Star Trek Federation: The First 150 Years

[DEWLine]

I prefer the "fought in public and on the public record" assumption about the Eugenics Wars myself. Since the whole thing's an alternative future-history anyways...and what was aired on TV implied that, as horrific as it was, it wasn't fought in North America. We simply got lucky one last time re: our physical isolation.

Again, apologies to Greg Cox.

[Christopher]

^Well, sure, I'd be happy to see that version of the Eugenics Wars fleshed out too. It's not a matter of preference; Star Trek tie-in fiction over the decades has often given us multiple versions of the same event, as far back as Gold Key and Bantam giving us different versions of McCoy's divorce and his daughter, or DC and Pocket giving us differing versions of Kirk's first mission on the Enterprise. We're up to seven or eight versions of the end of the 5-year mission by now.

But the novel continuity is what it is, and the DTI novels and Greg's EW novels are both part of it. That doesn't make Greg's version better or worse, it's just the one that's in the same continuity.

[Caesar753]

I got this book for Christmas and though I've only read the first chapter, I'm loving it so far.

[datalogan]

DavidAGoodman wrote:

---

Markonian - I think my decision to make the book Earth centric came from two sources - the original series and Star Trek: Enterprise. In the original series it was clear that Roddenberry was emphasizing Earth - everybody on the bridge save Spock was from Earth, first season there was the reference to the "United Earth Space Probe Agency" - the Romulan War was specifically described in Balance of Terror as the Earth-Romulan conflict. All the ships of Starfleet we encountered in the original series are named after Earth warships. Even though once we reach the next generation era, it seemed to me canon that the early years of the development of the Federation were Earth centric. Whether you like Star Trek: Enterprise or not, that trend continued (influenced somewhat by me) that these other Aliens all knew each other but it wasn't until Earth was involved that they came together.

I always had the idea that Earth and Humans were able to bring so many different races together (that were once enemies) and become pretty-much the center of the Federation because humans (in the Star Trek universe) are so much more cosmopolitan than other races. Other races are so mono-cultured. But humanity has tons of different races and ethnicities, who all went from world war to working together in less than 100 years (somehow) in the Star Trek universe. THAT is the special skill that the humans bring to the Federation.

[Christopher]

^But those other races can't have started out monocultured. Their ancestors must've lived in different regions on different continents and developed into distinct societies with their own languages and customs; it's just that by the time they got into space, their planets had become more unified or more dominated by a single culture.

In which case, maybe the key is that humans achieved warp drive earlier in the process -- or, to put it another way, took longer to consolidate. And thus that kind of cosmopolitanism, as you put it, was a more recent part of our history.

Although I think what ENT showed is that the reason humans were able to bring others together and take a leadership role is because humans were the only ones without a history of enmity with the other races, and thus were the only ones trusted to be neutral and fair.

It could also simply be that younger civilizations are hungrier, more ambitious, more driven to grow, while older, more settled civilizations are more set in their ways or content with their lot. For most of history, China was the most advanced and prosperous civilization on Earth; but it was therefore content to stay as it was, whereas the poorer, more backward English civilization was more driven to expand its influence and increase its prosperity, leading it to rise to global dominance and outpace the older, more settled civilizations of the world.

[datalogan]

Christopher wrote:

---

I don't expect this book and the novelverse to be compatible, and I don't see a need to try to fit them together. They're from different publishers and they each do their own thing, just as the novels and comics do. Trek fiction has always offered a variety of alternative takes on material beyond the canon, and I've always thought that was part of its charm. I'm currently writing my own version of the first years of the UFP, and it should be interesting to see how Mr. Goodman's version differs.

Some things discussed in this book that supposedly take place around the timeframe of your next novel, Christopher:
-The Enterprise NX-01 return to Earth seen in “These Are The Voyages” and the speech Archer makes in that episode are on 2161 Jan 18, at the beginning of the second convention for the Coalition of Planets Charter, called for after the Romulan War.
-Federation Charter, which was signed and Federation established on 2161 Oct 11, was made at this second convention to make a Coalitions of Planets Charter.
-Earth Ambassador to the convention that made the Federation Charter was Thomas Vanderbilt. He’s credited with coming up with the name “United Federation of Planets”. He also became the first President of the Federation, not Nathan Samuels, the current President of United Earth.
-Admiral Douglas, who had been the head of Earth’s Starfleet during the Romulan War, did not become head of the new Federation Starfleet, but instead started Starfleet Academy, which was founded on 2161 Dec 13.
-Daedalus starships were warp-7 ships that were made by Starfleet after the founding of the Federation (not earlier during the Romulan War).
-USS Daedalus was commanded by Malcolm Reed.
-USS Horizon captained by Vince Waldron.
-Archer retires from Starfleet as an Admiral in 2169, then becomes Ambassador to Andoria by 2174. Then becoming a representative on the Federation Council in 2175. Then Federation President in 2185.
-Prime Directive adopted in 2178, based a lot on Archer’s work.

