The history might be thin but there’s swearing, bonking and rakish, romantic politicking that’s bringing “Bridgerton” fans back for more, says “Streaming” columnist NICK OVERALL.

WITH all the hair feathers and puff sleeves of a Jane Austen story, one would be forgiven for thinking the Netflix hit “Bridgerton” was a polite and mannerly sorta deal.

That would be right up until around three and a half minutes into the first episode.

The costume drama romp set in a sparkling 19th century London is filled to the brim with swearing, bonking and rakish, romantic politicking. In other words, not quite your Colin-Firth-waist-deep-in-a-lake-type business.

Nonetheless, it’s worked its charms. The show’s first season pulled in a record-breaking 82 million viewers in under a month of release, and fans have now flocked back for a second season of episodes out this week.

Those returning will get to see more of the well-to-do Bridgerton siblings in their quest for love, or quest to avoid it, amidst London’s social season.

Daphne Bridgerton, who struck up a pretend romance with a duke to throw off a plucky scandal-sheet writer, entertainingly voiced by Julie Andrews, now faces a whole new overhaul to her high-society lifestyle heading into season two.

For those intrigued but not yet in the party, “Bridgerton” comes with a heavy disclaimer. While its inspirations are clear, the show doesn’t consider itself a historically accurate period piece.

Instead, its baroque British estates allow for a peep at the Regency era through a modern lens.

That repeatedly comes right from the mouth of Julia Quinn, the author of the books the series borrows from: “‘Bridgerton’ isn’t a history lesson, it’s for a modern audience.”

Indeed, while the Bridgertons themselves are a fictional family, the 19th century marriage market that the young women in the show are thrown into certainly wasn’t.

These fictional characters give a modern crowd a magnifying glass to examine 1813 England in new and entertaining detail.

One of the changes most commonly chewed over is the show’s approach to race. In its alternate history, “Bridgerton” imagines a racially integrated London, one where people of colour are also members of high society.

Queen Charlotte, a real historical figure, is depicted as mixed race – a nod to the controversial, real-life claims that the Monarch may have come from some African descent. Though denounced by many scholars, the claims have never been disproven and served as a lightbulb moment for series creator Chris Van Dusen.

Arguably, part of Van Dusen’s idea here was to make the show as accessible to as wide a modern audience as possible, and based on the numbers Netflix is raking in, it seems to have worked.

The style is not dissimilar to the “anti-history” antics seen in “The Great” (on Stan) which loosely retells the story of Russia’s last reigning empress in the back half of the 1700s with a wickedly comical twist.

The shows aren’t looking to disrespect history so much as they are injecting new interest – the fun is in giving a modern audience the chance to contrast traditions of their own time with that of a wildly different period.

All this parading around parks and fraternising at balls does seem rather absurd in an age where many people prospect possible romantic suitors via a left or right swipe, or if one is feeling extra scandalous in their courtship, maybe even with a super like.

What it proves is that the romantic repartee found in an Austen novel can still strike a chord with a mainstream audience, especially with a few shrewd tweaks here and there. Clever stuff.

For those looking for something a little more faithful it is possible to find the BBC ‘90s mini-series of “Pride and Prejudice” on Stan by the way, as well as the 2005 American one that cast Keira Knightley as Elizabeth Bennet.

If all this is a little slow for some I did also stumble across “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” on Stan which 100 per cent delivers on what its title promises. 

Something tells me that even Ms Austen, with her good sense of humour, would have got a laugh out of it.