• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • Comment
  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

We’ll be taking my thoughts and prayers to the ballot box.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

Innocent people don’t delay justice.

Hot air and ill-informed banter

He really is that stupid.

The worst democrat is better than the best republican.

Republicans don’t want a speaker to lead them; they want a hostage.

Just because you believe it, that doesn’t make it true.

When do the post office & the dmv weigh in on the wuhan virus?

We’re not going back!

It’s the corruption, stupid.

If you tweet it in all caps, that makes it true!

Something needs to be done about our bogus SCOTUS.

This isn’t Democrats spending madly. This is government catching up.

… pundit janitors mopping up after the GOP

A democracy can’t function when people can’t distinguish facts from lies.

Incompetence, fear, or corruption? why not all three?

The GOP couldn’t organize an orgy in a whorehouse with a fist full of 50s.

Don’t expect peaches from an apple tree.

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

Reality always lies in wait for … Democrats.

Republicans don’t trust women.

Republicans want to make it harder to vote and easier for them to cheat.

Come on, media. you have one job. start doing it.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Medium Cool / The Daughter of Time (with Subaru Dianne)

The Daughter of Time (with Subaru Dianne)

by WaterGirl|  August 27, 20237:00 pm| 133 Comments

This post is in: Books, Guest Posts, Medium Cool, Culture as a Hedge Against This Soul-Sucking Political Miasma We're Living In

FacebookTweetEmail

Medium Cool is a weekly series related to popular culture, mostly film, TV, and books, with some music and games thrown in.  We hope it’s a welcome break from the anger, hate, and idiocy we see almost daily from the other side in the political sphere.

Arguments welcomed, opinions respected, fools un-suffered.  We’re here every Sunday at 7 pm.

Tonight is the final chapter of the series on Josephine Tey, brought to us by Subaru Dianne.  These have been great, and I predict that BJ peeps will have a lot to say about The Daughter of Time, since it appears to be a favorite of so many people here.  I clearly have some reading to do!  Thank you, SD, for these wonderful series.

The Daughter of Time!

by Subaru Dianne

This is almost surely the portrait of King Richard III that so intrigued Inspector Grant in The Daughter of Time. Artist and date unknown, probably British or Flemish, early sixteenth century.

This week we conclude our discussion of the eight Josephine Tey mysteries with a focus on The Daughter of Time, Tey’s most famous and lauded* work by far.

On one level, it is simply a mid-20th-century attempt to unravel one of history’s most compelling true crimes — the fate of the two young “Princes in the Tower” — and to exonerate their accused murderer, their uncle, King Richard III. (This book is responsible for turning many people, myself included, into ardent and partisan Ricardians!)

Sir John Everett Millais’ sentimental and romanticised 1878 portrait of the imprisoned “Princes in the Tower,” heirs to King Edward IV. The younger lad is Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York, age 9; his elder brother is King Edward V, age 12. They mysteriously disappeared in 1483.

But on another level, whether you (along with Tey’s Inspector Grant) absolve Richard or prefer to remember him as one of History’s Greatest Monsters, you will be struck, I think, by the contemporary pertinence of the questions raised: How, and why, and by whom do “Big Lies” get started? Why do so many people persist in believing them long after they’ve been discredited, even hundreds of years later?

These are topics the BJ Jackaltariat talks about constantly! I look forward to tonight’s discussion and your always-insightful comments.

*In 1990, the British Crime Writers’ Association voted The Daughter of Time number one in its list of “The Top 100 Crime Novels of All Time.” Not too dusty!

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Sunday Evening Open Thread: The GOP Grifter Speedrun
Next Post: Late Night Open Thread: The RNC Will Go to Houston in 2028… »

Reader Interactions

  • Commenters
  • Filtered
  • Settings

Commenters

No commenters available.

  • A woman from anywhere (formerly Mohagan)
  • Almost Retired
  • anitamargarita
  • AnneWith
  • BellaPea
  • bookworm1398
  • caphilldcne
  • CaseyL
  • Cathie from Canada
  • Catnaz
  • columbusqueen
  • Crimson Pimpernel
  • Dorothy A. Winsor
  • eclare
  • Elizabelle
  • ETtheLibrarian
  • Feathers
  • Gretchen
  • Heidi Mom
  • J R in WV
  • joel hanes
  • Josie
  • kalakal
  • Kate
  • LiminalOwl
  • Miss Bianca
  • Mr. Bemused Senior
  • Nelle
  • OlFroth
  • Omnes Omnibus
  • Paul in KY
  • Percysowner
  • sab
  • Sherparick
  • SiubhanDuinne
  • Steeplejack
  • stinger
  • Tehanu
  • Timill
  • Tony Jay
  • Torrey
  • Traveller
  • WaterGirl
  • West of the Rockies
  • Zelma
  • zhena gogolia

Filtered Commenters

No filtered commenters available.

    Settings




    Settings are saved immediately; press X to close the box.

    133Comments

    1. 1.

      Gretchen

      August 27, 2023 at 7:05 pm

      I love this book! I chose it for my book club. Some of the members objected that it wasn’t a “real” mystery book so for the next one we read Rex Stout’s Fer de Lance and Dorothy Sayers’ Gaudy Night.

      It’s a great example of “history  is written by the winners” when they start investigating who wrote about Richard and how it slants things.

      Reply
    2. 2.

      SiubhanDuinne

      August 27, 2023 at 7:05 pm

      Sorry to start the thread on a sour(ish) note, but I have done something dire to my right shoulder, took more pain pills than I probably should have, and now can hardly keep my eyes open. I’ll try to follow all the comments and contribute as best I can, but if I suddenly disappear or get all incoherent, I hope you’ll understand.

      Reply
    3. 3.

      Mr. Bemused Senior

      August 27, 2023 at 7:07 pm

      First, Subaru Dianne and WaterGirl, thanks for organizing this. [SD, I hope you feel better soon!]

      Bemused Senior was a voracious reader. For years I mostly read technical documents and other work-related material. She drew me into mysteries, including of course Tey. I am eternally grateful to her for helping me rediscover the joy of reading for pleasure.

      DoT to me is an English history lesson as well as giving insight into the difference between history written by the victors and actual facts.

      Reply
    4. 4.

      SiubhanDuinne

      August 27, 2023 at 7:08 pm

      @Gretchen:

      Ha! There are plenty of people who don’t consider Gaudy Night a legit mystery, because there’s no murder!

      Reply
    5. 5.

      Torrey

      August 27, 2023 at 7:08 pm

      Delighted that this post is open. The Daughter of Time is one of my favorite reads, and I regularly reread it, just for the pleasure of appreciating Tey’s artistry in presenting the story. Derek Jacobi is the narrator of the Audible audiobook, and he is spectacular.One of the important things I learned from the book when I first read it as a young teenager was from Grant’s insistence on establishing the facts by eliminating anything that could be spin. Serves me well in keeping track of American politics.​

      Reply
    6. 6.

      LiminalOwl

      August 27, 2023 at 7:09 pm

      Oh no! Best wishes for shoulder healing.

      I’ve adored this book for years, and appreciate this chance to be reminded of why. At first I was thinking: well, because it was the book that got me into English history… but no, it’s exactly what you note in your intro: the meta-questions about the nature of history itself, and how history is used for political and social ends, the facts (sometimes, too often) be damned. Thank you!

      Reply
    7. 7.

      SiubhanDuinne

      August 27, 2023 at 7:12 pm

      @Mr. Bemused Senior:

      DoT to me is an English history lesson as well as giving insight into the difference between history written by the victors and actual facts.

      That is very well put. I don’t remember now, but I think it might well have been my introduction to the entire genre of “historical fiction.” Or it might have been Anya Seton’s Katharine, another lifelong favourite book.

      Reply
    8. 8.

      Torrey

      August 27, 2023 at 7:13 pm

      @SiubhanDuinne: ​
        I’m so sorry to hear about your shoulder. Best wishes for rapid healing.

      Reply
    9. 9.

      BellaPea

      August 27, 2023 at 7:15 pm

      I absolutely need to read DoT as I love anything related to English history! Thank you so much for introducing me to this book, and I apologize that I don’t have anything to contribute as I have not read it. I will soon! I also have loved Anya Seton’s Katherine since I was 16 years old (I’m 67 now) so glad to hear I have a fellow fan. Hope you guys have a great discussion this evening!

