My mother started lending me her historical romances when I was twelve, back in ‘75, and I read almost exclusively historicals for about the next twenty years. Even now, they’re one of my favorite subgenres on the het side, having only recently been overtaken by paranormals. (Although the time travel romance, a subgenre closely related to historicals which was incredibly popular for about a decade starting in the mid-eighties, was right up there during its heyday.)
One thing I’ve always noticed, though, is that the historical subgenre limits itself — or most of itself, call it 80-90% of the releases — to a relative few times and places in history. Regency England seems to be still the most popular, despite a bit of grumbling recently. Medieval England or France has always been popular as well, with an occasional Crusades book, usually set partially in England or France and partly in the Holy Land. And American West books, usually mid- to late-19th century, have been pretty steadily popular. And those are pretty much the majority of the subgenre.
The biggest chunk of what’s left goes to slightly longer list of times/places, although with far fewer books in each era than those above. Scottish Clan books — usually set in the 18th century — have a cyclical popularity, as do Viking books, usually set in the mid-Middle Ages. American Civil War books have periods of popularity, and I remember a smallish flurry of War of 1812 books back in the ’80s. Pirate books, again mostly 18th century, although hardly qualifying as historical the way they tend to be treated, have a thread of popularity, sometimes thicker and sometimes thinner. Same with Harem/Sheik books, set in varying eras and with wildly varying standards of accuracy. And Jo Beverley seems to’ve been keeping Georgian England alive pretty much by herself for the last twenty years.
And… that’s pretty much it, really, for the big New York publishers. (The smaller presses are willing to take chances on other settings, which is excellent, but for the majority of romance readers who still get their books from brick-and-mortar bookstores, those small presses might as well not exist yet.) Unless I’m missing something — which I might be, and feel free to chime in in comments if I’ve forgotten anything major — the entire rest of the history of the world clings to a few percentage points of the subgenre.
From my own reading, I remember three books set in ancient Egypt, all by the same writer, and a few books set in 19th century Australia, also all by the same author. A book set in 19th century China, one book set in 19th century Mexico, another 19th century book set partially in England and partially in Poland, and one set in 19th century India. One in pre-conquest Hawaii, either 18th or 19th century, I forget which. A couple set in 18th or 19th century Russia, by the same author. One set in Renaissance Florence and Rome, 15th century IIRC. And one set in ancient Babylon — the Girl was a Sumerian physician and the Guy was a Babylonian soldier, good stuff.
A relatively tiny number of settings, and mostly recent history. (Yes, I consider the 19th century to be “recent;” I was a medievalist, I can’t help it. [grin])
I’ve always wondered why the distribution is so uneven. I’ll admit I love English Regencies and medieval England and France as much as anyone, but there were a lot of other places around Europe where things were happening during the Middle Ages. And how about the Renaissance? That was a incredibly dynamic period with all sorts of things going on, war and peace and invention, trade and conflict and social change, and the Italian states weren’t the only ones to experience it.
How about the ancient world? Ancient Mesopotamia can support more than one story, surely. And how about ancient Greece, ancient Rome, Egypt, Carthage, Timbuktu, Great Zimbabwe? India was interesting well before the British took over, as was China — China’s a huge country encompassing a wide diversity of lands and peoples, and India almost as much so. Korea, Japan, the Southeast Asian patchwork — I don’t know much about that area, but I’d love to read books about those lands, especially if the books were set pre-colonial. I’d also love to see pre-Columbian America used, especially the old city-states and empires, the Aztecs, the Maya, the Olmecs and Toltecs and Inca.
These could be wonderfully rich settings — why aren’t there books set in these places and eras?
I know some settings don’t have a lot of research material; I have a semi-back-burnered project of my own set in pre-Islamic Arabia, and sources in English are few and far between. That can be a problem for some settings, it’s true.
