The Daughter of Time

By Josephine Tey

What does a great detective do when he’s stuck in bed?
 
Inspector Grant is used to prowling the streets, solving crimes and unraveling mysteries, so when he finds himself bedridden in the hospital, he needs something to occupy his mind. He turns his attention to the figure of Richard III—generally considered a murderous monster by history. But is the reputation really earned? Soon the inspector has his friends delivering stacks of history books to him, but can any detective, even one of his skill, solve a 400-year-old mystery?
 
In 1990, the UK Crime Writers’ Association ranked it at number one on their list of The Top 100 Crime Novels of All Time.
 
Penguin Random House Canada is proud to bring you classic works of literature in e-book form, with the highest quality production values. Find more today and rediscover books you never knew you loved.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Random House Publishing Group
• Release date: May 10, 2016
• ISBN: 9780771070631

Josephine Tey

Josephine Tey began writing full-time after the successful publication of her first novel, The Man in the Queue (1929), which introduced Inspector Grant of Scotland Yard. She died in 1952, leaving her entire estate to the National Trust.

Reviews for The Daughter of Time

[arubabookwoman · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Inspector Alan Grant is bedridden in a London hospital, but his brain is all there, and he's going mad with boredom. To occupy his brain (it's pre-TV after all), he decides to look into the mysterious deaths of the two young princes in the Tower a few centuries back--were they murdered, as history seems to claim, by their uncle King Richard III to secure his kingship? Or were other forces at play?The book takes a very positive view of Richard III, which was not the prevailing bias at the time it was written. The only other thing I've read on the subject is The Sunne in Splendour, which also absolves Richard of the crime. In the present book, Inspector Grant opines that the negative view history had taken of Richard was partially the result of the position of his successors, the Tudors. The negative bias of the Tudors would also have influenced the negative portrayal of Richard in Shakespeare's plays. Unlike a conventional murder mystery, Grant has to go back to contemporaneous historical sources hundreds of years old to come to a conclusion, and we follow right along with him on this journey as he puzzles out what might have really happened. The NY Times has called this one of the best mysteries of all time, although I have to point out that it is quite different than most murder mysteries being published today.

[andrew1theqm · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

This is an interesting book where Inspector Alan Grant, whilst recovering in hospital, investigates what the true story is behind Richard III. Was he the evil despot history has often portrayed him as? Did he have the Princes in the Tower murdered? Was he an evil hunchback? It is very interesting how Alan investigates historical sources, including one person who portrayed events as if he had been there but was only 8 when Richard III was killed at the Battle of Bosworth. This book definitely presents a different side to Richard III and demonstrates how history is written by the victor! Henry VII certainly doesn't come out of this book well and it has certainly changed my perspective of him. I just wish a family tree had been provided in this book as it would have made all the events easier to follow. It is a book I have meant to read for years and. I am glad that I did read it, if you are interested in Richard III, and many are (especially with the recent discovery of his body under a car park in Leicester ), it is definitely worth a read.

[rosalita_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I'm so glad I finally got around to reading this classic mystery, which has a most unusual set-up. Tey's detective Alan Grant (this is the fifth in a series) is flat on his back in hospital with injuries incurred in the course of duty. He's bored out of his mind until his friend Marta gets him interested in trying to solve a historical mystery: Was Richard III really a monster who had his young nephews murdered in order to steal the throne of England?I confess that the parade of similarly named English royalty often confounds me, and I couldn't coherently distinguish between Edward II and Edward III, or the multitude of Henrys, without a cheat sheet. Fortunately Tey, through Grant and his legman, American researcher Brent Carradine, provides plenty of easily digestible background material to fill in the blanks. It's always pleasantly surprising when books where the conclusion is known in advance remain compelling to read (cf. Erik Larson's Dead Wake about the sinking of the Lusitania), and that was the case for me here. I knew the bloodthirsty image of Richard III promulgated by Shakespeare and others had been debunked, but I still followed every twist and turn in the story with anticipation. And Tey's ability to make a book set entirely in a hospital room compelling is a tour de force.I don't know if or how the rest of the series can live up to this singular book, but I think I'd like to give it a try.