[Sci]

datalogan wrote:

---

Some things discussed in this book that supposedly take place around the timeframe of your next novel, Christopher:
-The Enterprise NX-01 return to Earth seen in “These Are The Voyages” and the speech Archer makes in that episode are on 2161 Jan 18, at the beginning of the second convention for the Coalition of Planets Charter, called for after the Romulan War.
-Federation Charter, which was signed and Federation established on 2161 Oct 11, was made at this second convention to make a Coalitions of Planets Charter.
-Earth Ambassador to the convention that made the Federation Charter was Thomas Vanderbilt. He’s credited with coming up with the name “United Federation of Planets”. He also became the first President of the Federation, not Nathan Samuels, the current President of United Earth.
-Admiral Douglas, who had been the head of Earth’s Starfleet during the Romulan War, did not become head of the new Federation Starfleet, but instead started Starfleet Academy, which was founded on 2161 Dec 13.
-Daedalus starships were warp-7 ships that were made by Starfleet after the founding of the Federation (not earlier during the Romulan War).
-USS Daedalus was commanded by Malcolm Reed.
-USS Horizon captained by Vince Waldron.
-Archer retires from Starfleet as an Admiral in 2169, then becomes Ambassador to Andoria by 2174. Then becoming a representative on the Federation Council in 2175. Then Federation President in 2185.
-Prime Directive adopted in 2178, based a lot on Archer’s work.

Most of those contradict various aspects of continuity established in the novels, particularly the ENT Relaunch.

Just a few off the top of my head:

• ENT: Last Full Measure established that the Federation Charter was signed at the Candlestick Auditorium in San Francisco on 12 August 2161, not 11 October
• ENT: The Romulan War established that the Coalition of Planets had virtually collapsed prior to the founding of the Federation, which replaced it
• Nathan Samuels was Prime Minister of United Earth, not President; he was a signatory of the Federation Charter along with United Earth President Lydia Littlejohn

[datalogan]

Sci wrote:

---

• Nathan Samuels was Prime Minister of United Earth, not President

That was my mistake. The Federation 150 book does identify Samuels as "United Earth Minister", not "President" like I said in earlier post.

Still, obviously lost of other inconsistencies between the book and the current Enterprise novel continuity.

[Christopher]

datalogan wrote:

---

Some things discussed in this book that supposedly take place around the timeframe of your next novel, Christopher:
-The Enterprise NX-01 return to Earth seen in “These Are The Voyages” and the speech Archer makes in that episode are on 2161 Jan 18, at the beginning of the second convention for the Coalition of Planets Charter, called for after the Romulan War.
-Federation Charter, which was signed and Federation established on 2161 Oct 11, was made at this second convention to make a Coalitions of Planets Charter.

Well, that's a good way of reconciling the inconsistency of Deanna's line in TATV about the convention being the first step that would "lead to" the Federation. Of course, the novels handled it differently. Then again, since I'm picking up after the UFP already exists, I don't have to worry about that.

-Earth Ambassador to the convention that made the Federation Charter was Thomas Vanderbilt. He’s credited with coming up with the name “United Federation of Planets”. He also became the first President of the Federation, not Nathan Samuels

The name Thomas Vanderbilt for the first UFP president comes from unseen production art for Star Trek Generations, an article from Picard's family album. The Romulan War novels established Vanderbilt as Earth's defense minister during the war, though he was called the environment minister in the chapter depicting the signing of the charter. I also independently went with Vanderbilt as the first president.

I don't recall any source claiming that Nathan Samuels ever became the UFP president. There is a reference in To Brave the Storm's final chapter to a "Nathan Samuels Room" at the Palais de la Concorde, but I think the novels established that the Palais was the Earth Prime Minister's residence before it became the UFP President's.

-Admiral Douglas, who had been the head of Earth’s Starfleet during the Romulan War, did not become head of the new Federation Starfleet, but instead started Starfleet Academy, which was founded on 2161 Dec 13.

In canon, Admiral Gardner led Starfleet after Forrest died, and he was the commanding admiral in the RW novels as well. Douglas was mentioned in passing in TATV and The Good That Men Do, but that's about it.

-Daedalus starships were warp-7 ships that were made by Starfleet after the founding of the Federation (not earlier during the Romulan War).

The novels have established that Daedalus-class ships had been around well before the war, in fact.

-USS Daedalus was commanded by Malcolm Reed.
-USS Horizon captained by Vince Waldron.

There is a Daedalus-class ship and crew appearing in A Choice of Futures, but it's neither of those.

