Agatha Christie's Secret Notebooks

Mrs McGinty’s Dead • Ordeal by Innocence • ‘Sing a Song of Sixpence’ • Sleeping Murder • Sparkling Cyanide

Some of Agatha Christie’s strongest titles feature murder in the past—the investigation of a case where the detective is dependent on the memories of those involved, where the trail has grown cold and clues have disappeared, and where the uncovering of the truth often awakens a sleeping murderer. She first experimented with this in Dumb Witness, where Poirot investigates a two-month-old death; six years later her greatest triumph finds Poirot examining a 16-yearold case in Five Little Pigs (see Chapter 4); in two other cases, Mrs McGinty’s Dead and Ordeal by Innocence, the verdict is already handed down and of her last six novels, five of them feature this type of plot. Also in this category we find her historical detective story, Death Comes as the End, a daring if not wholly successful experiment from mid-career.

Emily Arundell writes to Hercule Poirot on 17 April but he does not receive the letter until 28 June. And by then she is dead. Poirot goes to Market Basing to investigate her death, where the case involves spiritualism, a brooch, a dog’s ball—and another death.

Most of the notes for Dumb Witness, roughly 25 pages, are contained in Notebook 30 along with notes for Death on the Nile and the newly discovered short story ‘The Incident of the Dog’s Ball’; the relationship between the novel and its earlier incarnation as the short story (albeit with a vital difference) is considered in detail in the Appendix. Dumb Witness was published at the end of 1936 in the US as a Saturday Evening Post serial with the title Poirot Loses a Client, and as Mystery at Littlegreen House in a UK serialisation beginning in February 1937. In connection with the US serialisation, a surviving letter dated June 1936 from Edmund Cork to Christie thanks her for the revised version sent to the Saturday Evening Post magazine (who paid $16,000 for it, $2,000 more than Cards on the Table). Cork considered it a ‘tremendous improvement’ and suggested ‘using it for Collins also’. This most probably refers to the first four chapters, in which the ‘little English village’ setting is told in the third person—the rest of the book, in contrast, being narrated by Hastings. In retrospect, the information that they were added at a later stage makes perfect sense.

Dumb Witness is the archetypal Christie village mystery—a mysterious death in a well-to-do household, a collection of impecunious relatives, the village doctor and solicitor, and the arrival of Poirot whose questioning sets village tongues wagging. Once again the red herring of spiritualism is dragged across the investigation. As far back as ‘The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb’ in 1923 Christie murderers used this ploy to cover their tracks. And as late as 1961 and The Pale Horse, with a more sinister version of Dumb Witness’s Tripp sisters, spiritualism is a major plot device.

Unusually, we know from internal evidence—the ending of Chapter 7—the exact timeline of the novel; Emily Arundell died on 1 May 1936 and Poirot’s investigation began on 28 June, although for most of that investigation there is nothing to show that murder has been committed. Reader prejudice is toyed with, and yet again subverted, with the introduction of suspicious foreigner, Dr Tanios. Four previous killers are mentioned—Death in the Clouds, The Mysterious Affair at Styles, The Murder of Roger Ackroyd and The Mystery of the Blue Train—and there is an oblique reference to Murder on the Orient Express in Chapter 25. The description of Market Basing in Chapter 6 corresponds to that of Wallingford where Christie had, some years earlier, bought Winterbrook House.

The notes, headed with a working title, list the family members and background, although names and details—Charles is not married and his sister is Teresa, not Bella—were to change:

Death of Martha Digby [Emily Arundell]

The Digbys—their family history

Miss Martha—Miss Amelia—Miss Jane—Miss Ethel and Mr Thomas

Marriage of Mr Thomas—to a barmaid?

Mr John [Charles] and Miss Daphne (T’s children)

John—stock exchange—married—his wife clever woman

Daphne [Bella] marries an Armenian? Dr. Mendeman [Tanios]—charming man—his wife quiet, cold

The early chapters of the novel are accurately sketched with only minor differences—the chemist is delayed until Chapter 21 and there is a cryptic reference to painting in connection with Theresa:

General Plan

P. receives letter—he and H [astings]—he writes—then he tears it up—No, we will go—Market Basing—The Lamb…Board to be let or sold. Visit to house agents—an order to view—Ellen conversation—rap—rap—rap—a ball drops down staircase terrier wagging his tail

The chemist—his remembrances—they pretend that are writing up a history of the town—he is an amateur archaeologist—the history of the family. P goes to doctor—as a patient (and an archaeologist) doctor comes to dine—a good deal of local gossip—some little mystery about that death? Doctor indignant—perfectly natural causes—he says—well, I should think you’d be satisfied now. P. says ‘But she died’

Theresa—flat in Chelsea—painting—her engagement to Dick Donaldson—latter wants to specialise—infection—liver—serum therapeutics

Oddly, there are references to Peggy, rather than (Ara) Bella, in both of the following extracts. This was probably an early name choice for the character, as the clue of the symmetrical letter seen in the mirror, M for Margaret, would still work with it. As we have seen, this device was considered in conjunction with the plotting for Death on the Nile (see Chapter 6).

This page of experimentation with symmetrical letters and corresponding names is from Notebook 30. Note the inclusion here of ‘Wilhelmina/ Mina’, the first name of Miss Lawson. The all-important ‘Arabella’ and ‘Teresa’ are arrived at later in the same Notebook.

Another visit to the terrier—to the Tripps—hallucinations etc.—evidence of the cook—Miss Theresa on stairs that night—a piece of thread—yes, Ellen had found it. Miss Lawson again—money missing from drawer—knew who took it. P. bullies her a bit—she gets rattled—talks about poor Peggy—who has left her husband

Peggy again—about husband—she refuses to say—P. says tell me—I’m going to be in danger—she refuses to say anything. H. says ‘she knows something’—asked about dressing gown—says yes—she has a dark blue silk one—Theresa gave it to her. When? When we were all down that weekend, Which day? I can’t remember

And a page of letters and names experimenting with symmetrical letters, the vital clue as misinterpreted by Miss Lawson, eventually arrives at the required one:

ARABELLA A.T. BELLA T.A. Arundel

An elegant restaurant, a glamorous birthday party and beautiful Rosemary Barton is poisoned during the toast. A year later, in a macabre reconstruction at the same restaurant and with an almost identical party, there is another death. But who was the intended victim? Colonel Race investigates.

