Star Trek Chronology Dating.

[Warped9]

- I didn't accept the 2266-70 time for the five-year mission but rather placed it starting sometime in mid 2271 and ending in late 2276.

This works. I didn't agree with Okuda's explaination that he set TOS in 2266 simply because it was 300 years after 1966.

Using Data's date of 2364 for the first season of TNG makes more sense anyway, because it falls under another one of Okuda's stated rules, using onscreen dates as "offical".

While I have my own reasons for looking at TNG somewhat dubiously some of its dating references were of help in working out my own chronology.

2364 - 78 years = 2286. That's about ten years after the 5-year mission era (by my reckoning) or right in the time of the movie era. Curiously this puts TMP occurring around 2279 or 300 years after 1979 and TMP's release.

When a reference is something like fifty years ago or two centuries ago or three hundred years then that's something you can fudge to make things fit because you can assume the reference is an estimate or a rounded off figure. A figure like 11 years or 13 years or 18 years or 78 years or whatever is too specific to fudge.

 

[Noname Given]

If you want to REALLY go for a loop re - the TOS timeframe as stated in the series itself, it's all over te place.

In The Squire of Gothos Spock informs Kirk that Trelane is viewing events 800 years in Earth's past (the planet was 800 light years from Earth and Spock states that Trilane is not taking the speed at which light travels into account; thus the Napoleonic Era trappings). Since the accepected 'era of the Napoleonic war is 1799 -1815; this FIRMLY places TOS in 2599 - 2615 (aka the early 27th century).

Yet, later in the first season we have Tomorrow Is Yesterday; and a scene between a USAF Captain, and the arrested Captain Kirk, where the USAF Captain states:

"I'm got enough to lock you up for the next couple of centuries..."

"That outta be just about right"

this placing TOS in the mid 22nd century.

Then we have Space Seed with Khan's vessel launched in 1996 and the line from Kirk in response to Khan's

"How looong...."

"A little over 2 centuries..."

Which places TOS in the late 22nd, early 23rd century.

The most interesting thing to me in all the various continuity violation debate is that nearly everyone takes Spock's description of the Romulan War era of technology as sacrosanct; yet when the century of the TOS era was firmly laid down in the motion picture; NOBODY was citing the Squire of Goths Spock dialogue that crealy put TOS in the late 26th to early 27th century.

So, while I LOVE TOS (it's my favorite series); it's so internally inconsistent at times that I honestly can't tale a lot of what people claim as clear canon violations in later series seriously. And BTW, the arguement that 1960ies TV shows didn't place a lot of emphasis on internl consistency and continuity; sorry, there were others that did, like The FBI and QM's Invaders. IF GR and the gang had cared about internal consistency for TOS, they could have done it - but they didn't and instead chose to have the 'facts' serve the story when a contradiction arose (which is fine). Again, I just do find it interesting that some people like to state 'if they cared they would have watch TOS' for the later series, when often they DID; but again, TOS was not overall very consistent itself with a lot of its own 'historical backstory'.

 

[Warped9]

^^ These keep being thrown out there, but most of them can be rationalized.

In "Tomorrow Is Yesterday" the 200 year reference doesn't have to be taken literally. Just look at Kirk's expression. "That outta be just about right." The Colonel is exaggerating to make a point and Kirk's sarcasm plays into it. No problem.

In "Space Seed" it gets dicier to rationalize, but if accept that the Botany Bay reached a decent percentage of light than their "about two hundreds" year sleep could be explained as relativistic time dilation. I put the events of "Space Seed" in 2272. If the Botany Bay left Earth and the Sol system no earlier than 1996 than it's 276 years (realtime) before it's found by the Enterprise. Put that together and you can rationalize the "two centuries we estimate."

WNMHGB makes two references to the Valiant of about two centuries give or take a bit. I put the events of WNMHGB in 2270. Minus about two hundred years and you're in the latter part of the 21st century. That's just enough for the Valiant to be an early warp capable ship.