      Reply
    10. 10.

      SiubhanDuinne

      August 27, 2023 at 7:17 pm

      There are such wonderful secondary characters in this book, too. The Midget and The Amazon, Matron, and the surgeon are, as usual with Tey, beautifully drawn — but most especially, Brent Carradine III, the “Woolly Lamb.” I just adore him!

      Reply
    11. 11.

      SiubhanDuinne

      August 27, 2023 at 7:19 pm

      Thanks to everyone for the good shoulder wishes. I wasn’t looking for sympathy, just wanted to explain any weirdnesses* in my comments.

      *Any more than usual :-)

      Reply
    12. 12.

      OlFroth

      August 27, 2023 at 7:22 pm

      I read it in college, on the recomendation of my History professor.  What a great book!

      Reply
    13. 13.

      Dorothy A. Winsor

      August 27, 2023 at 7:23 pm

      When SD announced the title, I thought I’d never read it, but by the end of the second page, I thought, wait, is this the book where a detective solves a crime from the hospital? And I realized I’d read it maybe 30 years ago. I respect the way Tey frustrates the expectations for a detective novel. In the opening pages, Grant thinks that the books his friends are bringing him are just like all the other books those authors have written. So Tey is playing with us a little.

      I’d forgotten it was Richard III he “investigates,” but this was so much fun. SD, you’re right about the issues it raises about history. Great choice.

      Reply
    14. 14.

      kalakal

      August 27, 2023 at 7:23 pm

      It’s a very long time since I read the book but I remember being impressed by how Tey didn’t condescend to our ancestors. There’s a very strong ‘popular’ tendency to do the “look how stupid people where x years ago, they believed xxxx” Our ancestors where are smart/stupid as we are and good luck to anyone who thinks they’re smarter than Isaac Newton. Tey shows the actors in her mystery as rational, intelligent individuals motivated by realistic concerns. She follows “the money”. This is more common now in historical fiction, it was really, really rare 75 years ago.

      I’m something of a Ricardian so I’m biased but I think Tey did a marvellous job of analysing the sources to make both a powerful case for her solution and to write an excellent novel at the same time.

      SD sorry to hear about your shoulder, hope it clears up soon

      Reply
    15. 15.

      SiubhanDuinne

      August 27, 2023 at 7:26 pm

      @Torrey:

      Derek Jacobi is one of my very favourite actors, and I’ll bet he reads DoT wonderfully well. Thanks for the reference. I have two audiobook versions, one read by Edward Petherbridge and the other by Karen Somebody (Karen Catt or Carr or Cahn or something). I love Petherbridge as an actor, but I’m sorry to say he does nothing for me as a reader. Karen is … fine. But I need to get hold of the Jacobi version.

      Reply
    16. 16.

      LiminalOwl

      August 27, 2023 at 7:26 pm

      @SiubhanDuinne: Another vote for Katherine too!

      Reply
    17. 17.

      WaterGirl

      August 27, 2023 at 7:27 pm

      @SiubhanDuinne: Oh, no!

      Reply
    18. 18.

      Almost Retired

      August 27, 2023 at 7:27 pm

      I loved this book, which I read in a single setting yesterday.  I’m not much of a fan of mysteries and would never have picked this up without SiubhanDuinne’s recommendation.  But what a classic.  So, thanks!

      The ‘history is bunk’ and the ‘let’s analyze this logically’ themes appealed to my lawyer brain.

      Grant’s methodical examination of the evidence was riveting.   And since he’s examining 500 year old events, the plot is not undercut by what we know about modern forensics (which was my problem with “Rebecca”…..a simple DNA test would have made the whole issue moot).

      Last year I read Philippa Gregory’s “The White Queen,” so I was familiar with the characters – it was told from the point of view of Richard III’s sister in law, Elizabeth Woodville.  So it was easier for me to keep track of the names.

      But there are so many Edwards, Richards and Elizabeths.  If only 15th Century monks had produced one of those “Name Your Baby” books and distributed it amongst the Plantagenets.  The historical record would have been easier to follow with a Madison or Ethan thrown into the mix.

      Reply
    19. 19.

      kalakal

      August 27, 2023 at 7:33 pm

      @SiubhanDuinne: I’d be interested to know what you think of C. J. Sansom’s Mathew Shardlake books, set just a bit after DoT in Henry VIII’s reign. I’m a big fan

      Reply
    20. 20.

      SiubhanDuinne

      August 27, 2023 at 7:33 pm

      @WaterGirl:

      It is not a big deal, but thank you. I wrenched it in my sleep last night and it’s been bothering me all day. I wouldn’t even have mentioned it, but I took three of the really kapow!! extra-special-super-duper enhanced Tylenols they gave me a few years ago when I broke my arm. Had forgotten how potent they are.

      Reply
    21. 21.

      Tehanu

      August 27, 2023 at 7:33 pm

      First, hope your shoulder is better.

      I too became a Ricardian because of The Daughter of Time, and I’m grateful to Tey for bringing the story to us. I read my copy so many times it fell apart. I now have a copy I bought from The Folio Society — boxed, intro by Alison Weir, color illustrations — and I just realized, I haven’t re-read it in ages. So this is a very welcome reminder. I used to be active in the Richard III Society, and one of my favorite memories is a visit to Middleham Castle in Wensleydale — a romantic ruin indeed, especially viewed coming up the dale from the west, so you see its commanding position against the green hillsides. And the whole story of Richard III is, as others here have already observed, a great lesson in the power of spin and innuendo, and how difficult it is to dig out the truth of events.

      Actually, my favorite book about Richard III is a fantasy set in a Europe very different from the historical one, John M. Ford’s The Dragon Waiting, about which I will only say that in it, the Princes had to be killed for good reasons.  It’s the kind of book where you have to suspend disbelief from the neck until it’s dead, but if you can, it’s worth it.  I also loved Katherine, though (again) I haven’t read it in a long time.

      Reply
    22. 22.

      bookworm1398

      August 27, 2023 at 7:35 pm

      I read this a while back and I remember liking it, though not the details. It left me unsure about who had killed the boys, but he still stole the throne by my reckoning. The whole thing is a reminder that both sides in a conflict can be wrong/ bad guys. And I will never really get the whole non acceptance of bastards thing.

      Reply
    23. 23.

      Omnes Omnibus

      August 27, 2023 at 7:36 pm

      Feel better soon.

      In anticipation of this thread, I bookmarked a video on Richard III. It is pretty even handed and hopefully entertaining. People less than familiar with the Wars of Roses may find it helpful

      Reply
    24. 24.

      SiubhanDuinne

      August 27, 2023 at 7:37 pm

      @kalakal:

      That’s recommendation enough for me! I admit to never having read them, though I’ve come close a few times! But that was back when I was still working and was a bit afraid to go haring off on a whole new series. But I’m retired now, so……

      Reply
    25. 25.

      sab

      August 27, 2023 at 7:38 pm

      When I was their age I saw the painting of those boys and it broke my heart. Years later I realized it was just propaganda. Those boys didn’t look like that and that is probably not how those boys died.

      Reply
    26. 26.

      Josie

      August 27, 2023 at 7:38 pm

      It is interesting to me how many stories about that time in British history make people out to be villains or heroes/heroines – Richard, Elizabeth Woodville, Richard’s father (I forget his name), Edward, etc.
      I suspect that, more than anything, they were strong minded people, trying to survive and take care of their families in a brutal time period. I like the idea of solving the mystery of their actions by looking at many different accounts and using logic rather than emotion.​

      Reply
    27. 27.

      Torrey

      August 27, 2023 at 7:38 pm

      @SiubhanDuinne: ​
        Get it. You won’t regret it.

      Reply
    28. 28.

      Omnes Omnibus

      August 27, 2023 at 7:40 pm

      @Torrey: Richard’s father (I forget his name)

      That’s easy.  Richard.

      Reply
    29. 29.

      caphilldcne

      August 27, 2023 at 7:41 pm

      Thank you for this thread. I appreciate you letting me know about this book which I am certain my mother will enjoy. She’s turning 81 soon. Alas has a lot of pain including recently wrenching her shoulder do we feel your pain, SD.  Also she loves these types of mysteries and also any art mysteries. If anyone has suggestions do let me know.

