Is the Netflix romance series more rooted in fact or fiction?

Bridgerton is among Netflix’s most popular shows. The romance series primarily follows the large Bridgerton family as they fall in love and navigate the complexities of their social class in the early 19th century. With elegant costumes and classic love stories, it’s no surprise that Bridgerton has caught the attention of the masses, but it’s important to remember that, although the series is set in the Regency era, the history is loose, to say the least. Even the prequel series, Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story, which centers on Queen Charlotte (Golda Rosheuvel and India Amarteifio) and King George (James Fleet and Corey Mylchreest) who were real monarchs, does not strive for perfect accuracy. The franchise, as a whole, takes an alternative approach to the era, imagining a much more inclusive upper class. But despite some purely fictional characters and events, other elements in the series are rooted in fact.

The series itself is based on the novels by Julia Quinn, adding a layer of separation from any historical roots. Quinn’s series, like most Regency-era romance stories, was inspired by author Georgette Heyer‘s version of the Regency era, which was not entirely accurate in itself. With even the novels removed from the history of the period, it shouldn’t be a surprise that there are more than a few things that are not fact. Though Bridgerton never claims to be a documentary by any stretch of the imagination, historians have acknowledged the factual truths at its center.

‘Bridgerton’ Never Claims Perfect Accuracy

Bridgerton has always included elements that are instant proof of its fictional roots. For starters, very few of its characters are pulled from history, with the royal family being the only example of that, and even these characters have intentional changes. Of course, the series includes others based on historical figures but not directly representing them. Yet the vast majority of the characters are the inventions of Quinn, with no historical connections. This isn’t abnormal for such shows, but it is important to acknowledge that historical characters are the exception in this series.

Even looking at Bridgerton‘s general premise, the inaccuracies are blatant. The series features Lords and Ladies of all races, operating under the idea of a Black Queen Charlotte, who ushered in a more diverse upper class with her marriage to King George. This, of course, never happened, and the years in the series are only shortly after the slave trade was outlawed in Britain and before it ended in Britain’s many colonies. However, this explanation allows the series to cast talented actors regardless of their race. The other rather obvious inaccuracy in Bridgerton is the music, which uses orchestral arrangements of current hits rather than time-period-appropriate music. While the anachronistic nature of the soundtrack has no impact on the story, it’s worth noting as it demonstrates the many ways Bridgerton rejects history to do something different.

The Look of ‘Bridgerton’ Is Largely Realistic

While the series has some inaccuracies, the beautiful dresses are not among them. Dr. Lizzie Rogers told People that the empirical waisted gowns with square necklines that are so prevalent in the series were certainly popular, and even the Queen’s fuller skirts are accurate too, as the real Queen Charlotte was known to favor more traditional fashions. Though the fabrics and designs are more elaborate than historical fashions, the silhouettes are true to the era, which is an interesting division, providing the audience with stunning costumes that still seem real.

However, Bridgeron‘s fashion mkes one significant change by cutting out hairpieces. While the hairstyles are otherwise accurate, according to Rogers, women of the era would almost always wear a bonnet. Yet, again, there is an element of truth in there as the series uses hairstyle to convey age, specifically showing which young women are out in society and which are not — for example, the different styles of Eloise’s (Claudia Jessie) hair in Season 1 versus Seasons 2 and 3. In a society so caught up with appearances, fashion is a significant part of the series, and the designers were largely true to history as they created these beautiful visuals.

But the visual accuracy doesn’t stop there. Another lovely aspect of the series that is real is the sets. The houses of the central families are filled with art and ornate furniture, which Rogers identifies as accurate for the upper-class family of the time: “That was really important to … show your wealth [and] your social standing.” Rogers also praises the color palate, specifically the Bridgerton blues, stating that pastels were popular among this social class. These details make it easy to get lost in the consistent and beautiful world the series creates, and the visual accuracy makes the rest more believable.

‘Bridgerton’s Society Is Rooted in Truth

One crucial part of Bridgerton that Rogers confirms to be historically accurate is the events of the social season, specifically the coming-out balls. This event has featured in every season as young ladies present themselves in an attempt to catch the eye of a husband and, if they’re lucky, the Queen. The tradition goes back to the Tudor period, but in 1780, it became tied to Queen Charlotte’s ball, where young ladies were “presented by a family member who [had] also been presented at court,” and introduced to society. This ceremony is crucial to Bridgerton as it is when Queen Charlotte evaluates the new ladies, usually picking the season’s diamond, so it makes sense that it is at least partially accurate, as there would be little story without it.

The most important element of the series is exaggerated from its historical roots. Bridgerton shows an anonymous scandal sheet shaking up the ton, though few know it is written by the often-ignored Penelope Featherington (Nicola Coughlan). Without Lady Whistledown’s gossip, the series would look much different, but the famous scandal sheet is only somewhat real. Rogers explained that the process is accurate, especially as the new steam printing allowed more speed. Certainly, there was no Lady Whistledown, but the ton had a great love for gossip. However, the gossip columnists of the day operated somewhat differently, never bold enough to call out their victims by name. Whistledown’s frankness gives her more control over how the members of the ton view each other, adding drama to the series, but it is not accurate. “If you saw [gossip] in a real column … it would be done in a way that people would know who was talked about, but they wouldn’t directly say it, because it got them around libel laws,” Rogers says, suggesting that the position required great care. The use of names in Lady Whistledown is a particularly significant change for the series, but it keeps the spirit of history, giving an example of why anonymity was crucial.

The first four episodes of Bridgerton Season 3 are streaming on Netflix now, with Part 2 set to premiere on June 13.