[margaretfield · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Detective is stuck in hospital for many months recovering from multiple fractures. While there he researches the truth behind Richard III and Henry VII. "Truth is the daughter of time, not authority" Francis Bacon

[mrsrk-1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

“Truth is the daughter of time, not of authority” (Francis Bacon). If you don’t enjoy History and research, stay clear, for the book is all about both. Despite the main character is stuck in a hospital bed, Miss Tey made the most of one of the biggest mysteries of our time: the “princes in the Tower.” She did an incredible amount of research and if she didn’t set out to debunk myths, at least she put lots of doubts in her readers’ minds. (Among the myths she mentions is that of the 1910 Tonypandy Riot, when troops fired on the public at the 1910, which was not true.) The Daughter of Time is actually truth and it is said she based her fiction upon Clements Markham's “Richard III”—a book I can’t wait to get my little fingers on! I am not an expert on English history, far from it, but I always thought, from the little I knew of Richard III, that the murder didn’t fit his profile. Tey’s points are very well made and the thing that struck me the most was the fact that what is considered “historical account” was actually based upon Thomas More’s account. More was 7 years old when Richard died in 1485. His book The History of King Richard the Third was posthumously published in 1557 (More died in 1535), based upon the manuscripts her worked between 1512/1519. He lived under Henry VII (Tudor). It is interesting to notice that Tudor was a bastard branch, therefore, not in direct line to the throne. With the death of Richard, a line of heirs had the precedence over Henry Tudor, including his (illegitimate son, John of Gloucester. From Edward IV (his brother): Edward and Richard (the “princes in the Tower”), Richard of York, Elizabeth, Cicely, Annie, Katherine and Bridget. From Elizabeth, Duchess of York (sister): John. From George, Duque of Clarence (brother): Edward, and Margaret. Quite conveniently, almost all of them disappeared after Henry Tudor became king. If the princes had been murdered when Henry landed in England why didn’t he use it as a banner to bring the British to his cause? Much more is in this book I couldn’t put down. A really fascinating read. (Incidentally, Tey is the nom de plume of Elizabeth Mackintosh, who also wrote as Gordon Daviot. So if you enjoyed this as much as I did, look for her other books. Everything I read by her so far was excellent.

[susankrzywicki · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

I wanted to love this book - so many people say it is the greatest detective story. I think I had better stick to more middle-brow topics. Between all the Elizabeths and Edwards, I was constantly confused. I had to look up words like "attainder". There were two family trees and I never got them straightened out in my mind. One of her other books might have been a better starting place for me. But I saw this at The Last Bookstore in Los Angeles and couldn't resist buying it.

[lycomayflower · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

A detective recuperating from a fall investigates the mystery of the Princes in the Tower from his hospital bed. A had a little trouble following all the ins and outs of this when I wasn't familiar with all the historical figures referenced, but it was an entertaining read anyway, and I certainly understand the overall solution he comes to. I enjoyed the atmosphere of this book a good deal, as well.

[catzkc · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

The writing style made this one kind of hard to get thru for me. Fortunately it's pretty short. I did enjoy reading her obviously well-researched theories about what really happened to the two princes.

[laytonwoman3rd · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Just as delightful as all the reviewers and fans of Josephine Tey suggest it is, to follow Alan Grant's bed-bound investigation of the historical sources and what they fail to prove about Richard III's supposed murder of his young nephews, "the Princes in the Tower". I loved it. And I admire the way Tey used the "frame" of Grant being frustrated by inactivity, latching on to a portrait of Richard, bouncing from that to research aided by more-than-willing young American student who needs a thing of his own to pursue. Usually that kind of set-up dooms a book for me, or at least distracts immensely from the central mystery. But I actually enjoyed it in this case. My only quibble is that the American sounds rather British a lot of the time!

[parelle · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Very enjoyable

[nog_5 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Baffled by the love, especially the critics who have this way, way up on lists of best mystery novels of all time. Although not a bad book, it's got a pace to it that only a hard-core English history pedant could find exciting. Thankfully, it's a short book, so the staggering boredom is over with quickly. Recommended for insomniacs, masochists, and the aforementioned English bores.

[laura400 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

With such an interesting and unusual idea for a detective story, I've always revered this book. Upon re-reading it, however, decades later, I'm not sure it held up as much for me as an adult with more experience and a more critical outlook. It now seems dated, with the characterization of the minor characters entirely too sketchy and sometimes condescending. Still laudable in its premise and conception, however.

[norabelle414 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

In 1950s England, Detective Alan Grant is on bed-rest with a broken leg, and his friends suggest that he alleviate his boredom by trying to solve a purely intellectual mystery: did Richard III really have his two young nephews, known as the Princes in the Tower, executed? Detective Grant enlists the help of a bored American researcher to do all the dirty work, while he spends hours thinking through the information in a detective-y way.This book was very much not for me. I've read enough about Richard III (mostly written well after this novel) that none of it is much of a revelation. A lot of Detective Grant's ideas come to him through intuition and looking at Richard III's face in a portrait, which irks me. He's very disdainful of historians and says mean things about them, while he himself is sending a researcher to read first-hand accounts and bring him back facts that he can connect to come to a conclusion. How is that any different? It reminded me a bit of the current anti-science, anti-expert rhetoric.The writing of the book was fine though, and I did like the twist at the very end when they find out plenty of other people have already come to the same conclusion, because that's what I had been thinking the whole time.