      Reply
    30. 30.

      WaterGirl

      August 27, 2023 at 7:43 pm

      @SiubhanDuinne: oops!  I might have started with just one, but you’re a all-in kind of girl, and I can respect that. :-)

      Reply
    31. 31.

      AnneWith

      August 27, 2023 at 7:44 pm

      Add me to the list of those who became a Ricardian due to DoT. I also greatly enjoy Elizabeth Peters The Murders of Richard III, which features a house party of Ricardians, & much discussion of DoT (the main character finds Tey’s portrayal of RIII to be a bit soppy).

      Reply
    32. 32.

      caphilldcne

      August 27, 2023 at 7:44 pm

      I’m not sure if my previous comment attempt showed up. So just a quick thanks. This is a perfect book for 81 yo Mom. She also just wrenched her shoulder so we are sending SD good thoughts and hope everyone gets pain free soon.

      Reply
    33. 33.

      Josie

      August 27, 2023 at 7:45 pm

      @Omnes Omnibus: Lol. Thanks. I should have known.

      Reply
    34. 34.

      Torrey

      August 27, 2023 at 7:46 pm

      @Josie: ​

      Richard’s father (I forget his name)

      It was Richard. Because of course it was. Almost Retired’s point about a surfeit of Richards, Edwards, and Elizabeths was exceedingly well taken. (Actually, that leaves me wondering why Richard senior and Cecily his wife didn’t get around to naming a kid after him until four or five sons down.)
      Fun fact: Richard’s father, Richard Duke of York, was arguably the inspiration for Ned Stark in Game of Thrones.​
       

      ETA: Omnes got there first.

      Reply
    35. 35.

      Heidi Mom

      August 27, 2023 at 7:48 pm

      I read DoT many years ago and just finished a re-read this afternoon.  Yes, it–and further reading–turned me, too, into a Ricardian.  Tey does a fine job of explaining just how good a king Richard was, and how unworthy his successor was.

      Reply
    36. 36.

      Tony Jay

      August 27, 2023 at 7:48 pm

      @Tehanu:

      John M. Ford’s The Dragon Waiting

      Awesome book. Fantastic characters you really care about, big stakes, a dash of murder mystery tossed in there to bring them together. Loved it. Ford was channelling Dorothy Dunnett with a helping of really clever alt-hist when he wrote that.

      Reply
    37. 37.

      zhena gogolia

      August 27, 2023 at 7:49 pm

      I haven’t read it (I was thinking maybe I had, but I guess he’s kind of convalescing in The Singing Sands too, and that’s the one I read). But reading this discussion, I see that Colin Dexter ripped off the plot for The Wench Is Dead. Morse is in the hospital and uses his time to try to solve a historical murder. (Although there’s no real history involved.)

      Reply
    38. 38.

      LiminalOwl

      August 27, 2023 at 7:49 pm

      @Tehanu: Yes on The Dragon Waiting too, though I read it only once. And recommendations for, well, anything else available by Mike Ford. (Siubhan Duinne, for a very short bit of entertainment, I commend to your attention the story “Scrabble with God.’”)

      Tehanu, I recognize the origin of your name. Were you by chance on rasff long ago? Been meaning to ask, hope you don’t mind.

      Reply
    39. 39.

      SiubhanDuinne

      August 27, 2023 at 7:49 pm

      @Josie:

      Richard’s father (I forget his name)

      Well, if you’re talking about Richard, his father’s name was Richard. If, on the other hand, you’re talking about Richard, I’d have to consult a genealogical table.

      :-)

      Reply
    40. 40.

      Omnes Omnibus

      August 27, 2023 at 7:49 pm

      @AnneWith: Interesting.  No Tudor apologists here yet.  We could use Mnen here, she was convinced by Alison Weir’s book that RIII was guilty.  I blame Buckingham.  With some Tudor in second place.

      Reply
    41. 41.

      Kate

      August 27, 2023 at 7:50 pm

      Folks here may be interested in watching “The Lost King,” now available on Acorn TV, starring Sally Hawkins.

      From their website:

      “The true story of amateur historian Philippa Langley who took on Britain’s most eminent historians and forced them to rethink the legacy of Richard lll.”

      Reply
    42. 42.

      kalakal

      August 27, 2023 at 7:51 pm

      @SiubhanDuinne: I think you’ll like them😄 You do need to read them in series order

      Reply
    43. 43.

      Feathers

      August 27, 2023 at 7:51 pm

      I’m going to have to admit that I am going against the consensus here. I read the book and enjoyed it in my 20s, but it did not turn me into a Ricardian. Reading it a month or so, I found it a fascinating example of how bad information can be dressed up and presented as brave truth telling. It really is amazing how compelling Tey’s storytelling skills are. If I had to teach college students about himpathy, this book would would probably be my text.

      Tey goes so far in “eliminating spin,” that she is deliberately refusing to look at almost all the available facts. Handwaving away “Tudor propaganda” means that we cannot use any sources written after Richard’s death. Complaining that the Wars of the Roses are too complicated to follow means that the actual motivations of the people involved are lost. Reading it I felt like it was someone with some weird theory about the 2016 election, which depends on completely ignoring the events of Clinton presidency because Hillary wasn’t an elected official then, and besides, it was the previous century. The truth is that the boys were never seen alive after August 1483. They were under Richard’s closely held control. It’s very clear that within a few weeks, most of the people involved thought the boys were dead, and acted accordingly.

      I went on a bit of a research rabbit hole after reading DoT. I’d really recommend Alison Weir’s The Princes in the Tower, which goes through all the extant material available, and comes to the conclusion that Richard did indeed murder the princes, with a pretty close and detailed timeline. I also watched The Lost King, about the Ricardian woman who pushed for the dig that finally found Richard’s body. I really did enjoy it. The film finds a balance between her fervent belief in Richard’s innocence and the fact that he undoubtedly is not.

      Sorry if I went on too long. This one got me.

      Reply
    44. 44.

      Omnes Omnibus

      August 27, 2023 at 7:52 pm

      @Torrey: Edward IV the king who never lost a battle and then made an ill-advised marriage had strong echoes in Robb Stark.

      Reply
    45. 45.

      Nelle

      August 27, 2023 at 7:52 pm

      I’m startled by the change in Tey’s writing between The Man in the Queue and Daughter of Time.  At least, my impression is that the writing is both sharper and also more economical in getting directly to her point.  Vivid.  I found myself enjoying my reread (after maybe five decades) o  Daughter of Time much more that that of the first one.

      Anyone hear watch The Lost King recently? It’s on Acorn right now…I might watch it again, after first seeing it in the theatre.  Edit – I see that this has come up already.

      Reply
    46. 46.

      LiminalOwl

      August 27, 2023 at 7:53 pm

      @bookworm1398: OK, I’ll bite: why do you reckon it a stolen throne? If Edward’s children were illegitimate, Richard was the rightful heir.

      Reply
    47. 47.

      Tony Jay

      August 27, 2023 at 7:54 pm

      @Omnes Omnibus:

      The Tudors didn’t rule for long, but they had BIG reigns in the historically-important sense, and they were lucky that they had the most famous playwright in the history of the English language in their corner.

      Richard had a horse he really liked and was dead. Not much of a fair contest.

      Reply
    48. 48.

      LiminalOwl

      August 27, 2023 at 7:55 pm

      @Nelle: The Thin Black Duke and I saw The Lost King in the theatre too. Haven’t re-watched.

      Reply
    49. 49.

      Omnes Omnibus

      August 27, 2023 at 7:56 pm

      @Feathers: There are holes in Weir’s arguments too.  Henry VII, for example, never accused Richard of killing his nephews.  Why wouldn’t he have done?  It’s a curious case if the dog in the night piece of evidence, but significant.

      Reply
    50. 50.

      Torrey

      August 27, 2023 at 7:57 pm

      @AnneWith:

        Another book along the same lines as the Daughter of Time is Donald MacLachlan’s The Adventure of the Bloody Tower in which Dr. Watson (yes, that Dr Watson) is asked to investigate the historical mystery. From the cover: “‘For the very first time since I had met him, Mr. Sherlock Holmes let me down.’ As a result, Dr. John H. Watson finds himself forced to accept, in 1883, a trucky challenge to investigate the facts and fictions surrounding King Richard III. Richard III: Monster? Murderer of his brother’s young boys? Usurper? Or a legitimate but reluctant heir to the crown, and a good king who produced laws that are still in effect in Great Britain. The game is afoot for the good doctor, from serene Magdalen College, Oxford, to the Bloody Tower at the notorious Tower of London.”