In "The Squire Of Gothos" Trelane's planet is stated to be 900 light years from Earth. Trelane claims to have been studying Earth's past. There's no reason to believe that he studied only one small part of Earth's history during late 18th and early 19th century. He could have been studying all the way back to the 14th century and chose only to imitate the trappings of the 18th to early 19th centuries when the Enterprise came along.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Stardate order puts "The Magicks of Megus-Tu" before "Where No Man Has Gone Before".

Don't go by TOS stardates. That way lies madness.

 

[T'Girl]

is there a list somewhere of the production dates (as opposed to airdates).

This has all the airdates and order of production numbers for TOS. Plus all the dialog for all the episodes, for all the series, and all the movies. Enjoy.

http://www.chakoteya.net/index.html

 

[boobatuba]

In The Squire of Gothos Spock informs Kirk that Trelane is viewing events 800 years in Earth's past (the planet was 800 light years from Earth and Spock states that Trilane is not taking the speed at which light travels into account; thus the Napoleonic Era trappings). Since the accepected 'era of the Napoleonic war is 1799 -1815; this FIRMLY places TOS in 2599 - 2615 (aka the early 27th century).

In "The Squire Of Gothos" Trelane's planet is stated to be 900 light years from Earth. Trelane claims to have been studying Earth's past. There's no reason to believe that he studied only one small part of Earth's history during late 18th and early 19th century. He could have been studying all the way back to the 14th century and chose only to imitate the trappings of the 18th to early 19th centuries when the Enterprise came along.

Noname Given's observation is valid and Warped9's explanation doesn't jibe at all with the dialogue from the episode:

TRELANE: I can't tell you how delighted I am to have visitors from the very planet that I've made my hobby. Yes, but according to my observations, I didn't think you capable of such voyages.

JAEGER: Notice the period, Captain. Nine hundred light years from Earth. It's what might be seen through a viewing scope if it were powerful enough.

TRELANE: Ah, yes. I've been looking in on the doings on your lively little Earth.

KIRK: Then you've been looking in on the doings nine hundred years past.

TRELANE: Oh, really? Have I made an error in time? How fallible of me. Oh, I did so want to make you feel at home. I'm quite proud of the detail.
​

It's clear the episode should be taking place 900 years after the Napoleonic era. Unless, of course, you just want to say Jaeger and Kirk are wrong when they say the Napoleonic era was 900 years ago. That's fine, but just say that.

 

[Warped9]

^^ Not all. There's nothing there that invalidates what I said. Did we see all of Trelane's artifact's on display? Probably not considering also that there was a salt vampire on display that Trelane phasers. How in hell does that have anything to do with Earth history?

 

[Timo]

Indeed, all we have to do is assume Jaeger spotted something from the 1500s there - or then mistook what he saw for 16th century artifacts.

The latter is quite probable: our heroes aren't historians. Kirk sometimes shows narrow-scope expertise on 19th century United States but is completely lost on the 20th century US. Even Spock seems to have a vague and colored idea of Earth history, only displaying some expertise in "Metusaleah" regarding works of art.

In addition to this, Trelane's planet was a mobile one. So while Jaeger's statements require one set of explanations (say, those given above), the idea that Trenale would have information on 18th or 19th century Earth affairs requires no other explanation beyond "he looked at them when his planet was closer to Earth".

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Warped9]

^^ Exactly. And we also see that Trelane manipulates very advanced technology. Just as the Enterprise can see objects at extreme distances and see them in realtime as well as communicate near instantaneously over vast distances there's no reason to assume that Trelane doesn't have access to at least similar capabilities.

 

[ToddPence]

In "The Savage Curtain", it is said that Lincoln died "three centuries ago", apparently putting that episode in the mid 22nd century.

 

[Warped9]

The problem with putting TOS in the 22nd century is that it makes things too tight continuity wise. There's not enough time for things to have evolve credibly. And things like the Valiant from WNMHGB are in the late 20th century which simply doesn't wash.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Continuity is relative. Pick one that works.

 

[boobatuba]

More evidence from the episode:

KIRK: Fire without heat, mistaking all this for present day Earth without taking into account the time differential. Whatever we're dealing with, he certainly isn't all knowledgeable. He makes mistakes.
​

Again, my point is that it's Jaeger and Kirk that say they are 900 years ahead of Trelane's presentation of Earth. It has nothing to do with what Trelane might or might not really see with his "telescope" or whatever. Jaeger and Kirk both state that what he has presented is 900 years before their time. Not one artifact, the entire "feel" of the room...which is unmistakeably Napoleonic. You wouldn't have to be a historian to recognize the difference between a room from 1800 and 1300.