[sleahey_3 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Bedridden detective Grant avoids boredom by investigating the alleged murder of his two nephews by Richard III in the 15th century.

[gypsysmom_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I enjoyed this book but I didn't think it was the greatest detective story I'd ever read, hence the rating. Inspector Grant of Scotland Yard is flat on his back in a hospital bed after breaking his leg chasing a suspect. His friend, Marta, brings him a number of portraits of historical personages accused of crimes. Grant is mesmerized by the picture of Richard III who is infamous for putting his nephews to death so he could become king. But Grant doesn't think his face looks like the face of a murderer and he starts to delve into the contemporary record with help from Brent Carradine, an American in England to be with his girlfriend who is an actress. As Grant and Carradine explore further they find that there was no accusation of the murders at the time they were supposed to be committed. In fact, even after Richard was killed in battle and Henry VII ascended to the British throne, there was no mention of the murders. It is all a fabrication and it appears most likely that Henry VII had the boys killed in order for his accession to the throne to go smoothly. This book sort of reminded me of that Hitchcock movie, Rear Window, in which Jimmy Stewart lay in bed and saw a murder occur. I wonder if Hitchcock got his inspiration from this book. The title of the book puzzled me for a long time until I read the quote on the title page "Truth is the daughter of time. OLD PROVERB"

[natalies11-1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I would put this more at a 3.5, but rouded up as I did like it more than a 3 star book.I think Josephine Tey is a good author and overall I thought the topic was interesting, but it read too much like a history text. The first 70 pages were just too dense with information. I actually did quite a bit of my own research before I could continue reading the book just so I could get a handle on all the players.What I find most fascinating about this book, is that it sparked other people going back and looking at the history of Richard III and what was really true.

[donnab317 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Enjoying this tremendously! Provides a lot of confusing information clearly and entertainingly.

[bostonterrio-1 · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

Solving a cold case centuries old is an interesting concept. More so when the detective is laying flat on his back in a hospital bed. The characters flitting in and out of the hospital room help promise as they were quite interesting but the telling of the story was rather droll. The narrator did a good job but the story did not hold my interest.

[cfk_3 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Alan Grant, a Scotland Yard detective badly injured in the line of duty, makes a lousy patient. Flat on his back, bored, depressed and irritated for too long, he can't even stir up an interest in the stack of books brought by helpful friends. But when Marta, one of his best friends, brings him a stack of historical photos, he becomes intrigued with the face of Richard III. Thus begins a cold case study which will lead to interesting conclusions in the mystery of the missing princes, sons of King Edward IV.

[jlapac-1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

This book is part of the Young Man's school year 2012-2013 summer reading. We listen to it in the car on our way up and back from our vacation. I believe I have read this book before, but it was so long ago that I only really remembered Grant laying in the hospital bed. I think this is a good starter book for kids (people?) who will be writing history papers. I think it is probably good for people who are reading history as well. It is a good illustration of a couple of concepts:
-people are lazy or busy and will not delve into primary research themselves. They may also not have the access.
-bias must be understood. In this book, bias and hearsay infect a well respected author's work.
-sources such as accounts of where money was spent are excellent sources of research, because they usually are accurate
-watch out for hearsay. Hearsay has bias. Look at primary sources

The Lancaster/York War of the Roses aspect was a little unclear to me. I did notice that, despite Richard III's efforts to put that feud behind the country, the lingering effects went into Henry VIII's reign (as if that guy needed more problems).

A thin book, but not a quick read and I think that having the book to hand to re-read (with eyes) some of the quotes was useful.

[bontley · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

A timely re-assessment of Richard III written 60 years ago, in the form of bed-ridden-detective novel. Fascinating and convincing, just not beautifully written.

[amelish · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I luuuuuuurved this book when I first read it--high school?--and was CONVINCED that Richard III was horribly wronged and SO EXCITED to take a class in English history in college, and then I saw something shiny and forgot all about it.

Upon re-read, the book's argument is less convincing.* A mock-trial of Richard III for the murder of his nephews was conducted in the 70s with three Supreme Court justices as officiants, and did find that there wasn't sufficient evidence to convict Richard of the crime. There remain, however, significant gaps between the facts of the mystery (ha), and the surety with which "The Daughter of Time" makes accusatiions. Hurray for fiction and for filling those gaps convincingly, at least for a teenager.

*I also happen to be older.

