One of the pieces in history that is often found to be puzzling is the reign of King Richard III and the accusation against him of the murder of his two nephews, the sons of his brother, Edward IV. Josephine Tey’s 1951 novel, Daughter of Time, presents the past as a mystery to be solved. She delves into this matter and portrays the life of King Richard III in a new light. The timeframe of the novel is the life of King Richard III from the time his father ruled until his own death in the Battle of Bosworth. Through much discussion, Tey comes to the conclusion that perhaps it was not King Richard III who killed the two young boys. Modern views of the primitive king are largely influenced by William Shakespeare’s representation of King Richard
…show more content…
Alan Grant, an inspector for England’s Scotland Yard, is cooped up in the hospital after breaking his leg in the line of duty. His actress friend, Marta, brings him several books to read, which he rejects. Marta then brings him a pile of pictures of different of faces, portraits from history, to analyze. Upon discovering the face of Richard III, known for the murder of his two nephews, Grant does not observe the face of a villain who could commit such a dreadful act, but rather a man of conscience and integrity. Grant undertakes the ambitious project of solving the mystery of Richard III. He begins his investigation with a child’s history book borrowed from a nurse. For years, Richards III’s reputation has been perpetuated in school text books as the wicked uncle and dissatisfied with that, Grant sets out to change it. Along with Carradine, a researcher whom Grant recruited, Grant begins to learn more about King Richard III and hopes to come to a logical conclusion about the tale. He conducts his research in the same way he would a modern day criminal case. Through many resources and a lot of research, they come to discover many fascinating details that tend to discredit Richard III’s role in the death of the young boys. They come to the conclusion that perhaps it was not Richard III who killed the boys but Henry VII, Richard III’s successor, who ordered their murder. Through much secrecy and planning, Henry VII made all believe that Richard, who had no motive whatsoever, was responsible for the crime. A satisfied Grant has stayed occupied with this criminal analysis exercise throughout his stay in the hospital until he has
Alan Grant, an inspector for England’s Scotland Yard, is cooped up in the hospital after breaking his leg in the line of duty. His actress friend, Marta, brings him several books to read, which he rejects. Marta then brings him a pile of pictures of different of faces, portraits from history, to analyze. Upon discovering the face of Richard III, known for the murder of his two nephews, Grant does not observe the face of a villain who could commit such a dreadful act, but rather a man of conscience and integrity. Grant undertakes the ambitious project of solving the mystery of Richard III. He begins his investigation with a child’s history book borrowed from a nurse. For years, Richards III’s reputation has been perpetuated in school text books as the wicked uncle and dissatisfied with that, Grant sets out to change it. Along with Carradine, a researcher whom Grant recruited, Grant begins to learn more about King Richard III and hopes to come to a logical conclusion about the tale. He conducts his research in the same way he would a modern day criminal case. Through many resources and a lot of research, they come to discover many fascinating details that tend to discredit Richard III’s role in the death of the young boys. They come to the conclusion that perhaps it was not Richard III who killed the boys but Henry VII, Richard III’s successor, who ordered their murder. Through much secrecy and planning, Henry VII made all believe that Richard, who had no motive whatsoever, was responsible for the crime. A satisfied Grant has stayed occupied with this criminal analysis exercise throughout his stay in the hospital until he has