But Renaissance Italy (just as an example) has reams of reference material available in English, and still gets only a token handful of romances. There’s plenty of material on medieval Japan, and early medieval Europe east of France, and Indian history well before the British Raj, just thinking of times/places I took classes on while at university. We had plenty of material to get through, primary as well as secondary, so the lack of romances with these settings doesn’t stem from a lack of research material.
Are the bulk of the historical romance writers just not interested? Are the bulk of the readers just not interested? Is it the publishers who are afraid to take chances with settings which haven’t sold a bazillion books before?
What would you like to see in a historical, that you’ve never seen or have only seen a couple of times? If you could decide what the next Big Popular Setting would be, so you could have a few dozen books set in your favorite time/place, when and where would it be?
No related posts.
Interesting post! I think you just summarized why I don’t really care for historicals. Although all stories have their good points, the historicals I have read all seemed to be the same – a lot of tumbling back through time to England or the American Revolutionary War.
Personally, one thing I would love to see eliminated is the use of historical figures as characters in a book. I’ve read too many stories where George Washington gives more advice than Dr. Ruth!
After a while even the biggest fan starts burning out. [nod] I used to buy Regencies — both the sweet Regencies and Regency Historicals — practically by the cartload, and nowadays it’s rare that I even browse the shelves.
I don’t mind historical figures as supporting characters, but I agree that if you’re seeing the same person over and over and over, it starts getting monotonous.
Angie
Love Historicals and Historical Romance, but don’t even get me started on the limited times and places in which you can set them. Makes me verrrry cranky.
Isn’t it frustrating? [sigh] There’s so much out there that isn’t touched, or which has only had a tiny handful of books in the last thirty years. Historical could be such a vibrant, diverse subgenre, but instead it’s the same ole-same ole. :/
Angie
I love historicals in new settings and eras, but they are hard to find. I noted you mentioned France. I’ve seen so few stories take place there. I would love to see more done with the French Revolution or American Revolution, something in Italy (almost any time) and the same for Greece. Okay, I would like any historical romance that took place almost anywhere but before 1840.
Exactly — it’s so hard to find anything new and different, out of the whole sweep of world history. [nod] There could be so much variety but there’s not and it’s frustrating.
Wendy A above said she’s read too many books set during the American Revolution — maybe you should get a list from her?
Angie
I don’t think it’s that writers aren’t interested in writing them. I love just about anything set in ancient Egypt or ancient Rome, and I’d happily write in that time-period. But what’s the market for it? Enough to justify the huge investment of research time?
I get that there are business issues here, especially with historicals where it takes a lot of time and effort to build up your initial base of research. But if no one’s willing to take that chance, the fears become self-fulfilling. When what’s available on the shelf, setting-wise, shrinks down to just a few options, even the most devoted historical reader [waves hand] will eventually get bored and wander away.
Also, we can look at those settings in other media for some hints. Gladiator was a huge hit with the general public, as was the cable mini-series Rome. That says to me that there is a market for stories set in ancient Rome. Troy and The 300 both made a nice chunk of change despite critical snarking, so there seems to be an audience for stories set in ancient Greece. And there are still people who tune in for Charlton Heston’s old sword-and-sandals movies, despite the fact that they’ve been running every year for longer than I’ve been alive.
I know movie and book audiences don’t translate 100%, but surely that’s at least an indication of where interest may lie?
Angie
You’re preaching to the choir on this one, my friend. I was just offered a two-book deal by Berkley for my series set in Ancient Egypt, Rome, Numidia and Mauretania. It’s more on the historical fantasy side than the straight-up romance side, but I’m hoping that there will be cross-over interest.
Awesome.
Let us know when they come out? Even historical fantasy is cool, especially when it’s something besides the standard fantasy-medieval-England setting. Luck!
Angie
There’s such a prevalent idea among editors and agents that non-Regency-set historicals are a hard sell. Maybe this is backed up my sales data and maybe it isn’t, but you’re right, there’s a ton of untapped potential out there.
