Grant's Quest for clarity

I found the first nine chapters of The Daughter of Time ties in with our discussion of what is history/fiction. History is usually describe and associated with fact and is separate from fiction. The depiction of Richard III is that he is an ugly human and a killer. Our main character Alan Grant, is a detective and tries uncover the truth behind who Richard III really was. Grant and his associates are all interpreting different pictures and readings to try and found out what is true history and what is fiction when it comes to the uncertainty of who Richard III really was. Was he the rightfully the last King of the Middle Ages in England? Or was he a power-hungry nephew killer.While reading I found that there is a lot of confusion following the families and it is difficult to know who comes next. “Every Schoolboy turned over the last page of Richard III with relief, because now at last the War of the Roses were over and they could get on to the Tudors, who were dull but easy to follow.” (34) It seems to be a difficult family tree to follow for students in England. I feel that differing between history and fiction is even more difficult. Grant and his associates continue their push to differentiate the between history and fiction. They find that Thomas More’s account of Richard III was based upon false statements from John Morton who was “Richard’s bitterest enemy” (95). I think that this shows that John may have been biased in his interpretation of Richard and tried to paint him to be a bad person ergo, Richard might not have been such a bad guy. There is a lot of evidence that needs to be addressed by the characters to properly distinguish the facts. I’m excited to follow Grant as he attempts to separate true history from fiction.

Work cited

The Daughter of Time Josephine Tey