Historical fiction punishes certainty. You can spend three months reading about Wensleydale sheep and still be undone by a Regency heroine who pulls a box of matches from her reticule. Research isn't the problem. The problem is what we do with it afterwards. The mistakes below turn up again and again in British historical fiction, from debut manuscripts to long-running series, and each one has a fix that costs less time than the error will.
Anachronism: It's Almost Never the Big Things
Nobody gets the Battle of Trafalgar wrong. They get the teaspoons wrong. Readers will accept a slightly hazy grasp of foreign policy and then trip over a character who refers to a "weekend", drinks a cup of tea in a fifteenth-century farmhouse, or pays for a pint with a decimal coin.
Three categories catch most writers out:
- Objects and technology. Matches, gas lighting, railways, tinned food, anaesthetics, ballpoint pens, watches worn on the wrist. Each arrived at a specific moment and spread unevenly — London first, the provinces later, the Highlands later still.
- Money. Britain used pounds, shillings and pence until decimalisation in 1971. Sums, wages and prices need to come from your period's own records, not from a modern equivalent you half-remember.
- Attitudes. Harder to police, and more damaging when you get them wrong in either direction. A character who holds twenty-first-century views without any of the friction those views would have caused is as false as a Tudor lord with a wristwatch.
Keep a running document titled "Not Yet". Every time you catch yourself wondering whether something existed in your year, note it there with the date you checked and the source. It becomes a timeline of firsts, and it stops you repeating the same search in six months.
Language Without the Costume Drama
Period dialogue fails in two directions. The first is modern idiom: "I need some headspace", "let's touch base", "no worries". The second is fake-archaic padding — prithee, zounds, forsooth — which reads as pantomime rather than history.
The fix is rhythm, not vocabulary. Read letters, diaries, depositions and newspaper reports from your period and notice how sentences are built: where the clauses land, how people hedge, boast, apologise and insult. Then use a light touch. A few period words placed accurately will do more than a page of thee-ing and thou-ing, especially since thou was the informal singular and had largely fallen out of standard southern speech by the eighteenth century.
If a period detail only matters to you, it probably doesn't belong on the page.
The Info-Dump: When Research Waves at the Reader
The tell-tale sign is a paragraph that pauses the story to explain something the characters already know. Two farmers discussing the enclosure of common land for the benefit of the reader. A maid admiring the new kitchen range in unnecessary technical detail.
Three reliable repairs:
- Put it in an argument. People explain what they care about when they are trying to win something. Let a character be wrong about a fact, and let another correct them.
- Let someone misunderstand. A child, a stranger or an outsider can notice a detail without lecturing us about it.
- Allow one detail per scene. Choose the one that carries the most weight and cut the rest. Save the others for later chapters.
If you have written a beautiful 600-word passage about smock-frocks, that is not wasted work. It is research. Put it in your notes, not the manuscript.
Sources That Are Arguing With You
Every surviving document was kept by someone, for a reason. Estate accounts, parish registers, court depositions and newspaper reports skew towards the propertied, the literate and the scandalous. Memoirs were written decades later with reputations to protect. Newspapers had proprietors and prejudices.
Questions to ask of any source
- Who wrote this, and who paid them?
- Who is not speaking, and why not?
- What would this writer gain from the version they have given?
- What does the document assume the reader already knows?
- Does a second, independent source tell the same story?
Modern histories need the same scrutiny. Older scholarship often carries the assumptions of its own decade, and popular histories sometimes repeat each other without returning to the archive. Check the notes. If a striking claim has no citation, treat it as a lead, not a fact. For anything touching on legal or medical matters in your period, keep your period detail general enough to be accurate rather than specific enough to be wrong.
A Working Checklist
- Fix your year and your location precisely, then build a "Not Yet" list of technologies, objects and words.
- Check every coin, wage and price against a period source rather than a modern conversion.
- Read at least two pieces of writing actually produced in your period — letters, trials, sermons, journalism.
- Mark any passage where the narrative stops to teach. Rewrite it as conflict, or cut it.
- Trace your three most important facts back to a primary or well-cited secondary source.
- Ask a knowledgeable reader to hunt specifically for anachronisms rather than to comment on plot.
- Keep a research file separate from the draft, and let it grow without guilt.
Knowing When to Stop
Research is the most comfortable part of writing a novel, because it always feels like progress. It isn't, once you have enough to write the scene in front of you. Set a rule: when a question can be answered in ten minutes, answer it; when it takes longer, write the scene with a placeholder and move on.
Accuracy matters, but it serves the story rather than replacing it. The reader wants to believe they are in 1798 or 1911, and that belief comes from a hundred small, confident details used sparingly — not from a bibliography wearing a plot as a disguise. Get the essentials right, stay curious about the rest, and let your characters get on with the business of living.
Photo: Ylanite / Pixabay