Talk:The Daughter of Time

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Literature Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article needs an infobox template! - see Novels InfoboxCode or Short Story InfoboxCode for a pattern
	This article is supported by the Crime task force. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

The conclusion that Richard III is not guilty, however, is based to some extent on Grant's "gut feeling" , as a detective, that Richard is a good man and therefore not capable of such a crime.

I'm not certain that I agree with this analysis. He was not capable, Grant reasoned, of a base crime. He could have murdered, but he could not have comitted this murder. TRiG 14:11, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

This statement is only partly correct. "Gut feeling" did play a part in the reasoning, but it is backed up by solid contemporary descriptions of Richard's behaviour, which does allow some inferences about the nature of his character.

In addition, the statement that the novel claims to be nothing more than fiction is incorrect.

Lastly: It should be mentioned that one of the major points of the book lays in pointing out the hypocrisy of condemning Richard for the (alleged) murder of his nephews, while at the same time praising his successor Henry VII for "eliminating his potential rivals" (which apparently is done in several British publications) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.150.79.197 (talk) 19:01, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Is the historical evidence cited by Tey's characters accurate? What do professional historians of the period think of Tey's thesis? Xxanthippe 09:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)