      Received it as a gift, haven’t yet had a chance to read it, but it looks like it might be of interest. At this point, I find it impossible to imagine Dr, Watson as anyone other than Martin Freeman.

      Reply
    51. 51.

      Traveller

      August 27, 2023 at 7:59 pm

      For a different view from Tey’s, brought wonderfully to life by Ian McKennan as an adaption of Shakespeare’s Richard III, see link below…it is visually and intellectually exciting.

      https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114279/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0_tt_6_nm_2_q_Richard%2520III

      For a more classical presentation, see Laurence Olivier’s Richard III…while both take the More/Shakespeare view…they are both great movies to watch.

       

       

      Best Wishes, Traveller

      Reply
    52. 52.

      sab

      August 27, 2023 at 8:03 pm

      @SiubhanDuinne: We are grown jackals, not jackal pups/cubs. We’ll fend for ourselves and tomorrow you can inspect the rubble.

      Reply
    53. 53.

      Almost Retired

      August 27, 2023 at 8:04 pm

      Also, Alan Grant has a broken leg.  And he gets to stay in the hospital until it heals?  Different times….

      Reply
    54. 54.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 8:06 pm

      (Note: Haven’t read the comments yet.)

      I did my (enjoyable) homework for this week and finished the book in good time. I made a few notes and had time to mull them over. One thing that struck me the most was the recurring theme of “Tonypandy.”

      [Grant:] “If you go to South Wales you will hear that, in 1910, the Government used troops to shoot down Welsh miners who were striking for their rights. You’ll probably hear that Winston Churchill, who was Home Secretary at the time, was responsible. South Wales, you will be told, will never forget Tonypandy!”

      Carradine had dropped his flippant air.

      “And it wasn’t a bit like that?”

      “The actual facts are these. The rougher section of the Rhondda valley crowd had got quite out of hand. Shops were being looted and property destroyed. The Chief Constable of Glamorgan sent a request to the Home Office for troops to protect the lieges. If a Chief Constable thinks a situation serious enough to ask for the help of the military a Home Secretary has very little choice in the matter. But Churchill was so horrified at the possibility of the troops coming face to face with a crowd of rioters and having to fire on them that he stopped the movement of the troops and sent instead a body of plain, solid Metropolitan Police, armed with nothing but their rolled-up mackintoshes. The troops were kept in reserve, and all contact with the rioters was made by unarmed London police. The only bloodshed in the whole affair was a bloody nose or two. The Home Secretary was severely criticised in the House of Commons incidentally for his ‘unprecedented intervention.’ That was Tonypandy. That is the shooting-down by troops that Wales will never forget.”

      “Yes,” Carradine said, considering. “Yes. It’s almost a parallel to the Boston affair. Someone blowing up a simple affair to huge proportions for a political end.”

      “The point is not that it is a parallel. The point is that every single man who was there knows that the story is nonsense, and yet it has never been contradicted. It will never be overtaken now. It is a completely untrue story grown to legend while the men who knew it to be untrue looked on and said nothing.’

      “Yes. That’s very interesting; very. History as it is made.”

      “Yes. History.”

      [Carradine:] “Give me research. After all, the truth of anything at all doesn’t lie in someone’s account of it. It lies in all the small facts of the time. An advertisement in a paper. The sale of a house. The price of a ring.”

      Grant, with the aid of Carradine’s research in various archives, goes on to investigate the case by separating fact from narrative. As Carradine puts it:

      “Look, Mr. Grant, let’s you and I start at the very beginning of this thing. Without history books, or modern versions, or anyone’s opinion about anything. Truth isn’t in accounts but in account books.”

      “A neat phrase,’ Grant said, complimentary. ‘Does it mean anything?”

      “It means everything. The real history is written in forms not meant as history. In Wardrobe accounts, in Privy Purse expenses, in personal letters, in estate books. If someone, say, insists that Lady Whoosit never had a child, and you find in the account book the entry: ‘For the son born to my lady on Michaelmas eve: five yards of blue ribbon, fourpence halfpenny,’ it’s a reasonably fair deduction that my lady had a son on Michaelmas eve.”

      So Grant and Carradine go through the whole “case,” separating what people actually did from what they said, or what was said about them. And Tey makes a compelling case for Richard’s innocence.

      After I finished the novel I went looking for discussion and debate about it and the historical controversy in general. I was surprised that I didn’t find very much, and I was shocked to see that a lot of what I did find relied on sources, many of them secondhand, that Tey had already debunked—or prebunked, in Balloon Juice parlance. I’d love to see some sources, if anyone can recommend some.

      Reply
    55. 55.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 8:09 pm

      @SiubhanDuinne:

      The stage actress Marta Hallard is also an interesting character, although seen only somewhat obliquely. As a playwright Tey must have had extensive knowledge of the type. Of the ingenue Atlanta Shergold, too—the never seen fiancée of Brent Carradine, the woolly lamb.

      Reply
    56. 56.

      Almost Retired

      August 27, 2023 at 8:11 pm

      @Steeplejack:  That was my biggest takeaway from the novel.  She may not have been right about Richard III, but history is not written by historians.

      Reply
    57. 57.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 8:12 pm

      @Steeplejack:

      To clarify a bit, when I went looking for discussion and debate, I was wondering how much (if at all) Tey padded her narrative with fictional details or if she confined herself strictly to the actual historical record.

      Reply
    58. 58.

      CaseyL

      August 27, 2023 at 8:12 pm

      I loved this book on many levels, but haven’t re-read it in years. Due for another read, now that I’m older and soooo much more cynical.

      To me, the question that Grant posed that rang loudest was, Cui bono? Richard, being childless and therefore heir-less, had much less reason to kill the Princes than the Tudors, who had much less of a claim to the throne.

      I should note, however, that Mike Ford, in an afterword to his sci-fi/fantasy/alt.history masterpiece The Dragon Waiting, made an interesting comment about this: something along the lines that we (modern readers) have all absorbed Machiavelli, and would probably better understand a political imperative to kill rival claimants to the throne in the name of national stability.

      The Wars of the Roses devastated England for two generations; any ruler who cared about not having that happen again might be a bit more ruthless than they would have been otherwise.​​​

      Reply
    59. 59.

      Almost Retired

      August 27, 2023 at 8:13 pm

      @Steeplejack:  It seems a bit of both.  She describes the short reign of Richard III in sort of idyllic terms, but there were military uprisings that don’t get mentioned.

      Reply
    60. 60.

      Tehanu

      August 27, 2023 at 8:17 pm

      @LiminalOwl:  Not sure what “rasff” is/was, but I don’t think so.  I’ve been using this as my internet moniker for about, um, 12 or 13 years, I think.  I am a LeGuin fan, as you can tell!

      Reply
    61. 61.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 8:17 pm

      Tey’s style is remarkably fluid—things keep moving along even with the detailed scholarly research—and there are some nice background patches as well.

      [Grant] lay and thought about that England. The England over which the Wars of the Roses had been fought. A green, green England; with not a chimney-stack from Cumberland to Cornwall. An England still unhedged, with great forests alive with game, and wide marshes thick with wild-fowl. An England with the same small group of dwellings repeated every few miles in endless permutation: castle, church, and cottages; monastery, church, and cottages; manor, church, and cottages. The strips of cultivation round the cluster of dwellings, and beyond that the greenness. The unbroken greenness. The deep-rutted lanes that ran from group to group, mired to bog in the winter and white with dust in the summer; decorated with wild roses or red with hawthorn as the seasons came and went.

      For thirty years, over this green uncrowded land, the Wars of the Roses had been fought. But it had been more of a blood feud than a war. A Montague and Capulet affair; of no great concern to the average Englishman. No one pushed in at your door to demand whether you were York or Lancaster and to hale you off to a concentration camp if your answer proved to be the wrong one for the occasion. It was a small concentrated war; almost a private party. They fought a battle in your lower meadow, and turned your kitchen into a dressing-station, and then moved off somewhere or other to fight a battle somewhere else, and a few weeks later you would hear what had happened at that battle, and you would have a family row about the result because your wife was probably Lancaster and you were perhaps York, and it was all rather like following rival football teams. No one persecuted you for being a Lancastrian or a Yorkist, any more than you would be persecuted for being an Arsenal fan or a Chelsea follower.