Notes for Sparkling Cyanide are scattered over ten Notebooks. Although published in December 1945, the novel was serialised six months earlier in the UK and 18 months earlier in the USA. A copy of the typescript had already been sent to Christie’s US agents by January 1944, so this title was completed by the end of 1943. It is a very elaborated version of the short story (and subsequent radio play) ‘Yellow Iris’, which was first published in July 1937. The basic plot in both is the same but a different murderer is unmasked at the end of the novel.

Sparkling Cyanide is another example of a favourite Christie gambit—a poisoning drama. Its dramatic unexpectedness during a social occasion recalls a similar scene, ten years earlier, in Three Act Tragedy and foreshadows another one many years later in The Mirror Crack’d from Side to Side. However, some reservation remains as to the feasibility of the scheme. Is it really likely, especially in view of the subsequent investigation, that no one notices the incorrect seating arrangement that is vital to the success of the plot? The preparation and mechanics of this are masterly and the telling of it is very daring (re-read Book I, Chapter 2 and admire the audacity of even the name) but while the concept is undoubtedly clever, the practical application of it is somewhat doubtful.

There are structural similarities to Five Little Pigs with the reminiscences of six people of an earlier poisoning, although, unlike the earlier novel, they are not in the form of written accounts. We discover Rosemary Barton through the eyes of the suspects, including her killer, with a different picture emerging in each account. Through individual memories, in the first 70 pages of the book, we see her as wife, sister, niece, lover, friend, adulterer and, finally, victim. While the portrayal is not as full as the earlier novel it is still admirably drawn.

The most concentrated notes appear in Notebooks 13 and 63 with 18 pages each. The other eight Notebooks that feature Sparkling Cyanide have anywhere between one and six pages of disjointed notes, including a few false starts and some repetition. Despite name changes the characters as sketched in Notebook 35 below are immediately recognisable. As can be seen, the alternative title (under which it was published in the USA) emphasises the ‘murder in retrospect’ aspect of the novel:

Remembered Death ‘Here’s Rosemary—that’s for Remembrance’

Book I

‘Sweet as remembered kisses after death’

What must I do to drive away remembrance from my eyes?

Beginning of In Memoriam

Rosemary

Iris…shadows—the beginning of it all

Book

Remembered Death—girl’s name is Rue

Remembered Death

Rosemary (dead)—husband—George Barton—acts very suspiciously—he is a businessman

Stephen Fane [Faraday]—R’s lover

Lady Mary Fane—his wife—cold proud clinging jealous

Tony Getty [Tony Morelli aka Anthony Browne]—former lover of R’s apparently in love with Viola [Iris]

Ruth Chambers [Lessing]—George Barton’s sec[retary]—efficient girl—may be in love with him

Lucilla Drake—old pussy—cousin—lives with them—has a son in S. America—ne’er do well

Murder (of George or V[iola]?) by son who is secretly married to Ruth

Col. Race on job

In Notebook 63 we see the novel beginning to take shape, with six characters thinking about Rosemary:

Remembered Death Six people are remembering Rosemary Blair [Barton] who had died last November

Sandra—R. her hatred of her—her suspicion that St. doesn’t care for her

Iris—puzzling it out—letters etc.—George’s manner—Anthony’s coming—the Faraways [Faradays]

Stephen—his life—meeting S—calculated advance—the marriage—Rosemary—shock—infatuation—the awakening—her attitude—after the birthday

Anthony Browne—thinking of R—wondering how he could ever have been attracted—her facile loveliness. His name—‘a nice name’—eminently respectable—borne by chamberlain to Henry VIII

Ruth

It all began with Victor—interview in office with George. Her…undesirable relation—my wife—tender-hearted—girlish affection for him—he’s got to get out of the country—Argentine cash.

George

Thinking of his wife—(drinking?)—maudlin—what a pretty thing she was—always knew he wasn’t young enough. He’d made up his mind to it—all the same when he’d first had an inkling—the letter—blotting paper—written to whom—that fellow Browne? or that stick Stephen Faraday.

Notebook 21 has a sketch of the table of the first party (Rosemary is included) and, like the reference in the short story version to the location of the first dinner, seems to be set in New York rather than London. It is possible that Boyd Masterson was a forerunner of Colonel Race:

George has had letter—‘Your wife was murdered’

His oldest friend Boyd Masterson—latter consults with Iris—Iris meets Tony—staying with Stephen Fane M.P. and Lady Mary Fane.

The Party

George Barton

Iris

Tony

Stephen

Mary [Sandra]

Carolyn Mercer (R’s girlfriend) [dropped, possibly in favour of Ruth]

Boyd Masterson

Lucilla Drake (elderly cousin)

Sparkling Cyanide’s fatal seating plan—see opposite page.

These three cramped drafts, from Notebook 25, of the table from Sparkling Cyanide show ‘Rosemary’ in two of them, indicating the first fatal dinner-party.

Oddly, the following single page is in the middle of the plotting of Five Little Pigs, giving the impression that it was dashed down as Christie thought of it. There are two years between publications, but it must be remembered that an empty page was all Christie needed to get her idea down. Chronology was not a factor.

