You’re stuck in a hospital bed. You've read everything. You are so bored you've started counting the cracks in the ceiling. This is exactly where Inspector Alan Grant finds himself at the start of The Daughter of Time by Josephine Tey. It’s not your typical "whodunnit" because the body has been cold for nearly five hundred years.
Grant is a Scotland Yard man with a "face-reading" obsession. He thinks he can tell a person's character just by looking at them. When his friend Martha brings him a collection of historical portraits to cure his boredom, he stops at one: Richard III. He doesn't see a monster. He sees a judge. He sees a man burdened by responsibility, not a hunchbacked child-killer. This sets off a detective novelist’s fever dream that fundamentally changed how people look at English history.
Honestly, it’s a weird book. It’s basically a guy sitting in bed talking to a young American researcher named Brent Carradine, yet it’s more gripping than most high-speed car chases.
Why The Daughter of Time by Josephine Tey Is Not Your Average Mystery
Most mysteries are about "who." This one is about "how." How did a man who was arguably a decent king get rebranded as the ultimate villain of Western literature? Tey isn't just investigating a crime; she’s investigating propaganda.
She takes aim at the "Tudor Myth." You know the one. It’s the version of history where Richard III is a twisted, withered creature who smothered his nephews, the Princes in the Tower, to steal the throne. Tey argues that this version was written by the winners—the Tudors—who needed to justify their own shaky claim to the crown.
She uses Grant to pick apart the sources like a modern forensic analyst. He looks at Thomas More’s History of King Richard III and realizes it’s not a firsthand account. It’s hearsay. It’s basically a 16th-century tabloid piece.
The Princes in the Tower: The Ultimate Cold Case
The heart of the book is the disappearance of Edward V and his brother Richard, Duke of York. If Richard III didn't kill them, who did?
Tey points the finger at Henry VII. Her logic is pretty straightforward: Henry had more to gain. If the boys were alive, Henry’s claim to the throne was invalid. If Richard had killed them, why didn't Henry use that against him immediately after the Battle of Bosworth? Why wait years to "find" the bodies?
🔗 Read more: Jack Blocker American Idol Journey: What Most People Get Wrong
It’s a compelling argument. It’s also controversial. Historians have been fighting about this for decades. Some, like Desmond Seward, have argued that Tey’s "Ricardian" defense ignores the very real evidence of Richard's ruthlessness. But for many readers, Tey’s logic feels more "real" than the Shakespearean caricature.
The Power of Tonypandy
One of the most famous concepts in The Daughter of Time by Josephine Tey is "Tonypandy."
Grant uses this term to describe a historical event that everyone "knows" happened, but actually didn't. He refers to a supposed massacre of strikers in South Wales by the military in 1910. In reality, the "massacre" never happened, yet it became a cornerstone of local lore and political anger.
History is a lie agreed upon. That’s the vibe here.
Tey explores how a story, if repeated often enough, becomes indistinguishable from truth. She mentions the "Boston Massacre" as another example of an event that was blown out of proportion for political gain. It makes you wonder what else we believe today that is just... wrong.
A Masterclass in Sentence Variety
Writing a book where the protagonist doesn't move is hard. Tey pulls it off by making the intellectual pursuit feel physical.
The sentences are sharp.
💡 You might also like: Why American Beauty by the Grateful Dead is Still the Gold Standard of Americana
"Truth is the daughter of time," the old proverb says. That’s where the title comes from. It implies that eventually, the facts will surface, no matter how deep you bury them.
Grant’s frustration is palpable. He’s a man of action trapped in sheets. His only weapon is his mind. He treats the historical records like suspects in an interrogation room. He catches them in lies. He notices inconsistencies in their "alibis."
Is Tey’s History Actually Accurate?
This is where it gets tricky. Josephine Tey (the pen name of Elizabeth MacKintosh) was a novelist, not a PhD historian. While she did her homework, she definitely had a bias. She wanted Richard to be innocent.
She relies heavily on Sir Clements Markham’s 1906 book, which was a massive defense of Richard III. Modern historians like Alison Weir have countered many of Tey’s points. They argue that the "Cui bono?" (who benefits?) logic isn't enough to exonerate Richard.
- The Skeleton Evidence: In 1674, bones were found in the Tower of London. At the time, they were assumed to be the princes. Tey dismisses this.
- The 2012 Discovery: We can't talk about Richard III without mentioning his bones being found under a parking lot in Leicester in 2012. While this proved he had scoliosis (but wasn't a "hunchback"), it didn't prove he was a murderer.
- The Motive: Tey argues Richard was a loyal brother. Critics say the lure of the crown changes people.
Even if you don't buy her solution to the mystery, the book's value isn't in the "truth" of Richard III. It’s in the lesson of skepticism. It teaches the reader to ask: Who wrote this? What was their motive?
Why You Should Read It Right Now
We live in the era of fake news and deepfakes. In that context, The Daughter of Time by Josephine Tey feels more relevant than ever.
It’s a short read. You can finish it in an afternoon. But it stays with you. It makes you look at your history textbooks—and your news feed—with a much more critical eye.
📖 Related: Why October London Make Me Wanna Is the Soul Revival We Actually Needed
The book won the top spot in the Crime Writers' Association's "The Top 100 Crime Novels of All Time" list in 1990. It beat out Sherlock Holmes. It beat out Agatha Christie. That should tell you something about its staying power.
It’s not just a book for history buffs. It’s a book for anyone who likes a good argument. It’s for the person who always asks "Why?" when they're told "Because that's how it happened."
How to Approach the Cold Case Yourself
If you’re inspired by Grant’s bedside detective work, don't just take Tey’s word for it. The beauty of this mystery is that it’s still open.
- Read the primary sources. Look up the "Titulus Regius," the statute that declared Richard the rightful king.
- Compare the portraits. Look at the portrait Grant studied (the one in the National Portrait Gallery). Does he look like a killer to you?
- Visit the Richard III Society website. These people have been dedicated to clearing his name for decades.
- Watch the 2022 film The Lost King. It’s about the search for Richard's remains and captures that same "amateur detective" spirit Tey championed.
The legacy of The Daughter of Time by Josephine Tey isn't a closed file. It’s an invitation to keep digging. History isn't a static thing written in stone; it’s a living conversation. Sometimes, the most important work a detective can do is to question the "facts" that everyone else has already accepted.
Stay skeptical. Read between the lines. And never trust a winner to tell the story of the loser.
Actionable Next Steps for Readers
To get the most out of Tey's work and the historical mystery it presents, follow these specific steps:
- Audit Your Sources: Select a historical event you think you know well. Find two accounts of it written by opposing sides (e.g., British vs. American accounts of the Revolution). Note where the "facts" diverge.
- Study the Portraitry: Look up the "NPG 148" portrait of Richard III. Research how later artists may have altered his features in copies to make him look more "villainous" during the Tudor era.
- Cross-Reference with Modern Archaeology: Read the University of Leicester’s report on the 2012 exhumation. Compare the physical findings (like the lack of a "withered arm") to the descriptions Grant critiques in the novel.
- Explore the "Golden Age" Context: Read Tey’s other Alan Grant novels, like The Shilling for Candles, to see how her investigative style differs when dealing with contemporary crimes versus historical ones.