      Reply
    62. 62.

      Timill

      August 27, 2023 at 8:21 pm

      @Steeplejack: I can do you a generally unquoted source for Richard: along with Henry VII and Henry VIII, he’s one of the three Benefactors of King’s College Cambridge, which was founded by Henry VI. And as you will already have noted, he’s the only Yorkist there.

      In general, my take is that Richard was competent: if live Princes are a threat to him, so are undead ones. If he killed the Princes, he needed to announce their deaths to complete the elimination.

      And one thing that puzzles me: why were both the Pretenders claiming to be Richard DoY not Edward V? Was EdV known to have died at some point now lost?

      Reply
    63. 63.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 8:22 pm

      If anyone is motivated to read The Daughter of Time, Project Gutenberg Canada has an HTML version here.

      If you have a Kindle (or the Kindle app), the best version I found on Amazon is this one (for 99 cents).

      Reply
    64. 64.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 8:24 pm

      Now to make myself a stiff drink and read the comments!

      Reply
    65. 65.

      SiubhanDuinne

      August 27, 2023 at 8:26 pm

      @Steeplejack:

      Marta Hallard is a recurring secondary character in the Grant books — you’ll find her also in A Shilling for Candles and To Love and Be Wise.  According to Jennifer Morag Henderson’s biography of Tey, Marta was modelled on a close friend and member of Tey’s circle, an actress named Marda [sic] Vanne.

      Reply
    66. 66.

      Miss Bianca

      August 27, 2023 at 8:28 pm

      @Tehanu: I haven’t read The Daughter of Time in 40 years, at least, but it made a powerful impression on me. Have been re-reading all of Tey as a result of SD’s postings here, and they have been gratifying to varying degrees so far, but this is the one I have been looking forward to the most.

      I actually just read The Dragon is Waiting not too long ago. Interesting book, but a bit too…elliptical, perhaps, for me. I have the feeling I would need to re-read it at least once or twice more before I really understood what was going on, and these days that’s just too much work for me.//

      (I felt the same way about How Much for Just the Planet?, his Star Trek novel. Clever, but so convoluted! – I finally gave up trying to make any sense out of the action. Would have worked better as a screenplay, imho.)

      Reply
    67. 67.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 8:29 pm

      @Omnes Omnibus:

      Thanks for that. Will check it out later.

      Reply
    68. 68.

      LiminalOwl

      August 27, 2023 at 8:29 pm

      @Tehanu: Sorry, that must have been a different Tehanu. More than 20 years ago!

      I’m somewhat of a LeGuin fan too, of course. And occasionally I can revommend Earthsea to clients.

      Reply
    69. 69.

      Feathers

      August 27, 2023 at 8:33 pm

      @LiminalOwl: There was never any proof offered of the assertion that Edward IV had a pre contracted marriage with Judith Butler. For Edward’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville to actually be declared invalid, there would have had to have been a ruling from the ecclesiastical court. Richard never requested one, presumably because there was no actual evidence. Hence, the marriage was never actually ruled invalid. Richard had parliament make lots of rulings on matters which they did not have the authority to do so. It doesn’t seem to have been actually believed, but everyone knew Edward was an incorrigible womanizer, and Butler wasn’t really any more unsuitable than Woodville had been, so nobody could definitely say it hadn’t happened.

      @Omnes Omnibus: I think Weir’s contention that Henry didn’t want any attention brought back to his claiming of the throne is pretty valid. Also, he didn’t have the bodies, although he was looking for them. Without the bodies, he’d just be raising more questions, rather than providing answers. That the boys were never seen after the very early days of Richard’s reign is far stronger evidence to me.

      I also checked out Thomas Penn’s Winter King: Thé Birth of Tudor England. I’ve only skimmed it, but it looks good. I thing I want to watch The White Queen and The White Princess first, as I would probably be annoyed by the inaccuracies if I had just read a good history.

      Reply
    70. 70.

      Nelle

      August 27, 2023 at 8:34 pm

      @Steeplejack: Thanks for highlighting this, especially in light of talking about the Big Lie today and January 6.

      I read it on Kindle, which I don’t usually use.  So I lost track of the bits that I wanted to bring up here.  You got one of the important bits.

      Reply
    71. 71.

      Josie

      August 27, 2023 at 8:35 pm

      @SiubhanDuinne: ​
       As you can tell from my comment, I am not much of a fan of British history. I also have not read many mystery books since I was much younger. I must thank you, however, for inspiring me to read Josephine Tey by doing this series. I love her style. Her language is so precise and the characters so beautifully drawn and recognizable. I’m planning to go back and reread all of her books just to bask in her word choices.

      Reply
    72. 72.

      SiubhanDuinne

      August 27, 2023 at 8:37 pm

      @Omnes Omnibus:

      I saw that in the movie theatre when it was first released. A brilliant and utterly chilling, terrifying interpretation of the Shakespeare play. I got goosebumps again just watching that trailer a minute ago.

      I vividly remember seeing the Olivier film version in July 1959, halfway across the Atlantic Ocean on board the Canadian Pacific liner Empress of France. Have no idea how CP selected their nightly film offerings, or at this point what the other movies were, but that one looms large in memory.

      Reply
    73. 73.

      Timill

      August 27, 2023 at 8:38 pm

      @Feathers: I’m sure he could have got an answer from the ecclesiastical court…:

      R3: “Now choose! Either die in the vacuum of space or… tell me my brother’s marriage was invalid.”

      EC: “Your brother’s marriage was invalid.”

      Reply
    74. 74.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 8:38 pm

      @Omnes Omnibus:

      Yes, this. Why didn’t Henry include the murders in his laundry list of “why Richard was a bad dude”?

      Reply
    75. 75.

      Torrey

      August 27, 2023 at 8:39 pm

      @CaseyL: ​
       

      Richard, being childless and therefore heir-less, had much less reason to kill the Princes than the Tudors, who had much less of a claim to the throne.

      The princes were not seen after June 1483. Richard’s legitimate son Edward lived until April 1484. So at the time of the boys’ apparent disappearance, Richard had a living heir.

      By the way, the Big Finish Dr. Who continuation has a Richard III episode in which the Fifth Doctor lands in England towards the end of Edward IV’s reign. It’s fun.

      Reply
    76. 76.

      Omnes Omnibus

      August 27, 2023 at 8:42 pm

      @SiubhanDuinne: No, I think your pain pills may be kicking in.  My link is to a YouTube history “influencer” and her 41 minute summary of Richard’s life and background.

      Reply
    77. 77.

      SiubhanDuinne

      August 27, 2023 at 8:42 pm

      @Josie:

      I am so glad to know that! And I think you’ll find, as others have mentioned, that her writing becomes both more lyrical and more economical as she gains confidence and experience.

      She can also be hella funny — not LOL funny, but lots of wry little observations that are a delight to come across.

      Reply
    78. 78.

      Torrey

      August 27, 2023 at 8:47 pm

      @Timill: ​
       

      In general, my take is that Richard was competent: if live Princes are a threat to him, so are undead ones. If he killed the Princes, he needed to announce their deaths to complete the elimination.

      There’s also a suggestion I’ve seen that the boys were kidnapped by someone else and Richard had no idea where they were. Henry, Duke of Buckingham, has been mentioned as a possible suspect. I’m not a historian and I don’t have references except an article in the Mills College Quarterly by Elizabeth Pope. 1974, I think. But if the boys were kidnapped by someone else, and neither Richard nor Henry Tudor had any idea where they were, if they were alive or dead, that would account for the behavior of both men. (Again, not a historian, just spitballing, based on the suggestion.)

      Reply
    79. 79.

      SiubhanDuinne

      August 27, 2023 at 8:48 pm

      @Omnes Omnibus:

      Oh, sorry, probably so! Well, somebody here provided a link to the trailer of the Ian McKellen film of R3. That’s what I was remembering.

      Yours looks interesting too. I’ll check it out tomorrow. Thank you.

      EDIT: That was @Traveller (#50). Thank you for that link, and apologies for misdirecting my reply.