Remembered Death Possible developments

Black out—snapdragon? At Savoy—performers—indecent song—everyone listens breathlessly—not to miss words. Waiter and drinks—Lights go up—Viola [Iris] gets up to dance—drops bag—young man replaces it on table—on next seat—therefore—a man dies—George Barton

Although Ruth and Victor were always the front-runners for villains, providing, as they do, a more unexpected solution, other characters were also considered. In the second extract below, from an earlier draft, Charles is George Barton and Pauline is Iris Marle:

A. George—kills Rosemary—keep control of money—she is going to leave him. Then Iris because she too will demand money—Lucilla Drake will leave it in her hands. He manufactures letter—work up the ‘murdered’ idea—ropes in Race

B. Victor Drake—arranges it with Ruth—Ruth to marry George—R. slips cyanide in R’s handbag. Victor as waiter puts it in her glass. Iris inherits money—not George—is keen on Gerry—Ruth and Victor (married) decide to act—Victor ostensibly in S. America. Ruth puts cyanide in Stephen’s pocket—letter in Iris’s bag (from Stephen to Rosemary)—bag replaced wrongly on table—therefore Iris sits down wrong place—George drinks the poison

C. Victor is the man and he is also Gerry Wade [Anthony Browne]—in with Ruth—plot laid between them

Killer could be

Charles—(first death suicide)—has misappropriated P’s

[Pauline, later Iris] money

Or

Anthony (really V’s lover?)—killed her—Charles finds out—means to separate them—Charles is killed

Or

Pauline? Killed her sister

In Egypt in 2000 BC, wealthy landowner Imhotep shocks his family by bringing home a new young wife, Nofret, who antagonises the entire family. Murder soon follows, but the evil at the heart of the family is not appeased by a single death and the killer strikes again…and again…and again.

Long before the current vogue for mysteries set in the past, Agatha Christie was a pioneer. Death Comes as the End, written in 1943, was an experiment created at the instigation of Stephen Glanville, professor of Egyptology and a friend of Max Mallowan. He provided her with much of the basic information and gave her books to study in order to get details correct.

Considered purely as a classical detective story this novel does not pass the key test. There are no clues for the reader to spot and interpret, thereby arriving at a logical solution. But as a tense and readable whodunit, it passes with flying colours. And as a believable picture of a family not sure who to trust within their own family circle, it is totally believable. Most of the usual ingredients of her other novels—police resources and post-mortem analyses, telephones and telegrams, fingerprints and footprints, formal investigation and inquests—had to be abandoned. So, while not a firstclass Christie, it is nonetheless a major achievement.

Part of the difficulty interpreting the Notebooks for this title is the fact that the names of the characters change throughout the 80-odd pages of the five different Notebooks. At various times the character who appears in the novel as Nofret is also called Ibunept, Nebet, Ibneb and Tut. And, of course, it is not possible to be sure if the names refer to male or female characters.

Christie writes in her Autobiography that ‘Houses were far more difficult to find out about than temples or palaces.’ And in Notebook 9 we find 16 pages of notes on ‘Life and Customs in Ancient Egypt’ with details of everyday life (the page references are to some of the volumes borrowed from Stephen Glanville):

Bead bracelets or gold rings with green glazed scarabs P.110 P.46 also

Embalming 21ST D. P.111 and 55

The making of papyrus paper P.114

Description of bow and arrow P.127

Description of Scribe outfit P.14

Description Foundation dynasty P. 51

Description mummification etc. P.55 and P.57

Notebook 46 contains the initial sketch for the family. Although some of the names do not correspond with those in the novel, the characters are all recognisable:

Middle Kingdom Setting Characters

Ipi—(old mother) Tyrant? Devil? Wise? [Esa]

Father—old fusser—kindly—a nuisance [Imhotep]

Meru—(elder son) Good boy of family—a bit dull—inwardly resentful? [Yahmose]

S—? Bad boy of family—not at home—Troublemaker [Sobek]

H—Spoilt young son—precocious [Ipy]

Concubine—Victim? Beautiful in danger or Evil—full of power [Nofret]

M’s wife—a shrew [Satipy]

S’s wife—gentle creature or an Emilia? [Kait]

A daughter—energy—resolve [Renisenb]

N—family friend—shrewd—lawyer like maybe tell in 1st person [Hori—but the ‘1st person’ idea was not pursued]

Hepshut—mischief maker [Henet]

The basic situation is described in Notebook 13:

Nofret arrives—everyone cruel to her—she is fierce to them—her tales of foreign cities—the way she stirs up strife—Hori says always there underneath. She writes by scribe to Imhotep—Imhotep replies furious to family—he returns—settlement of land on her. She dies—scorpion stung her—everyone knew—Rensenb troubled—then remembers a scene between Nebet and Seneb

The notes for this novel include another example of Christie’s system of arranging scenes by allocating letters to them. It is interesting to look at the following page from the Notebooks and compare it to the novel. Although it is headed Chapter 15, the scenes are in fact scattered through Chapters 15, 16 and 17. But her final decision (‘A.C.D.—then BB’) is followed through. I have added the relevant chapter headings to each scene:

Chapter XV

A Esa and Henet [15 iii]

B Henet and Imhotep [16 i]

C Renisenb and ‘Everything is Fear’—meets Aapene—Why do you look at me strangely? Then sees Yahmose—discusses it with him—who could it be? [15 iv]

D Renisenb Yahmose and his father—Y. more authority [15 v]

E Kait and Renisenb [15 vii]

F Renisenb. Teti and Kameni—his eyes on her—strong children [15 vii]

G Renisenb and her father—marriage [17 i]

H Ren. and Kameni—love talk—the amulet—broken—she goes home—looks in box—Henet finds her with it—H’s hints [17 ii and iii]

Who dies next?

A.A. Esa—from unguent—or perfumed oil

B.B. Aahene [Ipy]

Yes, B.B. after cheeking Henet [15 vi] who complains to Imhotep

So: A.C.D.—then B.B.

And this is the order as it appears in the published novel:

A Esa and Henet [15 iii]

C Renisenb and ‘Everything is Fear’—meets Aapene—Why do you look at me strangely? Then sees Yahmose—discusses it with him—who could it be? [15 iv]

D Renisenb Yahmose and his father—Y. more authority [15 v]

B.B. Aahene [Ipy]. Yes, B.B. after cheeking Henet [15 vi]

The Notebooks offer a solution to at least one tantalising puzzle concerning this novel. In her Autobiography, Christie writes:

Stephen [Glanville] argued with me a great deal on one point of my denouement and I am sorry to say that I gave in to him in the end…If I think I’ve got a certain thing right in a book—the way it should be—I’m not easily moved from it. In this case, against my better judgement, I did give in. It was a moot point, but I still think now, when I re-read the book, that I would like to re-write the end of it…but I was a little hampered by the gratitude I felt to Stephen for all the trouble he had taken and the fact that it had been his idea in the first place.