[rvhatha · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Favorite quotes: "She would fritter it away, of course, in small unimportances; so that in the end she would not know what she had done with it; but perhaps a series of small satisfactions scattered like sequins over the texture of everyday life was of greater worth than the academic satisfaction of owning a collection of fine objects at the back of a drawer.""It's an odd thing but when you tell someone the true facts of a mythical tale they are indignant not with the teller but with you. They don't *want* to have their ideas upset. It rouses some vague uneasiness in them, I think, and they resent it. So they reject it and refuse to think about it."

[mlleehreen · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

So, this probably is obvious to a lot of people, but it wasn't to me: THE DAUGHTER OF TIME is not the place to start if you don't know anything at all about the Wars of the Roses. Partly because Tey tosses a lot of names and events at the reader, and if you don't already know who Edward IV is, or what happened at the Battle of Bosworth, you'll find yourself checking Wikipedia a lot and sort of scrambling to understand. THE DAUGHTER OF TIME has a really zippy pace, the writing is bright and lively, so if you've got a great big blank spot in your education under the heading "Wars of the Roses," Tey is not the person to provide much in the way of painstaking detail.

I also think that THE DAUGHTER OF TIME is designed, like so many mysteries, to surprise the reader. If you open up the pages believing that Richard III is an evil murderer of children, woah, would you be shocked to have evidence presented bit by little bit to show that actually, he is most likely innocent of that crime and a wonderful, upstanding individual besides. Since I had hardly any notion of who the Princes in the Tower were, nor any ill opinion of Richard III, I felt no surprise.

THE DAUGHTER OF TIME is a really fun book, even though I had to keep my Wikipedia open to follow along. As in so many mysteries, our protagonist is a sleuth. A police inspector, Alan Grant, confined to bedrest after a bad accident. He investigates Richard III to pass the time, because a centuries-old cold case is the only kind he can take on from his hospital room, and Tey lays out the historical evidence the same way that Agatha Christie distributes clues. There are twists and turns, unexpected reversals. It's really satisfying to reach the last page and feel like untruths have been cleared away, answers found, a man's reputation vindicated.

I'm interested in reading more about the Wars of the Roses now, which I feel is a little backwards. Still, good read.

[raschneid_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

A wonderful read for a weekend spent largely in airports, this unconventional detective novel lived up to the hype. Must-read for history nerds, and could potentially be a fun, not-too-didactic primer in critical reading for the classroom (in a world with students who aren't scared away by the maddeningly complex chronology of the War of the Roses. It's just A Song of Ice and Fire without dragons, mmkay?)

[kathleen586 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

This book is very fascinating! The story is unique in that fictional characters attempt to solve a historical mystery. The book makes a convincing case as to who murdered the Princes in the Tower. (I do wish it had footnotes/citations, etc.)

[amaraduende · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

This was the first I've heard of the Richard III is innocent movement! Turns out the Supreme Court ran a mock historical trial and found him totally UN guilty. This book is very one-sided - it does no present the arguments against him at all - so I'd like to find a book that really lays it all out. But it's so interesting!
This was an armchair mystery about a laid-up policeman who "solves" the Richard III problem from his bed while recuperating. It was very well written - funny and great descriptions.

[nmele_4 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I had never read anything by Josephine Tey before, but this brief historical puzzle caught me very quickly and held my interest all through, despite all of the detecting being done from a hospital bed and through books of history and documents five to six hundred years old. It is fascinating, and then I closed the book and admired Tey for her skill and style.

[mephistia · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Apparently Josephine Tey normally wrote mysteries. Not a big mystery fan, myself -- especially if there are multiple murders involved -- but Tey's writing is intriguing and compelling enough that I may make an exception for her.

This mystery is more of a historical puzzle, which is why I picked it up. I love those questions historical figures have left in the cloth of our reality, and I enjoy the quest to solve them. This particular mystery has to do with the Princes in the Towers, who were murdered around the beginning of the Tudor reign in Europe. Apparently it's commonly accepted that Richard III, last of the Plantagenet dynasty, killed them.

Using the device of an injured policeman bored with his hospital stay, Tey examines the evidence for and against Richard III murdering his nephews and looks at other possible murderers.

It's a great book, and does what I think all great books examining history should do -- makes the reader want to know more. I've been researching the Plantagenet's and early Tudors since I read this book.

[librarycin · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

3.5 starsIn this book, a detective is in the hospital and is looking for something to keep him busy. With the help of friends, he starts researching Richard III and whether or not he actually did murder his nephews in the late 15th century. I thought it was interesting. There were dry spots in the book, as it was all research - the detective talking to his friends/helpers about what might or might not have happened. It is a topic I'm interested in and have read a little bit (though not a lot) about. I do intend to read more. I sure would have liked for the author to provide an afterword, but maybe providing that was less common for historical fiction in the mid-20th century? I do wonder about the title, as well.