      Reply
    80. 80.

      Crimson Pimpernel

      August 27, 2023 at 8:57 pm

      My copy of DoT is falling to pieces, but I’d like to be more persuaded of her conclusions than I am.  Some of Tey’s arguments seem inconsistent (if I recall correctly, Edward’s sons were ineligible to succeed because their parents’ marriage was illegitimate but elsewhere Richard could have made his out-of-wedlock son his heir).  Medievalists I know also have been skeptical.  Nonetheless a great read.

      Reply
    81. 81.

      Timill

      August 27, 2023 at 8:57 pm

      @Torrey: Nice idea!

      Also on the “not Richard” side: Edward Plantagenet, 17th Earl of Warwick (Clarence’s surviving male heir), who could also have had a better claim than Richard to the throne. It was left to H7 to off him.

      Reply
    82. 82.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 8:58 pm

      @Torrey:

      At this point, I find it impossible to imagine Dr. Watson as anyone other than Martin Freeman.

      LOL. Late last night I happened to watch Dressed to Kill (1946), with Nigel Bruce as the estimable doctor and Basil Rathbone as Holmes. Completely different approach, but iconic in its way.

      I loved Sherlock, but the definitive Holmes for me is Jeremy Brett in the 1980s Granada series, and he had two Watsons—David Burke and Edward Hardwicke. They segued so seamlessly that it’s hard to tell them apart.

      Reply
    83. 83.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 9:02 pm

      @Almost Retired:

      And an injury to his spine. I think that’s what kept him in the hospital—and so immobile that he couldn’t look at anything but the ceiling for much of the book. Chapter 14:

      Grant was not, as it happened, out of bed when Carradine came again, but he was sitting up.

      “You can’t imagine,” he said to Brent, “how fascinating the opposite wall looks, after the ceiling. And how small and queer the world looks right way up.”

      Reply
    84. 84.

      Omnes Omnibus

      August 27, 2023 at 9:03 pm

      @Timill: Clarence was attainted.  Attainders cover children, so until and unless it was reversed young Warwick was ineligible.

      Reply
    85. 85.

      Feathers

      August 27, 2023 at 9:09 pm

      @Steeplejack: because he didn’t know who had killed them and when and how it had been done, until Tyrell confesses in 1502. At that point, he seems to have chosen to let the matter alone. Also, bringing up the dead princes would also draw attention to the fact that his wife was the rightful heir. And if not her, then Warwick and Lincoln were ahead of him in the succession. However, at that point England needed an adult King, so Parliament accepted his claim by right of conquest.

      I seem to be the only one taking the historian’s side. Should I drop it?

      It’s fascinating seeing people bringing up Jan 6. Because I’m seeing it, but but from the other side.

      Reply
    86. 86.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 9:09 pm

      @CaseyL:

      But if Richard III was worried about “rival claimants” to the throne, there were more than just the two boys—something like five or seven other siblings or relatives who theoretically would have had to be gotten out of the way. But Richard allowed them to live and even prosper.

      Reply
    87. 87.

      anitamargarita

      August 27, 2023 at 9:10 pm

      @LiminalOwl: and another, I love that book

      Reply
    88. 88.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 9:13 pm

      @Timill:

      I can do you a generally unquoted source for Richard: along with Henry VII and Henry VIII, he’s one of the three Benefactors of King’s College Cambridge, which was founded by Henry VI.

      Uh, who is the source you are referring to? Unclear to me.

      Reply
    89. 89.

      CaseyL

      August 27, 2023 at 9:15 pm

      @Torrey: ​

      The princes were not seen after June 1483. Richard’s legitimate son Edward lived until April 1484. So at the time of the boys’ apparent disappearance, Richard had a living heir.

      Huh. I either forgot that, or never knew it.

      Reply
    90. 90.

      A woman from anywhere (formerly Mohagan)

      August 27, 2023 at 9:15 pm

      I too owe to DoT my becoming a Ricardian, and my interest in English history in general.  Before reading the book, my grasp of English history was shaky (Americans don’t get much British history in Junior and high school lol).  I knew 1066, and Richard the Lion-Hearted, Henry VIII, and Elizabeth, and Victoria.  I had never heard of the War of the Roses, or Edward IV, or Richard III. So I owe Josephine Tey a great debt, along with a lot of enjoyment of Brat Farrar, Miss Pym Disposes, To Love and Be Wise, etc.

      Reply
    91. 91.

      Timill

      August 27, 2023 at 9:16 pm

      @Omnes Omnibus: Yup. Which is to say: the same position as EdV and RDoY: excluded unless Parliament reverses itself. If R3 needed to kill the Princes, he also needed to kill Warwick. Which he didn’t. And therefore he didn’t…

      Reply
    92. 92.

      Omnes Omnibus

      August 27, 2023 at 9:18 pm

      @Feathers: ​I seem to be the only one taking the historian’s side. Should I drop it?

      One historian. There still is disagreement. IMO Weir relies a bit too much on Thomas More’s probity. More’s willingness to trust the previous generation’s writers who happened to write a version of events friendly to the Tudors is sensible from an ambitious man. That is not inconsistent with his later unwillingness to sign an oath that violated his conscience. They are different things.

      Edited slightly.

      Reply
    93. 93.

      Timill

      August 27, 2023 at 9:23 pm

      @Steeplejack: You can probably find it on King’s website. But all Kingsmen used to eat dinner under their portraits (until some lowlife half-inched them).

      Reply
    94. 94.

      Percysowner

      August 27, 2023 at 9:29 pm

       

      Like many others, I love this book. Yes, it turned me into a full fledged Richardian. At the very least, it makes me keep in mind that history is, in fact, written by the victors and that The Big Lie is not a modern invention. It’s a book I return to now and again, which is more than I can say about most mysteries. The fact that it is so different from most mysteries makes it worth rereading for me.

      Reply
    95. 95.

      Timill

      August 27, 2023 at 9:31 pm

      @Omnes Omnibus: Richard III is as remote from More as Nixon’s execution of Archibald Cox is from us. (More so, given the shorter lifespan then)

      Reply
    96. 96.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 9:41 pm

      @Feathers:

      But Tyrrel didn’t confess, at least according to Tey.

      [Carradine:] “I don’t need to, do I? He finished up in a dungeon in the Tower. And was beheaded ‘in great haste and without trial’ on May 6th 1502.”

      [Grant:] “And what about his confession?”

      “There wasn’t one.”

      “What!”

      “Don’t look at me like that. I’m not responsible.”

      “But I thought he confessed to the murder of the boys.”

      “Yes, according to various accounts. But they are accounts of a confession, not—not a transcript, if you see what I mean.”

      “You mean, Henry didn’t publish a confession?”

      “No. His paid historian, Polydore Virgil, gave an account of how the murder was done. After Tyrrel was dead.”

      “But if Tyrrel confessed that he murdered the boys at Richard’s instigation, why wasn’t he charged with the crime and publicly tried for it?”

      “I can’t imagine.”

      “Let me get this straight. Nothing was heard of Tyrrel’s confession until Tyrrel was dead.”

      “No.”

      [Grant:] “If that had really happened; I mean: if the keys were handed over [to Tyrrel] for a night on Richard’s order, then a lot of junior officials at the Tower must have been aware of it. It is quite inconceivable that one or other of them wouldn’t be ready to tell the tale to Henry when he took over the Tower. Especially if the boys were missing. Brackenbury was dead. Richard was dead. The next in command at the Tower would be expected to produce the boys. When they weren’t producible, he must have said: ‘The Constable handed over the keys, one night, and since then the boys have not been seen.’ There would have been the most ruthless hue and cry after the man who had been given the keys. He would have been Exhibit A in the case against Richard, and to produce him would have been a feather in Henry’s cap.”

      [Carradine:] “Not only that, but Tyrrel was too well known to the people at the Tower to have passed unrecognised. In the small London of that day he must have been quite a well-known figure.”

      “Yes. If that story were true Tyrrel would have been tried and executed for the boys’ murder, openly, in 1485. He had no one to protect him.” He reached for his cigarettes. “So what we’re left with is that Henry executed Tyrrel in 1502, and then announced by way of his tame historians that Tyrrel had confessed that twenty years before he had murdered the Princes.”

      “Yes.”