It is not entirely clear what she means by ‘the end of it’—does she mean the identity of the killer or the manner of revelation? If she means a more dramatic final scene we shall never know, although this would seem unlikely as the setting of the denouement clearly echoes the earlier murders of both Nofret and Satipy. But if she had a different killer in mind, she had already lined up a few candidates:

Henet—hated wife—and all children—eggs on Ibneb—then kills her

Henet—loves old boy—killed first wife—and second ‘sister’—determined to destroy Ibneb—pretends to suck up to her

Hori—in league with Ib? She is to gain ascendancy over old woman—Hori has speculated—blame is to be put on Meru

Hori and Ibneb are buddies—he arranges for her to meet old boy—puts him up to deed of settlement by pretending to object—she then rats or is going to—he kills her—then pretends—she is revenging herself on family—final scene with Renisenb—you Hori—young cousin rescues her

Son (bad lad) comes in—speaks to concubine—he likes her—idea is they are in it together

And there was another fascinating idea that never made it to the printed page at all. In Notebook 13 Christie toys with the idea of having a modern parallel running alongside the historical one. Indeed it is possible to see, even in these brief notes, similarities between the ancient and modern characters. The old professor and his young wife are Yahmose and Nofret, Julie is obviously Henet, Regina is a latter-day Renisenb and Edward and Silas could be Sobek and Ipy:

Modern start—Old professor or Chancellor—his young wife—he brings out son and son’s wife—widowed daughter and child

Julie (ancient Mademoiselle who has stayed with them)—young archaeologist who has stayed with them

Discovery of Tomb Letters—Including one from to dead wife who is accused of killing Tut

Author’s second wife died suddenly—she took drug by mistake

Young wife dies—quarrel between father and son and wife—F[ather] says new will—all to Ida

Julie and portrait of Eleanor (first wife) who was going to come back

Elaborated

Dr. Elinor Solomon Oppenheim

Ida—his young wife

Julie the faithful maid and companion ex-governess

Edward Mervyn Oppenheim—dependent on father—is he archaeologist

Charlotte—sculptress—or musician (pianist)—or historical—or political writer

Charlotte’s brother—Richard—the archaeologist

Regina Oppenheim a widow with children—Oscar Walsh

Jeremy Walsh—a young writer—psychic—deductive—knows too much about people

other son Silas

From the phrase ‘Young wife dies’, paralleling the death of Nofret, Imhotep’s young wife, it would seem that the parallels were to extend to further than family relationships. However, the idea was not pursued any further than these short notes—of course, if it had been it would have meant shorter stories within each period.

These two aspects—the alternative ending and the parallel narrative—make this an even more fascinating novel than heretofore suspected, even without bringing the groundbreaking feature of the historical setting into the discussion. Seemingly complete and interlocking as it is, it would seem that Christie was ready to embroider a few more threads through her narrative. It is entirely probable that had she pursued her present-day parallel, she would have revealed yet another solution; after all, if both branches of the story had arrived at the same destination, a distinct sense of anticlimax would have resulted. So a unique background produced one actual solution, another intended one and a possible third.

At the request of Superintendent Spence, Poirot agrees to reinvestigate the murder of charwoman Mrs McGinty, found battered to death two months earlier. Although James Bentley has been convicted of her murder, someone in Broadhinny is ready to kill again. And yet, they are all very nice people…

Continuing a pattern set two years earlier by A Murder is Announced, Mrs McGinty’s Dead is decidedly unglamorous, reflecting the post-war adjustment; it is one of Poirot’s rare ventures into the working class. ‘The Adventure of the Clapham Cook’ in 1923 was his earlier experience. The murder of a charwoman, appalling accommodation, an attempt on Poirot’s life and a completely uncharismatic defendant all combine to make Mrs McGinty’s Dead a particularly dark case.

There are more than 70 pages of notes for this novel. Names, motives, suspects, the earlier cases, the current possibilities all appear in chaotic profusion. As we saw in Chapter 3, the permutations and combinations of the four vitally important early cases and their possible incarnations as current inhabitants of Broadhinny are almost limitless; and all of them are considered.

On the first page Christie sets out the premise of the novel, leaving only the name of the superintendent to be decided:

Inspector ? [sic] old friend retiring worried about case just ending at the Old Bailey (or just sentenced sent for trial).

Not right—evidence all there—motive—opportunity and clues—but all wrong—his duty to get the facts—sent them to Public Prosecutor—there his responsibility ended. He can’t do any more…Can P do something?

Facts?

No facts. No-one else with motive—as a matter of fact, they’re all very nice people

She eventually settled on Superintendent Spence, Poirot’s partner in investigation from his previous case, Taken at the Flood, four years earlier. This was quite a big gap and the cover of the first edition of Mrs McGinty’s Dead is emblazoned—‘Poirot is Back!’

And over 30 years after her first novel, her powers of invention show no signs of deserting her. She sketches at least seven possible scenarios before settling on the fourth one below. It would seem that the title was already decided, probably because it is the name of a children’s game, albeit not a very well known one. It is quoted and described in Chapter 1 but only the title is utilised and there is no attempt to follow the rest of the verse. This was the one unalterable fact around which she effortlessly wove these ideas, any one of which would have made an acceptable plot. As can be seen, preliminary notes for this case first emerged as early as 1947, five years before the book’s appearance:

Mrs McGinty’s Dead

Mrs M is charwoman—middle aged office cleaner—because of something in wastepaper basket—she pieced together letters? Had taken something home

Morphia in the morning tea—

Flats! Lawn Road—only super—Mrs M is one of the cleaners

1947

A. Mrs McGinty’s Dead

Start Charwoman found dead in office—Lifted to sofa—later discovered strangled

Someone goes to break news at her home—real Mrs M is dead 6 months ago—this one is known to other cleaners as her sister in law

Why?