I’m personally a huge sucker for the WWII era; so much drama and romance implicit in that struggle, and so many true tales of heroism to draw from! I would LOVE to read romances set then (whole books devoted to the subplots from Suzanne Brockmann’s early Troubleshooter novels would be just fine by me) and if anyone knows of any, I’d be thrilled to hear about them!
There’s a lot of interest in WWII, so yes, I would think there’d be a market for romances set in that era. [nod]
As I said to Stephanie right above, I get the fear of putting all that time and effort into a book and then having it not sell, but when that fear is controlling the subgenre as a whole, it becomes self-fulfilling. Historicals used to be the number one subgenre among single-title romances, but they’ve lost that spot to paranormal, and I think part of the reason is that there’s just not as much variety in historicals. After a while, even a dedicated fan is going to say, “Okay, enough,” when it’s all the same stuff.
Angie
Try english authors if you want WW2 books. There are LOTS. It seems a very popular subject over here as well as pluckly factory girls (19th century, early 20th). In fact that is why I started to read US authors as I got fed up both types!
Helen — it’s good to know there are different eras coming out of different countries. I’m wondering now whether Canada, Australia and New Zealand publishers have different settings too? [ponder]
Angie
I’ve never been a huge fan of historicals, but this year for National Novel Writing Month, I wrote one. It’s the story of my ancestors who emigrated from France to Quebec in the mid-1600’s. The research was interesting, and really helped bring my ancestors to life for me. I’m still not a fan, but the tide just may be turning for me.
Congrats! and best of luck on selling your book! I’ll keep a set of virtual fingers crossed for you.
Angie
I grew up in the age of the great TV westerns and the first historicals I read were all set in the American west. I still love that era. It was the time when women were winning their rights. Women brought civilization to that part of the country by insisting on schools, churches and doctors being priorities in their settlements. It’s much easier to accept the strong woman heroine in that setting than many other historical eras when women were treated like second class citizens with few rights and options in employment or even marriage choices.
But I would love to read more historicals set in Austrailia or perhaps South America.
I remember reading that some of the frontier states granted women the vote specifically to draw more women to immigrate. [nod] That could definitely be a fertile area.
For Australian historicals, dig around in Linda Lael Miller’s older books. She had half a dozen or so, IIRC, set in frontier Australia. It’s not my favorite setting and I wouldn’t have even tried them if she hadn’t been one of my favorite authors at the time, but I enjoyed them a lot more than I expected.
Angie
I think – and I may be wrong – that part of it is about familiarity for readers. As readers, we’re pretty familiar with these popular settings. We know what a heroine means when she gushes about her new spencer, understand why a rakehell hero isn’t fond of Almack’s, and know what’s up with the whole permission-to-waltz thing. Medievals? Well, our knowledge may not be as extensive, but we have a general idea of what’s going on. Same with Westerns. Because you can expect your readers to have some understanding of these time periods, you don’t have to explain stuff as much, and can focus more on your characters than on making the world clear to your reader. Your reader already knows what to expect and doesn’t need extra info. One of the most common complaints I’ve heard about fantasy is that sometimes it’s hard to understand the world the author has built. Maybe part of the reluctance to use new settings is the historical equivalent of this.
I’m sure that’s an issue, but in my view it’s the author’s job to make things clear and understandable for the reader, whether one is writing a historical or a fantasy or just a contemporary set in an area of the US I’m unfamiliar with. If some significant number of readers have to stop and page back to look something up, or stop and go, “Wait, what?” at any point, that’s an issue with how the book is crafted.
And if the book — the characters, the story — clicks with readers, unfamiliarity isn’t going to be an issue. Consider how popular JR Ward’s Black Dagger Brotherhood books are, despite having (and ho-boy, needing) a glossary in each book to keep track of all the new and creative vocabulary and concepts she’s invented to support her universe. If hordes of readers are willing to learn ten pages of new vocabulary and concepts from scratch to enjoy a made up fantasy world, then surely there’d be a nice sized audience willing to learn a few things about an actual time and place in history in order to enjoy a good romance. I would think so, anyway. [wry smile] I hope so. Because if not, then I can see historicals continuing their downward slide in popularity until they’re sharing a half-shelf with inspirationals.
