Abstract: In 1824, Walter Scott suggested that the epistolary form hindered the creation of historical narratives. In contrast, this article argues that Michael Ondaatje, an author not usually associated with the epistolary form, self-consciously utilises these epistolary ‘flaws’ to narrate the human histories of Toronto in In the Skin of a Lion. My reading shows how a close analysis of language and form reveals the importance of dialogue and communication in this novel: aspects which were admired by early book reviewers but quickly submerged by a sea of literary criticism eager to embrace the novel as a quintessentially ‘postmodern’ text. The epistolary lens directs our attention away from the much-discussed impossibility of locating historical truth, towards the possibility of corresponding or connecting with the past and witnessing truths for the future. The epistolary reading therefore casts a new light on our understanding of the novel, bringing solidarity, imaginative empathy and futurity to the fore.