-Archer retires from Starfleet as an Admiral in 2169, then becomes Ambassador to Andoria by 2174. Then becoming a representative on the Federation Council in 2175. Then Federation President in 2185.

This is from Mike Sussman's bio screen for Archer in "In a Mirror, Darkly Part 2," so it comes as no surprise. None of this conflicts with what I'm doing, though of course ACoF is only in 2162-3.

-Prime Directive adopted in 2178, based a lot on Archer’s work.

Again, no conflict. Interesting choice of date. It's unclear when the PD was established, but New Frontier: Double or Nothing mentions a 2175 Resolution of Non-Interference which was an important step toward the later establishment of the Prime Directive.

[Sci]

Christopher wrote:

---

I don't recall any source claiming that Nathan Samuels ever became the UFP president. There is a reference in To Brave the Storm's final chapter to a "Nathan Samuels Room" at the Palais de la Concorde, but I think the novels established that the Palais was the Earth Prime Minister's residence before it became the UFP President's.

Not exactly. Articles established that the Palais existed as early as Haroun al-Rashid's presidency; Beneath the Raptor's Wing established that the U.E. Prime Minister maintained an office at the Place de la Concorde, future site of the Palais, in the 2150s, but not that the Palais itself existed.

[Hando]

^
Can some one point out to me where it was said that Gardner was the head honcho of Starfleet?
After all in 2151 he was only a captain, and suddenly in 4 years he is in charge, even though there are more experienced admirals already in place?
Is it not possible that Gardner was to Douglas as Douglas MacArthur to George Marshall during WW2? Please forgive me if any misconception as I was just trying to find a good example...

Nathan Samuels Room can be explained. When the Palais was built the Prime Minister of United Earth, probably still Samuels, had offices there.

Does nobody else have a problem with Archer's Presidency? The years appear wrong to me!
If we go by Articles and every President had a regular run then the presidencies should be 2161-2165-2169-2173-2177-2181-2185-2189-2193, so how come Archer is President from 2184-2188-2192?

[Christopher]

Hando wrote:

---

^
Can some one point out to me where it was said that Gardner was the head honcho of Starfleet?
After all in 2151 he was only a captain, and suddenly in 4 years he is in charge, even though there are more experienced admirals already in place?

All I know is, in ENT's fourth season, after Forrest died, every time an admiral was mentioned as giving orders to NX-01, it was Gardner, with Douglas only being mentioned in TATV. The four post-series ENT novels to date consistently portray Gardner as the go-to admiral in Starfleet Command, at least an equal to Admiral Black. Admiral Douglas is only mentioned in passing in the first two novels and not at all in The Romulan War.

Is it not possible that Gardner was to Douglas as Douglas MacArthur to George Marshall during WW2?

Within the context of the First 150 Years book's version of events, sure, it's possible. But we've already established that the novelverse version of events is different.

Does nobody else have a problem with Archer's Presidency? The years appear wrong to me!
If we go by Articles and every President had a regular run then the presidencies should be 2161-2165-2169-2173-2177-2181-2185-2189-2193, so how come Archer is President from 2184-2188-2192?

Well, Barack Obama was re-elected President of the United States in November 2012, but his second term won't begin until Inauguration Day, January 20, 2013. So if the Federation has a similar gap between election and inauguration, it could be that Archer was elected in 2184 but didn't actually begin his first term until 2185.

[Hando]

Christopher wrote:

---

Well, Barack Obama was re-elected President of the United States in November 2012, but his second term won't begin until Inauguration Day, January 20, 2013. So if the Federation has a similar gap between election and inauguration, it could be that Archer was elected in 2184 but didn't actually begin his first term until 2185.

That would make sense and would have been better where it not for the fact that the bio gives the exact years 2184-2192 /President, UFP 2184-2192/.

It is possible that there was no president in 2161-2162 and the first President of UFP enters office in 2163 so we have the Presidencies 2163-2167-2171-2175.

Although my take is that 2161-2164 was Vanderbilt's provisional term as President of the Federation Council/President of UFP. Followed by regular 4-year-termers al-Rashid, T’Maran, sh’Rothress, someone from Centauri and someone from Tellar. In a typical Council fashion.
While Mark Wells 2196-2201 brought it back in synch and adapted the direct election.

But that's just me and until it is disproven, I am sticking with it. Which it already may have been.
So please excuse my ramblings.

[Steve Mollmann]

Didn't Articles establish that if there's a midterm election (such as Bacco had), that the new president starts a new term instead of completing the previous one? That would make it impossible to back-calculate electoral terms with any accuracy, I would think.

[Christopher]

Hando wrote:

---

That would make sense and would have been better where it not for the fact that the bio gives the exact years 2184-2192 /President, UFP 2184-2192/.

The bio isn't strictly canonical anyway, so don't worry about it. Barely glimpsed numbers on a screen aren't absolutely binding.