Who?

A woman of 50-60—Hands calloused—feet manicured—good underclothes

Mrs McGinty’s Dead

A. Mrs M is a charwoman. When investigated, it is found that she has no past history—she bribed former woman and took her place—her references were forged—17 Norton St. Birmingham—an accommodation address. What was she doing in Eleanor Lee’s office…Evidence for blackmail?

B. Mrs M is a char—‘does for’ the Remington family—lives in a little house by P.O.—takes a lodger—(James McBride) her savings broken open—Or hit on head—blood on James’s clothes—he tries to burn them in boiler.

C. Mrs M elderly middle-aged woman—lived with elderly husband James McGinty. Found killed—JM tells very peculiar story—(like Wallace) or is he nephew inherits money. Really young man cultivates her acquaintance—flatters her up—finally kills her in such a way J is bound to be suspected—Why?

Ideas for HP (Mrs McGinty)

4 or 5 people in household—one dangerous—P’s only clue—he is pushed at race meeting under horse’s hoof or train etc. by one of them. Mrs McGinty—(housekeeper?) leaves—is sent away—why? Later he finds her—she is dead

‘Wallace’ in item C above is a reference to the famous Julia Wallace murder case in Liverpool in 1931. Her husband, whose alibi could never be substantiated, was convicted of her murder but subsequently released. Like Mrs McGinty, Julia Wallace was found in her own sitting room with fatal head injuries.

All of the clues that appear in the book feature in Notebook 43—the bottle of ink and the letter, the newspaper cutting with its all-important mistake, the coffee cup, the sugar-cutter and Maureen Summerhayes’s very daring remark during the party:

Inkstain on the dead woman’s finger. Bought bottle of ink that afternoon at PO—no letter found. Newspaper—Daily Newshound or Evening Paper

Sugar cutter—Judge and wife brought them back—Vicarage sale of work

Real clue Robin

E. Kane changed her name to Hope—Evelyn Hope—girl—but not girl—boy. Robin’s ‘mother’ is not his mother—he got her name by deed poll—she was paid to give her name to him—later he kills her—does not want her to tell about past story

Robin’s method for second murder—has coffee cup with dregs and lipstick

The slip in paper—child not yet born—therefore sex not—known

Don’t like being adopted, do you? (A remark by Maureen Summerhayes at party)

And then she considers suspects…

Now consider each likely household

1. Married couple in late thirties—very vague—like R and A [Rosalind and Anthony, Christie’s daughter and son-in-law]—do market gardening—(he is son—or she is daughter of X) [possibly the Summerhayeses]

2. Invalid woman with son—son is artist—or does painted furniture or a writer—(detective stories?) [Mrs Upward and Robin]

3. Vaughans—unstable husband (banker or solicitor) quiet self-effacing wife—children?—one (son) hers by former marriage?

4. Rich woman wife very flashy—2 young men—live together—(one is son of X) has told stupid rich girl he is son of Russian Grand Duke

Not all of the previous cases which provide the motivation for a killer trying to conceal a criminal past appear in the Notebook as they do in the novel:

Edith Kane [Eva Kane/Evelyn Hope]

Went out that day—he poisoned Wife—a lot of gup in paper—all about that innocent child—betrayed—she and her child—the child born later—a daughter—the little daughter who never knew her father’s name. The new life for Edith Kane—went to Australia—or S. Africa—a new life in a new world.

She went—yes—but she came back 25 years ago

Janice Remington—acquitted of killing her husband or her lover like Madeleine Smith [Janice Courtland]

Little Lily Waterbrook—took chopper to aunt—detained—only fifteen—released later—Harris? [Lily Gamboll]

Greenwood Case—daughter—changed name—her evidence saved father—thirtyish

Newspaper suspects—Age now

55 Eva Kane (? changed name to Hope—went abroad—had s[on] or d[aughter]

45 Janice Crale—or The Tragic Wife—husband died of morphia—or bath—lover did it—unpleasant man—perverse—took drugs [Janice Courtland]

30 Lily Gamboll—killed aunt

The reference to ‘Madeleine Smith’ above relates to the case of a woman tried for poisoning her lover Emile L’Engelier in Glasgow in 1857. The verdict against Smith was ‘Not Proven’; in reality, it amounted to an acquittal. Like the Wallace case above, it is still the focus of keen speculation.

Appearing together on just one page of Notebook 43, the following would have been added when the plot was well advanced. With the exception of Point B, all these occur in Chapters 13 and 14:

Points to be worked in

A. Mrs Upward sees photo—familiar

B. Mrs Rendell came down to see Mrs Upward that night—couldn’t make her hear

C. Maureen talks about being adopted

D. Mrs O sums up Maureen’s age and appearance

E. Mrs Rendell asks P about anonymous letters—untrue

F. Poirot told by Mrs O—it was Dr Rendell

In particular, Point C is the main clue that incriminates the killer—although few readers will notice it, so subtly is it inserted. And Point A sets up the second murder in Broadhinny as Mrs Upward plays a very dangerous game with Poirot.

Jacko Argyle died in prison while serving a sentence for the murder of his stepmother. His assertion that he had an alibi for the fatal night was never substantiated—until now. Arthur Calgary arrives at the family home and confirms Jacko’s alibi. This means that the real killer is still living among the family and is ready to kill again.

Notebook 28 contains all of the notes for this novel, amounting to almost 40 pages. On 1 October 1957 Agatha Christie wrote to Edmund Cork, asking him to check on the legal situation if person A were to be tried and convicted of the murder of his stepmother despite his claim that he was with person B at the crucial time of the killing. Person B is never found and A dies in prison six months into his incarceration. Then B, who has been abroad for a year, turns up and approaches the police to confirm A’s story and provide the alibi. Christie wanted clarification on the situation with regard to a ‘free pardon’ and the possible reopening of the case. She assured Cork that an early reply would enable her to get to work ‘industriously on this projected new book’. The date ‘Oct 6th’ appears on page 20 of Notebook 28, confirming that the novel was planned and written the year before publication.

