The Daughter of Time

Josephine Tey's The Daughter of Time (1951) is probably her best-known and most re-printed novel, and it's the book that pretty much single-handedly kicked off the movement to rehabilitate King Richard III. The novel has a cool and original structure, with our detective being bed-bound in hospital with a broken leg, and sending off various minions to do his research and discuss the results. Alan Grant seems to stay in hospital for WEEKS, so in that respect the book definitely shows its age! 

I've read The Daughter of Time a couple of times before, and I still find Tey's arguments pretty persuasive. In the middle of reading it, I (obviously) did some googling, and also listened to a The Rest is History podcast on the topic. Dominic and Tom were fairly scathing about the idea that Richard couldn't have murdered the princes because he was a good administrator and has 'a nice face' -- which is basically the foundation of Tey's argument; their view was that he probably did do it, but he kind of had to, given his circumstances. They didn't examine the version of history that Tey presents, which was disappointing, and I still don't know how accurate her facts are -- things like the timing of the rumour surfacing, why Richard wasn't accused immediately by Henry VII after the defeat at Bosworth, which I find more persuasive than the 'nice face' angle. I'd love to know if this is the accepted timeline or if more scholarship has emerged since Tey wrote her novel. Having read a few Josephine Tey novels in a row, it's clear that she's a big believer that faces are the key to personality, a belief that her detective Alan Grant shares, and I view that I cannot endorse.

So I wouldn't say I'm a hundred percent Ricardian, but I'm open to arguments either way!