Author Liana De la Rosa surprised her fans in the December edition of her newsletter. Apart from her cover reveal for the final book in her historical romance trilogy, the Luna Sisters, she announced that the novel “will probably be the last historical romance I write for a while.” She explained that editorial houses have shifted away from acquiring historical romances and that to continue her career with a big publisher, she “would need to pivot to something new.” It’s a dramatic shift from just three years ago, when Berkley (Penguin Random House) acquired De la Rosa’s series, which follows three wealthy Mexican sisters falling in love in 1860s London, after just 36 hours on submission.
De la Rosa is one of several prominent historical romance writers who have stepped away from the once-popular subgenre over the past year. Harper St. George, author of multiple series set in the Gilded Age, said on Threads late last year that her publisher declined to buy more books, even though her novels had earned out their advances. Amalie Howard and Elizabeth Everett shared similar stories of being told to pivot to other subgenres. Even Sarah MacLean, a New York Times bestseller and co-host of the popular Fated Mates podcast, has taken a step away from historical romance. She’ll publish her first contemporary novel, These Summer Storms, in July.
Agent Kevan Lyon, who represents a number of authors in the subgenre, says historical romance “has in the past year or two years gone through definitely a softer period, which is disappointing, because I love a good historical romance.” Despite Netflix’s blockbuster Bridgerton adaptation and the BookTok-fueled romance boom, historical romance, long a mainstay of the genre, may be on its way out—for now.
Publishing deal data underscores the authors’ anecdotes. Of the more than 80 romances acquired by leading publishers Avon, Berkley, Canary Street, Forever, Kensington, St. Martin’s, and Sourcebooks in 2024, just seven were historicals, according to Publishers Marketplace deal reports. (However, Harlequin Historical and Dragonblade Publishing, a boutique publisher founded by medieval romance author Kathryn Le Veque, continue to acquire historical romances.)
Two of the seven novels acquired recently by publishers aren’t even traditional historical romances. Avon bought an Outlander-style time-travel romance from Kate Bromley, and Kensington purchased Amy Rose Bennett’s The Nanny’s Handbook to Magic and Managing Difficult Dukes. Already this year, Mimi Matthews sold a Victorian-era novel featuring a witch, a departure from her typical historical romances.
“Adding a twist, or a hook as we call it in publishing, like a magical element is a plus,” Lyon, who represents Bromley, said. “It’s something that sets the book apart and gives something that publishers can really hang a marketing plan on and distinguish the book from the pack.” Lyon added that she’s advising clients who write historical romance to try something new if they want to sell another book to a top publishing house. “In some cases, it’s super exciting for them, sometimes it’s daunting, but in general, most of the clients I’ve talked about doing a pivot with, they’re excited about it,” she said.
Authors and agents point to several reasons for the shift away from historical romance, ranging from cyclical interests to changing reader sensibilities. Lyon said that over her career, she’s watched multiple subgenres, such as paranormal or romcoms, surge in popularity only to wane again. She also said the switch in formats from mass market paperback to trade paperback has driven readers away. As retail outlets such as Barnes & Noble, Target, and Walmart cut back the space they allocate to mass market paperbacks, editorial houses have started publishing historical romances, such as De la Rosa’s, in the trade paperback format.
“Many historical authors have successfully moved to trade paperback, but it is a higher price point,” Lyon said. “So, the move to trade paperback has not worked as successfully for everybody, and I think that that has narrowed the field for historical romance.”
Adrianna Herrera, who has written both contemporary and historical romances, echoed Lyon’s thoughts on the mass market paperback and added that publishers’ “risk averseness” has played a critical role in the decline of the historical.
“At some point, it did become a little bit difficult to not point out the fact that these books were being written about these people who became very wealthy because of slavery and the exploitation of other people,” she said. “People started dismissing historical as out of touch.”
In recent years, authors such as De la Rosa and Herrera, as well as MacLean and Joanna Shupe, have directly addressed slavery, racism, queerness, and economic exploitation in their books. For Herrera and others, it’s frustrating to see publishing move away from historicals just as authors of color and queer writers were getting a chance to put their spin on the genre.
Genre watchers expected Netflix’s premiere of Bridgerton at the end of 2020 to drive interest in historical romance books. De la Rosa said the show’s success with a diverse cast was one of the reasons Berkley was so interested in her series. But the increase in sales after the show’s premier quickly petered out. “It could have just been people wanted to buy the Bridgerton novels only, and they weren’t really venturing far afield,” she said.
Herrera posited that readers looking for the diverse set of characters and modern sensibilities of the show didn’t fall in love with the two-decade-old books. She also criticized publishers for not meeting the moment. “They could have made a really big splash with a banner in Times Square with [Lisa Kleypas’s] Ravenels on it or [Sarah MacLean’s] Bareknuckle Bastards,” she said. “They should have had three or four diverse historicals come out with fresh, new authors. All of that could have happened, and they didn’t do it.”
Bottom line: As to where the historical romance goes from here, MacLean suggested it could shift to indie publishing, posting to Threads, “Historical readers, we know you’re out there. We see you. And we know you are eager for books. Historical isn’t dead. It’s just moving to indie. And it’s going to thrive over there.”
Lyon said she expects historical romance will have another moment of popularity in the future. She compared it to the paranormal romance market. “Twelve, thirteen years ago it was huge. We couldn’t get enough of it, and then it faded into oblivion. Now, it’s back,” she said. “Similarly, I’ve seen in my career that interest in historical romance wanes and then grows again. It never goes away completely, because there’s readers like us that are out there and absolutely love it.”
Elizabeth Held is a writer living in Washington, DC. She writes the weekly book recommendation newsletter What To Read If and co-moderates East City Bookshop’s Really Reading Romance book club.
Elizabeth Held is a writer and romance reader in Washington, D.C. She writes a weekly book recommendation newsletter and runs East City Bookshop’s romance book club.