‘This is easily the best non-branded [Poirot or Marple] Christie we have had for some time…The Innocent [as it was then called] is close to achieving a successful blend of the classical detective story and the modern conception of a crime novel.’ This was the enthusiastic verdict on 1 May 1958 when Collins received the latest Christie. The reader considered that it could benefit from cutting and mentioned that Agatha Christie proposed to do that. His other reservation was about the title and he suggested some alternatives—‘Viper’s Point’, ‘A Serpent’s Tooth’, ‘The Burden of Innocence’ and, prophetically, ‘Cat among the Pigeons’. Although no one knew it at the time, this was to be the title of the following year’s book.

The short story ‘Sing a Song of Sixpence’ (see Chapter 4), collected in The Listerdale Mystery, contains distinct similarities to this novel. As in the short story, an outside investigator arrives at the home of the murder victim, whose relatives are mutually suspicious, and discovers that the killer is a young man with an emotional connection to the elderly family retainer. Change the ‘son’ of the short story to ‘lover’ and the similarities to Kirsten Lindstrom and Jacko in Ordeal by Innocence, where Arthur Calgary arrives at the Argyle household, are striking. Although the story first appeared in December 1929, almost 30 years earlier, the parallels to Ordeal by Innocence are too many to be mere coincidence—the outsider detective, the elderly matriarch bludgeoned to death for money, the gnawing suspicion and distrust, the eventual disclosure of an unsuspected emotional and criminal partnership.

Ordeal by Innocence remains one of the best of the latter-day Christies. It is a crime novel, as distinct from a classical detective story, with deeply held convictions about truth and justice, guilt and innocence. It is marred only by the inclusion, in the last 20 pages, of two perfunctory crimes, a successful and an attempted murder. Coming, as they do, so near the end of the novel, they do not convince either as an illustration of the killer’s panic or

as a suspense-building exercise; the Notebooks, however, give some insight into the inclusion of these murders.

The opening of the novel follows exactly the earliest jottings in Notebook 28, even to the amount of the fare paid to the boatman. The ferry used by Arthur Calgary is the one that still runs to this day at the end of Greenway Road just past the imposing gates of Dame Agatha’s summer residence.

Arthur Calgary—Crossing ferry—begins

The ferry came to a grinding halt against the shelving pebbles—A.C. paid fourpence and stepped ashore

Well, this was it—he could still, he supposed, turn back etc

An early page of Notebook 28 gets straight to the crime. This remains largely the same except for the detail of a poker instead of a sandbag. At this stage the character Jacko that appears in the book is still appearing in the Notebook as Albert:

Violent quarrel between Albert and Mrs A—he attacks her—she is nearly dead—K. sends him off to obtain an alibi. At 8 o’clock—with her again and kills her or he sticks her with a knife—she gets up—tells about him.

Possible course of real events—

Albert—determined to get money out of Mrs. Argyle makes up to Lindstrom—wants her to marry him—she agrees—Mrs. A—won’t help—Leo won’t help—he works on her—the sandbag from under the door—at 8.15 a form she does not understand—Mrs A bends over it—K socks her

The family members underwent name changes but are still recognisable, while Mr Argyle, Kirsten and Maureen are substantially the same as the finished novel. The calculation of Tina’s age shows that these notes were written in 1958:

Tina half-caste girl—(5 in 1940—23 now) married to local postman? Builder’s mason? farmer

Linda—married to a man since paralysed—she lives there [Mary]

Johnnie—a job in Plymouth comes over quite often

Albert—bad lot—unstable hanged convicted of murder of Mrs. Argyll [Jacko]

Mr Argyll—a scholar

Mr Argyle—(or Mr Randolph) Randolph Argyle? Ambrose Randolph?

Thin—ethereal—surrounded by books

Kirsten?

Her homely face—pancake flat—nose surrounded by bleached permanent w hair

How much better a nun’s coif and wimple?—not a contemplative lay sister—the kind who inspected you through a grille before admitting you to the visitor’s parlour—or Mother Superior’s presence

Calgary goes and sees—Maureen—(married to him?)—Silly common little girl—but shrewd—went to family when he was arrested—they didn’t know she he was married.

Mary—Tenement in New York—hatred of it all—mother out in street—car passed—Mrs A—adoption—then hotel life—nursery growing up—plans for her—meeting with Philip—no background—goes off marries him—he sets up in business—Fails—then polio—Mrs. Argyle—wants them there—he is quite ready to go—goes into hospital—Mary goes to stay at Sunny Point

The two subsequent victims are also considered. As the notes below show, however, the original intention was that either Philip or Tina would be the victim:

Who is killed? Philip poisoned—doesn’t wake up or Tina stabbed—she walks from Kirsty to Mickey—collapses

The poisoning of Philip was discarded in favour of stabbing. In view of the urgency of the killer’s situation, this was a more expedient course and one easily within the capability of the character in question. And a possible reason for inclusion of the unsuccessful attempt on Tina is that it provides a witness in the absence of any other proof of guilt. For those readers who doubt the medical possibility of the attempted murder of Tina, who continues to walk despite having been stabbed, there are two editions of the British Medical Journal, dated 28 January and 18 February 1956, among Christie’s papers with pages dealing with just this type of event. And both articles are marked. A careful reading of a very daring Chapter 22 should be enough to dispose of any accusations of cheating.

There were also a few ideas that never got further than Notebook 28:

Forged will—forged in favour of real murderer—but forged very badly? Or forged badly in favour of Albert.

Husband dislikes wife and hated the children. Wanted to marry someone? Or had son of his own.

She was going to alter will in favour of a foundation for orphans—which cut out husband.

