The Daughter of Time by Josephine Tey published 1951 is a classic in the mystery/ crime genre, a unique sort of crime novel involving a 20th century Scotland Yard Detective determined to solve a 500 year old mystery involving Richard III (The English King who ruled from 1483-1485). Was Richard responsible fo the deaths of his two nephews, the Princes in the Tower as they have been called, or has he been unfairly maligned by history? Josephine Tey makes a good case for why Richard might be innocent and I found this book to be both entertaining and educational.
And so when The Daughter of Time begins we are in England during the early 1950's and Alan Grant is a detective with Scotland Yard. He is in the hospital recuperating from an injury. He is bored and frustrated. Friends bring him books he has no interest in reading and then one of his closest friends Marta Hallard a theater actress brings him a portfolio containing dozens of portraits of famous historical figures. It turns out to be just what the doctor ordered since Alan is a specialist in reading faces. He spends an enjoyable day in bed looking at each portrait, speculating about who they were, their character traits, etc. But then he comes to one photo he has overlooked:
"It was the portrait of a man. A man dressed in the velvet cap and slashed doublet of the late fifteenth century. A man about thirty-five or thirty-six years old and clean shaven ... a judge? a soldier? a prince? Someone used to great responsibility, and responsible in his authority. Someone too conscientious. A worrier, perhaps a perfectionist ... Someone, too who had suffered ill-health as a child ... He turned the portrait over to look for a caption. Richard the Third. So that was who it was. Richard the Third. Crouchback. The monster of nursery stories. The destroyer of innocence. A synonym for villainy".
What bothers Alan Grant is how he could have read a face so wrong "mistaken one of the most notorious murderers of all time for a judge" and so Grant decides to investigate. Who was Richard the Third, what made him tick, and what really happened to his two young nephews? But how do you begin an investigation confined to your hospital bed? And how to discover the truth about a crime that happened five hundred years ago?
Detective Grant uses the tools at his disposal. He discusses the case with the hospital staff and it turns out one of his nurses knows a good deal about Richard III and directs Grant to an influential biography of the man written by Sir Thomas More. But Grant discovers there are serious problems with More's biography, gossip and inuendo reported as fact.
Detective Grant realizes that he needs to start from scratch to learn the truth about Richard III. Once again his friend Marta comes to the rescue. She introduces Grant to a young American scholar, Brent Carradine who is at the British Museum doing research about the Plantagenet period in English history. Brett jumps at the chance to help Alan and as they hash out the case together they uncover a great deal. Richard was not a ruthless King and Edward IV had older children who would have inherited the throne before the nephews so their murder made no sense. Grant and Carradine go on to discover that during Richard's short life (he died at age 32) there were no accusations that the nephews were dead or even missing. Grant comes to the conclusion that the nephews were therefore alive when Henry VII who suceeded Richard took power and could he have been the real killer?
One thought that occured to me as I was reading The Daughter of Time was did Josephine Tey uncover all this evidence of Richard's innocence and if so where were the historians down through the centuries? Well actually after the Tudor line ended the historians of the 18th and 19th century took a look at this case and questions began to arise. But in the 20th century regarding Richard's innocence Josephine Tey has done a great deal to bring this case to the modern day public's attention and with over 700 reviews on Amazon its clear that readers are still interested. I recommend The Daughter of Time for mystery lovers and history buffs alike.
Super review. The book sounds very good. There is such a mystique around Richard III and the murders of his nephews. I know that several scholars have delved into this. I guess my only reservation is that, regardless of how god the book is, I wonder about telling this story in a novel. There is already so many myths and controversies around this topic. I wonder if the novel form muddies the topic further.
ReplyDeleteThanks so much Brian, What's needed is a very good present day history book about Richard III. Because after I read the novel I figured that current historians would back Josephine Tey up that Richard III wasn't the killer but actually history scholars are still not sure and so I agree about the problems with history being told as a novel because the author doesn't have to work with the same constraints a historian would.
ReplyDeleteAwesome review! Have you read any other books by Tey?
ReplyDeleteThanks so much Lark. I haven't read any other books by Tey but I know that Alan Grant the Detective in Daughter of Time appears in about five other Tey books. In the other books Grant solves present day cases. I would be curious to see how Grant behaves when he is not recuperating in the hospital because he was a bit rude to people in this novel but he wasn't feeling his best. But I recommend Tey. She is one of the classic authors from Britain's Golden Age of Mysteries.
DeleteI'd really like to read some of her books.
DeleteI think what really happened with the princes in the tower may never be fully answered. But I really enjoyed this book as you did. I've read a few books by Tey but this one remains my favorite. I feel like I learned a lot (even if I take Tey/Grant's theories with a grain of salt)!
ReplyDeleteHi Ruthiella, Agree, it will always remain a mystery but I enjoyed the book very much and curious to see how Alan Grant behaves in Josephine Tey's other mysteries. He was a bit gruff in this one and that's understandable confined to his hospital bed as he was.
DeleteI've read this twice over the years, but would enjoy a third visit!
ReplyDeleteHi Jenclair, I was impressed with my reading of this book and might explore some of Ms. Tey's other mysteries.
DeleteAs an unabased Richardian, the Tudor propaganda makes me see red! I do think Josephine Tey did more to restore RIII's reputation than just about anything else. While some scholars did question the Tudor party line, Tey reached a much wider audience with the theory of his innocence.
ReplyDeleteHi Jane, Tey does make a good case for Richard's innocence. Had he killed the princes wouldn't someone have noticed during his lifetime that they were dead or even missing. Richard III doesn't seem to have been a brutal King either during his short life. Also he idolized his brother Edward IV so why would he kill Edward's two sons? Haven't read Wolf Hall but that's another book that is singlehandedly restoring the reputation of a historical figure, Cromwell.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete