I don't think that's an example of bending it to its needs so much as arrant ignorance.
I have a big problem with ignorance in historical writers. A fairly well-known romance writer did a series of three historical romances that sold (and still sell) quite well. Not only does she insist that men ride destriers even if they're just riding to the dairy for a pint of cream, she insisted that spinning wheels were used in thirteenth century England and, by the way, that the king of England had some control over the Scots (before he started that little war about conquering them).
If that wasn't thrown across the room and then stomped on... well. Of course, it was.
He wasn't, by the way, looking for something current. He was making some sort of data base (lord only knows why) of all historical novels EVER written--but did he try to read them all one has to wonder.
Edit: I suspect, on why he said it was vague, he meant that the dividing line between a romantic historical and a historical romance might be vague, although I'm not sure I agree with him.