And, finally, two intriguing ideas, both actually variations on the same theme…

Or was Albert her [i.e. Mrs Argyle’s] son

Is Kirsten Albert’s real mother?

Both of these would have worked and would, moreover, have made psychological sense. The former would have made a profoundly affecting scenario; the latter would perhaps have been more effective as a motivation for Kirsten (as it did for her counterpart in ‘Sing a Song of Sixpence’) than the one actually used. However, the possibilities of unacknowledged parenthood as a plot device and a motivation are fully explored in Hercule Poirot’s Christmas, Sad Cypress, Mrs McGinty’s Dead and ‘Dead Man’s Mirror’ among others, so perhaps it was simply a case of avoiding repetition.

Gwenda Reed’s new house evokes disturbing memories and her attendance at a performance of The Duchess of Malfi confirms her suspicions that, as a child, she witnessed a murder there. Miss Marple’s advice to let sleeping murder lie is ignored and a murderer prepares to kill again.

Although published ten months after Christie’s death, Sleeping Murder was written during the Second World War and, like Curtain, placed in safekeeping to appear only after its author’s death. Or so, until the discovery of the Notebooks, we thought…

Notes relating to the development of Sleeping Murder appear in Notebooks 17, 19, 33, 44, 63 and 66, an indication of its convoluted genesis: it underwent two changes (at least) of title and its history is linked with Taken at the Flood (see Chapter 12), which in turn is linked with They Do It with Mirrors. The Notebooks also show that at various times it was to involve the motif from the Mr Quin story ‘The Dead Harlequin’ of a person looking down at a dead body on the floor; it could have been a Poirot title and, even more amazingly, a Tommy and Tuppence novel. And despite the assertion that it was written during the Blitz, the Notebooks reveal a very different timescale for its creation.

The first page of Notebook 19 is headed:

Cover Her Face

The Late Mrs. Dane

They Do It with Mirrors

The promising title ‘The Late Mrs. Dane’ was not pursued although the name appears in the early sketches for Sad Cypress and The A.B.C. Murders. Cover Her Face, meanwhile, was the one-time title for Sleeping Murder. It was originally called Murder in Retrospect, as it appears on one of the surviving typescripts; and as Chapter 5 of the novel asserts. Then the American publishers of Five Little Pigs appropriated this title in 1942, so the stored manuscript was renamed Cover Her Face. All was well until P.D. James used the latter title in 1964 for her first detective novel. Agatha Christie herself, in a 1972 letter to her agent, suggested She Died Young. Eventually the final Miss Marple novel to appear in print was published in 1976 as Sleeping Murder. But, as can be recognised from the details in the following extract—the familiar house, the wallpaper, the door—the title Cover Her Face appears frequently in the Notebooks in connection with Sleeping Murder.

Cover her Face

The House—recognition—door—Staircase etc. Poirot and girl at Duchess of M—her story

Cover her Face

…in the train—then the house—feeling of knowing it—the wall paper in this room—(inside closet)—the door but it was the door that really shook her

The complex history of this novel is best exemplified by a brief quotation from Notebook 63:

Helen—Start with the house and the girl and Tuppence (?) or friend—Raymond West and wife—the things happening one by one—then the theatre—Malfi—a T and T story? A Miss M story? An HP story?

Helen Rendall—suicide—hanged herself—her husband sold the house and went abroad.

Now who killed her?—Her brother—eminent surgeon—Doctor?—Husband? shell-shocked—girl’s husband? H is P’s second wife—young, flighty—a lover—Fergus—chauffeur or lover

The only real certainty in all of this plotting is a girl buying a house that contains memories from her earlier life, and we can see from the above extract that Christie was undecided as to whose case this was to be—Miss Marple, Poirot, even Tommy and Tuppence! Apart from that, there was no clear idea of how to proceed; and, presumably, depending on the detective she chose, a different book and possibly a different plot would have followed. This vacillation about the detective also raises questions about the book being written specifically as Miss Marple’s last case; if it was created as her final investigation Miss Marple would have been a given from the start.

Notebook 17 has a clear outline of the plot as far as the first four chapters. The heroine’s name, later to change to Gwenda, is here Gilda, although her husband’s remains the same:

Gilda—young married woman arriving Plymouth or Southampton—feels ill—stays night then hires car—drives slowly through Southern England. Feeling of coming home—evening—down into the valley—board up—visit to house agent—(former owners?). She buys it—writes letter to husband (or takes it furnished? unfurnished?) Incidents—the path—the door—the wallpaper—sends telegram to London—to Giles aunt Miss M?—or to Giles cousin Miss M is her aunt—or to the Crests—theatre—some young people—etc.—Cover her face—she rushes out and home. Joan asks her—Miss M. comes up with hot water bottles and hot coffee and sugar. The next morning…Gilda tells her all about it—Helen etc.

Notebook 66 begins as Notebook 17 but then diverges briefly to a different idea before returning to the Duchess of Malfi theme. Also included in this jotting is the notion of a father in a mental hospital for a murder he may or may not have committed, an idea which appears in Sleeping Murder.

Cover her Face

Start with girl and friend (f[emale]) find house [in] Sidmouth—queer things etc.

Husband comes (or is coming)—A’s fear—consults local doctor—really crook? He advises her to leave neighbourhood—later window box falls on her—‘the house hates me’)—play—Duchess of Malfi etc.—etc.—Helen. Is her father in loony bin because he thinks he killed his young wife

Notebook 44 confuses the issue further with mention of a soldier and Poirot:

Theatre party

Duchess of Malfi—Cover her Face—girl screams—taken out—won’t go home with fiancé—young soldier—goes with Poirot. A man looking down at someone dead—the man with the hand—not only that—familiar house—seen it all before

And Notebook 33 shows the potential Harlequin connection:

Continuation of Harlequin and Helen?