      “And he didn’t offer, anywhere, at any time, any reason for not trying Tyrrel for this atrocious thing he had confessed.”

      Reply
    97. 97.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 9:48 pm

      @Timill:

      You can’t name the source? I looked on the Google and the King’s College Wikipedia entry and didn’t find anything. Can you at least cite the relevant document(s)?

      Reply
    98. 98.

      J R in WV

      August 27, 2023 at 9:55 pm

       

      Many years ago, Wife and I took a tour of mostly ancient sites in Basque Spain and Sw France, one of which was Richard the First’s  of France,  same guy, castle in a beautiful countryside,  where even a king couldn’t stay out over night. So there was a castle every day’s travel apart.

      The castle was fascinating, somewhat empty but  well lit.

      We weren’t allowed in  the basements,  but there were cannonballs embedded in some exterior walls. Even the wealthy and powerful Iived hard Iives back then!

      And life was cheap also!

      Reply
    99. 99.

      columbusqueen

      August 27, 2023 at 10:10 pm

      The novel I passionately recommend on Richard is Sharon Kay Penman’s The Sunne in Splendour. She shows a great level of perception about all the historical people she writes about, & I find her answers to the riddles of the time convincing.

      Reply
    100. 100.

      Zelma

      August 27, 2023 at 10:18 pm

      Historian here.  In fact, an English historian who taught English history for decades and has read literally dozens of books about the era.  I also read and loved Daughter of Time as a teenager.  I assigned the novel quite often over the years, especially to my “Writing History” students.  It is a wonderful example of reading source material critically.  But…

      I firmly believe that Richard did it.  Richard’s actions after his brother’s death were absolutely ruthless.  He set about to eliminate any possible political rivals, anyone who had influence over his nephews and anyone who supported them.  He probably believed he was acting out of self-preservation.  The memories of the bloodbath that had preceded Edward IV’s final victory were fresh.

      The fact is that the boys were never seen after August, that the queen dowager fled with her daughters to the protection of the church, and that there seemed to be a contemporary belief that Richards had ordered them killed.  Means, motive and opportunity.  A very strong circumstantial case.

      I think you will find that among professional historians of the era, the belief in Richard’s guilt is pretty unanimous.

      Reply
    101. 101.

      Catnaz

      August 27, 2023 at 10:19 pm

      @SiubhanDuinne: a ridiculous reason.  Gaudy Night is a fine read, and about as “feminist” as you could get back then.  Of course there was also the romance, but that also proceeded on Harriet’s terms.

      Reply
    102. 102.

      Feathers

      August 27, 2023 at 10:31 pm

      @Steeplejack: I think the reason why you don’t find much discussion online is because anyone tries to do so ends up in a morass with Ricardians simply refusing to accept evidence from the period that doesn’t suit their needs.

      As I said in my first post, this whole thing has all the marks of ‘himpathy.’ A man, whose portrait shows us a man with a serene and interesting face, was a valiant soldier, a king who ruled wisely (though arguably because he needed to because everyone thought he had murdered his nephews to gain the throne), must therefore be wrongly accused. Innocent until proven guilty comes to mean that all the contemporary sources are lying propaganda and should be automatically ignored. When what texts we have are from a generation later, that means only eyewitness testimony is valid. People start inventing new ways he could be innocent. Kidnapping? The Tower of London was very secure and the only reason to kidnap the boys would have been to raise an army and seize the throne from Richard. Which didn’t happen.

      Folks, people with great faces who do good works in the world are capable of murdering their family. I know it’s uncomfortable, but it’s really eye opening to see how many people really seem to need for that not to be true.

      Reply
    103. 103.

      Tehanu

      August 27, 2023 at 10:32 pm

      @Zelma:  Maybe “pretty unanimous,” but not completely; what about Paul Murray Kendall?

      Reply
    104. 104.

      Omnes Omnibus

      August 27, 2023 at 10:33 pm

      @Feathers: Folks, people with great faces who do good works in the world are capable of murdering their family. I know it’s uncomfortable, but it’s really eye opening to see how many people really seem to need for that not to be true.

      Well, thanks for not condescending to anyone here.

      Reply
    105. 105.

      Zelma

      August 27, 2023 at 10:58 pm

      @Tehanu:

      Kendall wrote a long time ago and there has been lots of new historiography on the era since then.  I did say “pretty” unanimous.

      Reply
    106. 106.

      Zelma

      August 27, 2023 at 11:06 pm

      @Tehanu:

      The latest worthwhile book is Thomas Penn, The Brothers York: A Royal Tragedy.  It’s really well written and describes the fraught relationship between Edward, his brother Clarence and Richard.  Damaged men, all.

      Reply
    107. 107.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 11:22 pm

      @Feathers:

      You haven’t offered much, if any, evidence, just a referral to Alison Weir’s book and a somewhat convoluted theory that we’re all under the hypnotic sway of “himpathy” and Richard’s “great face.”

      I’m not a Ricardian, by any means, but you’re offering very little on the other side. Mostly just accusing Tey of “handwaving away ‘Tudor propaganda’” and of “complaining that the Wars of the Roses are too complicated to follow.”

      The truth is that the boys were never seen alive after August 1483. They were under Richard’s closely held control. It’s very clear that within a few weeks, most of the people involved thought the boys were dead, and acted accordingly.

      And did what, exactly? Do you have any sources for what people thought or what they did that would be connected to the boys’ deaths?

      Reply
    108. 108.

      CaseyL

      August 27, 2023 at 11:42 pm

      BTW, if anyone here is interested, there’s a sweet little British film that came out in 2022 called “The Lost King,” which is based on the true story about an amateur historian finding where Richard III’s body was.

      The lead is played by Sally Hawkins, the same actress who starred in “The Shape of Water.” She sees visions of Richard asking her to find him (and Richard is played by Harry Lloyd, who also played Viserys Targaryen in “Game of Thrones”).​​

      Reply
    109. 109.

      stinger

      August 27, 2023 at 11:55 pm

      Having read and re-read DoT several times over the course of several decades, I find it to be a great read, an original style of mystery, and a fresh way (at the time it was written) to think about history. However, the whole story for me is weakened by Tey’s (or Grant’s) initial reliance on a painting of Richard not taken from life. (The image at the top of this post is held by Britain’s National Portrait Gallery and stated by them to be late 16th century, not early — meaning it was painted about 100 years after Richard’s death.) You might say it’s only a jumping-off point for Grant’s investigation, but he keeps coming back to it.

      When Agatha Christie uses physiognomy to indicate someone’s guilt, she is rightly derided. I don’t see why this is any different.

      Reply
    110. 110.

      Steeplejack

      August 27, 2023 at 11:55 pm

      @CaseyL:

      Streaming on Acorn and AMC+. Available to rent or buy elsewhere.

      Reply
    111. 111.

      Feathers

      August 28, 2023 at 12:25 am

      @Steeplejack: Weir cites multiple journals and letters from ordinary people in London where they say that they thought the boys were dead. But by Tey’s standards, this is hearsay and gossip and not to be considered. Also, we have accounts from various courts of Europe that the Princes are dead and Richard responsible. But, again, hearsay.

      It isn’t that there aren’t sources, it’s that there is a sizable group of people who have decided that these sources, which are as good as anything we have for the era, aren’t good enough when it comes to Richard being accepted as having murdered the princes in the tower.

      Do you agree with Tey that More is not a reliable source?

      Reply
    112. 112.

      Crimson Pimpernel

      August 28, 2023 at 1:14 am

      By the way, when I was a college student and spent the summer of 1973 in London, I stayed at Crosby Hall, once owned by Richard (and subsequently, ironically, by Thomas More).  When I stayed there it offered inexpensive lodging for students.  The 15th century part was the dining hall, fortunately not the student rooms.  I believe Grant mentions the place to Brent in passing in DoT.  Per Wikipedia, it is now privately owned.

      Reply
    113. 113.

      Cathie from Canada

      August 28, 2023 at 1:26 am

      @Gretchen: just a side note on Rex Stout — in one of his books, Archie says Wolfe once spent a week investigating the death of the princes, and then removed Sir Thomas More from his shelves because he had libeled Richard III.

      Reply
    114. 114.

      West of the Rockies

      August 28, 2023 at 1:29 am

      I hope a new post arrives.

