, earls and the like - can, and often should be created entirely from the mind of the author. I don't care whether women were wearing a particular style during the years of my story - in fact, I don't care that much exactly what anyone was wearing. If I describe a gown in detail, it's because those details will play an important part of the scene. Otherwise, I don't sweat the small stuff.