Girl (Anne) comes down stairs and sees girl dead and man/woman bending over her—(grey hands) Helen

Eventually, with the plot well in hand and Miss Marple firmly installed as the detective, Christie is able to follow her alphabetical plan:

A. Love letter in bureau to Musgrave? [mentioned in Chapter 17 iii by Erskine]

B. Newspaper adv. seen by the ex-servant [Chapter 12]

C. Servant 1? 2? heard that H. afraid of someone [Chapter 14]

D. 3 servants—1. Nurse flighty—out that night…(She is C [above])

2. Cook—Mrs. F’s servant—very young at time

3. Lily—very young at time—say housemaid—clothes wrong—saw something out of window? [Chapter 14]

E. Fane in office—gentle, repressed—never married—possessive mother [Chapter 13]

F. Miss M and mother—learns about Jackson’s boy—also about man on way out—Major M [Chapter 16]

G. Jackson [Affleck]—left under a cloud—(in Fane’s office?) made good—member of an accounting firm—2nd murder—Lily? Nurse? [Chapter 21 and 22]

H. Major and Mrs. Musgrave [Erskine]—Gwenda talks to him—lovely girl—yes, I fell in love with her—my wife—young children—suppose I did the right thing—came down to Dilmouth because I wanted to see where she lived once [Chapter 17]

I. Miss M says—body can always be put where you want it—in garden—following on J. [Chapter 23]

J. Dr. Kennedy with G. Gil and Miss M—the 3 men—which? Then subsequent lives—Miss M. asks how a man would feel—lonely—want to talk [Chapter 23 is the nearest match]

In a somewhat lacklustre book the alibi for the Lily Kimble murder shines out as a prime example of Christie ingenuity. And it appears in the book much as outlined in Notebook 17. As usual with the best Christie ploys it is simplicity itself:

Circumstances of Lily’s killing

Writes (against husband’s advice) to Dr. K—He when he comes to see G[iles] and G[wenda] finds Marple—brings her letter—says he has asked her to come on Tuesday by 4.30 train changing at Dillmouth Junction. G and G get there at 4.30. Actually he tells her to come by 2.30 train—two letters—just the same—except for time

Overall, however, Sleeping Murder is not in the same class as other titles written in the early 1940s—One, Two, Buckle my Shoe, Evil under the Sun or The Body in the Library. And, thanks to the Notebooks, we now have a possible reason why.

Notebook 14 contains the first reference to a date in conjunction with this book, September 1947:

Plans Sept. 1947

Dying Harlequin

Cover her face (Helen)

Crooked House (The Alt[eration]s) Done

And it is this date that completely contradicts all the theories we have received about the date of the book’s creation. There is no other novel that could possibly fit the description of ‘Cover her face (Helen)’ so it is definitely a reference to the book that we know as Sleeping Murder. But if it was only in the planning stages (and a very early stage to judge by the brevity of the note) in September 1947 the writing of it is placed much later than heretofore presumed.

This complication is underlined on the following page when we find a date more than a year later again, with still only the barest outline of the plot:

Plans Nov. 1948

Cover her Face

The girl (or young wife) has memories—come back—point it—‘Helen’ is dead at foot of stairs—‘Grey fingers’. Advertisement for Helen Gilliat (name found in a book)—answered by Dr. Gilliat—a plastic surgeon—it was his sister?

And some of the plot outlined here (‘name found in a book—answered by Dr. Gilliat—a plastic surgeon’) bears no relation to the plot of Sleeping Murder, although the reference to ‘Grey fingers’ here and ‘the man with the hand’ above, is reflected in the final confrontation in the book, when their disturbing significance becomes clear. Clearly there was still a lot of planning to complete. So we can move the writing of it nearer to 1950, i.e. almost ten years later than the supposed 1940 date.

There are yet further indications that this book was written several years after the war. In the following extract from Notebook 19 (‘girl at theatre—stumbles out’ clearly identifies Sleeping Murder) we find a reference to ‘in the war years’, a phrase which would surely be written only long after the war had ended:

Jimmy Peterson comes from U.S.A. to look up Val (who was over there in the war years). Girl at theatre—stumbles out—young man follows her

Two final points support the theory that Sleeping Murder was not written during the war. First, why write, in the early 1940s, a ‘final’ case for Miss Marple when at that point her only fulllength case had been The Murder at the Vicarage, published in 1930, and The Body in the Library was not to appear until 1942? And second, in Chapter 24 i of Sleeping Murder Inspector Primer mentions the ‘poison pen trouble down near Lymstock’, a direct reference to The Moving Finger, published in 1943.

Overall, Sleeping Murder is a disappointing climax to Miss Marple’s career. While a perfectly adequate detective story it is not in the same class as the previous year’s technical tour de force, Curtain: Poirot’s Last Case; or, indeed, A Murder is Announced, the real apex of Miss Marple’s career. The possibility that it was written much later than previously suspected would go a long way towards explaining why.

Exhibit E: N or M?—A Titles Quiz

The two essentials for a story were a title and a plot—the rest was mere spadework, sometimes the title led to a plot, all by itself as it were, and then all was plain sailing—but in this case the title continued to adorn the top of the page and not the vestige of a plot was forthcoming.

‘Mr Eastwood’s Adventure’

All of the following were considered, but ultimately discarded, as titles for Christie works. They are drawn from the notebooks, the typescripts or manuscripts, readers’ reports and correspondence. Some are more obvious than others and the list includes novels, short stories, plays and a Mary Westmacott.

1. Tragic Weekend

2. Post Mortem Justice

3. Retrospective Death

4. In Memoriam

5. Death of a Games Mistress

6. The Innocent

7. Aftermath

8. Blood Feast

9. The Hand

10. A Death has been Arranged

11. Operation Deadline

12. Return Journey

13. Death is Folly

14. Easeful Death

15. Viper’s Point

16. 2nd Innings

17. The Tangled Web

18. Laura Finds a Body

19. The Flowing/Incoming Tide

20. A Serpent’s Tooth

21. Cat among the Pigeons

22. The Soul in the Window Seat

23. The Spider’s Web

24. The World’s Forgetting

25. The Manor House Mystery

26. Shadow in Sunlight

Answers on the following page.

Answers[1]