Angie
Anything before yesterday.
LOL! See, here’s a reader who’s incredibly easy to please. It’s not that hard.
Angie
Minnette Meador writes some terrific books set in Roman Britannia (ca. 60AD). You can find her work at Amazon
The Centurion And The Queen
and
The Edge Of Honor
I don’t think I’ve ever seen any romances in that setting — thanks for the rec!
Angie
Sergeanne Golon’s Angelique series. Travelled around the world of the 18th Century. Provence, to Paris to the Barbary Coast and into the New World.
I’d love to see those reprinted.
You know, there were a few popular series from the seventies where the action “swept” across continents, with Our Heroine making stops everywhere from Moscow to Atlanta to the Yukon. [nod] Valerie Sherwood wrote a lot of those too, if I’m remembering the name correctly.
I don’t know whether modern readers would care for them, though. They were written in the heart of the rape era, one, and two, the protag tended to have sex with multiple guys before settling down with her True Love, who often turned out to have been the first one who raped her. [cough] But yes, there was definitely a variety of setting here. Not era, though; IIRC, they were all mid- to late-19th century. Still, it’s something.
Angie
I’d like to read more books with heroes and heroines who aren’t nobility or even gentry, for that matter. When I do find books about more ordinary people (Carla Kelly has a couple along these lines), they’re like gold to me.
Those are rare too, definitely. [nod] Every now and then you’ll get a My Fair Lady type of story, about a maid or something like that, but yes, usually both characters are nobility, or at least gentry. And even if they don’t seem so at the beginning, it turns out they’re Lord So-and-so’s bastard or something like that. And half the time that turns out to have been his Lordship’s true marriage, and they dig up the mother’s marriage lines at the last minute. [wry smile]
Helen up in 5.1.1 mentioned that English publishers have more “plucky shop girl” type characters; you might poke around in that area and see what you can find.
Angie
I think Canada is vastly underrepresented.
Very true. [nod] In the books I mentioned in a comment above where the Girl ended up in the Yukon during the gold rush there — I think there might’ve been two, although I specifically remember at least one — they seem to have bypassed Canada on the way. [wry smile] I know almost nothing about Canadian history and would love to read some books set in Canada.
Heck, the TV show Due South had (and still has, I think, despite having been cancelled a few years back) a thriving fandom full of people writing fanfic about it, and particularly the Mountie character, whose name I forget right now. But there’s definitely an audience willing to embrace a Canadian character and institution; it’s just a matter of getting a book or three published, and then letting that audience know about it.
Angie
This is such an interesting discussion, Angela. Like Stephanie, I’ve recently been offered a two book deal from Berkley Heat for my 1st century Roman set historicals. I’m so pleased Berkley are willing to look at more unusual time periods!
Congrats Christina!
It sounds like someone on the New York side has decided that Ancient Rome is the next big setting, or at least is willing to give it a shot. I’ll keep a set of virtual fingers crossed and hope it sells well. Maybe they’ll keep it, and expand further. That’d be awesome. 
Angie
Thanks, Angie!
Welcome!
Angie
What a wonderful post! I agree that it would be lovely to see more historicals set in different time periods. I do love the Regencies, though. With the social constraints and excesses of the time, it’s simply well-suited for great romances.
I received a wonderful novel called HIS FORBIDDEN PRINCESS set in ancient Wales (then called Cymru) over the summer and sold the book in September. The author’s name is Christina Phillips and the story takes place during a Roman invasion of druid territory.
Right, the English Regency is my favorite single setting too. [nod] I just wish there were more options out there. It’s like, chocolate is my favorite dessert-type flavor, but I also love apple pie and creme brulee and pecan ice cream, and cetera.