      Reply
    115. 115.

      eclare

      August 28, 2023 at 2:50 am

      @West of the Rockies:

      Your wish has been granted.

      Reply
    116. 116.

      joel hanes

      August 28, 2023 at 4:15 am

      Back when the blogosphere flourished, John M. Ford was a commenter/contributor to the Nielsen Hayden’s blog Making Light.

      He wrote this poem about 9/11
      http://www.110stories.us/

      Reply
    117. 117.

      Paul in KY

      August 28, 2023 at 12:00 pm

      @bookworm1398: William I, who was a bastard himself, left explicit instructions/commands that the throne of England could never be passed down to a person of bastard birth.

      Reply
    118. 118.

      Paul in KY

      August 28, 2023 at 12:02 pm

      @sab: The former Edward V had a terrible infected tooth at that time. Probably jaw swollen, etc. His brother had also been Duke of Norfolk, as well as Duke of York. That was one of the things done by his father that helped to get them in the tower.

      Reply
    119. 119.

      Paul in KY

      August 28, 2023 at 12:05 pm

      @Heidi Mom: IMO, Richard III was a good king for regular, non-gentry folk. Problem was, he also needed to be a good king for the people who had all the political power back then and he wasn’t.

      Reply
    120. 120.

      Paul in KY

      August 28, 2023 at 12:06 pm

      @Omnes Omnibus: Richard had them offed. I think his wife was a factor with her desire to see people who would/could be counter-claimants to the throne eliminated.

      Reply
    121. 121.

      Paul in KY

      August 28, 2023 at 12:10 pm

      @Omnes Omnibus: Henry VII never explicitly accused Richard of that, but in his general ‘Richard is a monstrous evil tyrant murderer scumbag, etc. etc.’ seems to be alluding to it (IMO).

      Henry never liked mentioning the side of the family that was his only link to having the throne (his wife’s side).

      Reply
    122. 122.

      Paul in KY

      August 28, 2023 at 12:12 pm

      @CaseyL: He had a very alive child in 1483. His son Edward, Prince of Wales.

      Reply
    123. 123.

      Paul in KY

      August 28, 2023 at 12:20 pm

      @Feathers: Edward and Elizabeth never had a public ceremony for their wedding. That was a big ecclesiastical no-no. If a public ceremony had been had, that marriage may later on be found to be bigamous, but the children produced by the union are considered legitimate. No public ceremony and later marriage found to be bigamous, children are judged illegitimate.

      That appears to be what Richard III was going on. It seems that within Edward’s close partying circle, it was no secret that ‘Hey baby, want to be Queen?’ was one of his go-to courting tactics for a highly born woman he wanted to bed and would not just jump into bed with him at the getgo (in his pre-Woodville youth).

      Reply
    124. 124.

      Paul in KY

      August 28, 2023 at 12:23 pm

      @Timill: And H7 did it much more elegantly than R3.

      Of course, H7 had much, much better advisors/mentors than did R3 (IMO).

      Reply
    125. 125.

      Paul in KY

      August 28, 2023 at 12:25 pm

      @Omnes Omnibus: H7 did treat him as if he really was Earl of Warwick heir and a rival claimant to crown. The kid seems to have had mental competency problems maybe.

      Reply
    126. 126.

      Paul in KY

      August 28, 2023 at 12:26 pm

      @Steeplejack: ‘Claimants’ with a better claim than he and his son (if they aren’t illegitimate, etc. etc.)

      Reply
    127. 127.

      Paul in KY

      August 28, 2023 at 12:28 pm

      @Timill: He didn’t need to kill Edward, son of George Plantagenet, as the sainted Edward IV had attainted him and thus he was not eligible to inherit. Plus the boy appears to have been handicapped in some gross manner that would have stopped him from assuming the crown anyway.

      Reply
    128. 128.

      Paul in KY

      August 28, 2023 at 12:35 pm

      @Steeplejack: Henry VII was quite happy that the boys were dead, as he’d never have been King if they were still alive. Same goes for Duke of Buckingham being dead.

      Reply
    129. 129.

      ETtheLibrarian

      August 28, 2023 at 12:40 pm

      I loved this book and still have my copy. I should re-read it. I would say that it is the reason I have ever payed attention to this period of English history. When he was dug up years ago this book was mentioned as a bit of a catalyst for the pro Richard camp. I don’t know if that is 100% true but I definitely feel that they have definitely taken the book up.

      Reply
    130. 130.

      Elizabelle

      August 28, 2023 at 1:13 pm

      This was a great thread.  Thank you, Tey jackals, be you Ricardians or not.

      Own a copy, and it just did not hold my interest first attempt.  (That happens sometimes.). To give it another attempt, this fall, and then bedevil Subaru Dianne with questions and comments.

      Really good comments about the misdirections of history.

      Wondering if this is a point Hilary Mantel was trying to make, with resuscitating Thomas Cromwell, literarily, anyway.  Take a man who was villainized, and look at it from his side.  She laundered his reputation.  Who is the unreliable narrator?

      Henry 8th was appalling, once he decided to divorce Catherine of Aragon and moved on to Anne Boleyn.  Were he not the father of Elizabeth I, history might deal with him far more harshly.  Having your wives (plural) executed?  Come on.

      Reply
    131. 131.

      Sherparick

      August 28, 2023 at 3:20 pm

      @Omnes Omnibus: Richard, Duke of York, whose grandfather was the first Duke of York, Edmund of Langley, son of Edward the III. His mother, Ann Mortimer was was also a great-granddaughter of Edward III through his second son, Lionel (hey, a different name for a Plantagenet!)  The Henrys & Johns tend to be Lancastrians. There is one “George” Richard III young brother, who was executed by the older brother, Edward IV, who had a long list of bodies to his credit.  Not for nothing did the War of Roses & Hundred Years War inspire George Martin’s “Game of Thrones.”

      Reply
    132. 132.

      Paul in KY

      August 28, 2023 at 8:09 pm

      @Sherparick: Pretty spot on! Just George was an older brother too of Richard’s. Edward, Edmund, George, Richard.

      Pedantic Man away!

      Reply
    133. 133.

      Tehanu

      August 28, 2023 at 9:47 pm

      @Zelma:  Thanks, I will check it out.

      Reply

    Leave a Comment

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    If you don't see both the Visual and the Text tab on the editor, click here to refresh.

    Clear Comment

    To reply to more than one person, click the X to save & close the box.

    Primary Sidebar

    Political Action

    Postcard Writing Information

    Recent Comments

    • zhena gogolia on Lazy Sunday Open Thread (Sep 24, 2023 @ 4:59pm)
    • RevRick on Lazy Sunday Open Thread (Sep 24, 2023 @ 4:58pm)
    • prostratedragon on Lazy Sunday Open Thread (Sep 24, 2023 @ 4:55pm)
    • Anyway on Lazy Sunday Open Thread (Sep 24, 2023 @ 4:54pm)
    • wjca on Lazy Sunday Open Thread (Sep 24, 2023 @ 4:53pm)

    🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

    Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
    Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

    Balloon Juice Posts

    View by Topic
    View by Author
    View by Month & Year
    View by Past Author

    Featuring

    Medium Cool
    Artists in Our Midst
    Authors in Our Midst
    We All Need A Little Kindness
    What Has Biden Done for You Lately?

    Balloon Juice Meetups!

    All Meetups
    Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning

    Fundraising 2023-24

    Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

    Calling All Jackals

    Site Feedback
    Nominate a Rotating Tag
    Submit Photos to On the Road
    Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
    Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
    Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

    Twitter / Spoutible

    Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
    WaterGirl (Spoutible)
    TaMara (Spoutible)
    John Cole
    DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
    Betty Cracker
    Tom Levenson
    TaMara
    David Anderson
    Major Major Major Major
    ActualCitizensUnited

    Join the Fight!

    Join the Fight Signup Form
    All Join the Fight Posts

    Balloon Juice for Ukraine

    Donate

    Cole & Friends Learn Español

    Introductory Post
    Cole & Friends Learn Español

    Site Footer

    Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

    • Facebook
    • RSS
    • Twitter
    • YouTube
    • Comment Policy
    • Our Authors
    • Blogroll
    • Our Artists
    • Privacy Policy

    Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

    Insert/edit link

    Enter the destination URL

    Or link to existing content

      No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.
        Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

        Email sent!