The orthodox view is that Bohr won the dispute with Einstein about the interpretation of quantum mechanics: the verdict, it is held, was reasonable enough in the mid-thirties, and put beyond all doubt by the work of John Bell in the mid-sixties; moreover, in steadfastly rejecting the case against him, Einstein is pictured as wilfully oblivious to reason, or naive and reactionary, or pathetically unable to grasp the new physics, or all three. Leaving aside the question about which one had the stronger case, recent work by Arthur Fine and others gives the lie to this disparaging picture of Einstein; indeed, it is a travesty of the truth. It is not my intention to argue that the verdict should now be reversed, but rather to show that Einstein's case is not as weak, nor Bohr's as strong, as it is ordinarily taken to be.