Angie
OMG, I didn’t even realize you’d posted, Christina! Silly me!
Hee, I’ve done that too. [grin] No prob; if a book is really good, I’d rather get two recs than none.
Angie
Hi, I’m new here and fascinated by the topic! I love WWII romances and have read some British authors, also the American West and Colonial era.
I tried to write romances about 20 years ago and loved it. It was a lot of fun but other responsibilities interfered-like making a living-lol.
Do you think if someone (a new author) wrote a book in an era that publishers felt wasn’t as popular, that they’d take a chance on it? Maybe the reason certain eras are ignored isn’t that authors are interested in writing and readers aren’t interested in reading, but that publishers won’t take a chance on them?
Joan — honestly, I think it depends what you’re writing and whom you’re submitting it to. And of course, it always depends on the editor and publisher; you never know when someone’s going to decide they want to try X, and if that’s what you put in the mail the next day, there you go.
In general, though, from what I’ve heard, the big NY publishers are definitely less willing to try the iffier (from their POV) books from an unknown writer. I’ve heard from a number of writers how they wrote really innovative books, or books like what we’ve been talking about, with a less popular setting (or plot or gimmick or character type or whatever) and they kept bouncing, but that after they’d sold one or two more conventional romances and had them do well, their publisher was more willing to consider something farther outside the box.
Now, if you’re willing to look beyond New York, the small presses are much more flexible; I’ve seen a lot of little-used settings with the small presses, which is why I specified the big New York presses for the column, particularly since New York is still ninety-some percent of the romance market.
If you’re willing to consider a small press, though, you’d need to do a lot of research and figure out which ones fit you, and fit what you’re writing. A lot of the major names in the small presses are specifically erotic romance houses, for example, so the plot of your book would need to (smoothly) incorporate quite a lot of sex, and probably some variation in activities.
I just got an acceptance on a novel with only about 1.5 sex scenes, but it’s m/m and my publisher, which specializes in GLBT, is incredibly flexible in what they take so far as heat level and all goes. (Which is one of the main reasons I’m with them, despite the fact that some other publishers sell better.) If you can write m/m, or even m/m/f, there are that many more options.
If you have your heart set on getting an agent and selling to a New York house, though, then yeah, I’d have to say that your best bet is to write something more conventional, and maybe two or three somethings, and (assuming they sell well) proposing the more out-there books you really want to write, once you have a track record.
And about your last question, my guess is that it’s much more about the publishers than the readers, and that the writers are somewhere in between. Especially with a historical, you’re talking about a lot of research if you’re going to do it right; I’ve heard from historical romance writers that they’ll put two years or more into researching a new-to-them setting. That’s why they tend to stick with a single setting for at least a few books if they can, and often a lot — once you’ve done your initial research, invested that year or two or three, subsequent books in the same setting will take much less research. So it’s like your later books are going back and making use of that initial research, spreading the cost out over a number of books, as it were.
So from the POV of the writers, as someone said upstream, it takes a lot of confidence for a writer to make that investment. What if you spend that two years researching and then find out that no one wants books with that setting? That’s a lot of wasted time, and I can understand someone being hesitant.
At the same time, though, I honestly think that part of the reason historicals have shrunk down to an also-ran from their previous spot as queen of the romances is because there’s that much less variety. Readers will always have their favorites, but most people are eventually going to get tired of the same old thing, if that’s all they get. Take the English Regencies out and what’s left? Take the American Frontier era books out and now how much is left? Now kill the medievals — how many shelves is the bookstore going to need for the historicals, once the big three are gone?
It’s definitely a gamble, especially with the big publishers being as conservative as they are these days, but I really think historicals as a subgenre needs to have a body of writers who are willing to take that gamble, to keep fresh material flowing in and keep interest up.
It’s not going to work for everyone — you always know the pioneers ’cause they’re the ones with the arrows in their backs — but someone has to break new territory, or the genre’s going to stagnate.
Angie