Again, I'm not arguing the show should be in the 2700s because of this episode, I'm just pointing out that it's an error. Why is that so hard to accept? The creators and producers of the show MADE A MISTAKE.

 

[Lieut. Arex]

When you're being purposely vague about the time frame, how can you make a mistake?

 

[boobatuba]

When you're being purposely vague about the time frame, how can you make a mistake?

Because there's nothing vague about Jaeger and Kirk's lines. They both specifically say 900 years. If you want to be vague about the timeframe of the series, just strike/revise specific lines like that from the script. Or, if you decide to go ahead and mention a specific time, then stick to it. It's not that hard, and that's what continuity editors are for.

 

[Mytran]

As others have said, Trelane had a mobile planet and some very advanced technology. He also had a less than perfect knowledge of grasp of the power and tech at his disposal. And he seems to have observed a fair range of time periods on Earth.

But the crew specifically said it was 900 years, didn't they? Well not quite. The person (Jaeger) who identified the 900 year thing was a Geophysicist, not a Historian. Kirk simply agreed with him (and he's not a historian either)

JAEGER: Notice the period, Captain. Nine hundred light years from Earth. It's what might be seen through a viewing scope if it were powerful enough.
TRELANE: Ah, yes. I've been looking in on the doings on your lively little Earth.
KIRK: Then you've been looking in on the doings nine hundred years past.
TRELANE: Oh, really? Have I made an error in time? How fallible of me. Oh, I did so want to make you feel at home. I'm quite proud of the detail.

Given the numerous references in other episodes to anything from the 20th Century as "ancient", it's not that far fetched to suppose that a non-historian would lump all "ancient" things together. It's not that different to today really, when many people treat the Middle Ages as a time of "knights and castles" - in fact it was a period of tremendous cultural and technological change.

So, if Jaeger also considered the trappings around him to be Medieval, a rough figure of 900 years is not that far off. If the far more precise Mr Spock had identified the period, then we'd be in trouble!

 

[Mytran]

While I have my own reasons for looking at TNG somewhat dubiously some of its dating references were of help in working out my own chronology.

2364 - 78 years = 2286. That's about ten years after the 5-year mission era (by my reckoning) or right in the time of the movie era. Curiously this puts TMP occurring around 2279 or 300 years after 1979 and TMP's release.

I like your reasoning here, and it's definitely got me thinking about alternate interpretations (I usually favour an early 23rd century TOS). However, I feel I ought to point that Decker says Voyager 6 was launched over 300 years ago.

Then again, perhaps he was just taking a leaf out of Kirk's book and exaggerating for dramtaic effect?

 

[Captain Robert April]

If it's a discrepancy that could've been solved by a pencil slash, and doesn't really effect the overall story, i.e., the time differential isn't crucial to the plot, then it's something that can easily be sluffed off as a one-off.

It's when the number of pencil slashes mount up to the point where the script would wind up looking like a redacted document from the CIA (like ST09) that some of us start calling for someone to slam on the brakes and rethink the thing.

Decker's line can be taken to mean that, in the Star Trek universe, the US had a much more vigorous space program, and the Voyager series started in the late 60's instead of the mid 70's. How else do you think they came up with the DY-100 by the mid 90's?

 

[Timo]

So, if Jaeger also considered the trappings around him to be Medieval, a rough figure of 900 years is not that far off.

But an even rougher figure of a thousand years would make infinitely more sense in that case...

Actually, the logic of the episode would probably work the other way around. Jaeger knows Earth is 900 lightyears away. So that's what he would use as the starting point when presenting his CO with the clever observation that Trelane is stuck in the past. "Hey, I figured it out - this ancient junk in this castle comes from the past because Trelane sees 900 (light)years into the past. Ain't I clever, boss?"

So the actual timeframe of the surroundings would be of secondary import; Jaeger would pull the 900 yr figure from a completely different source, using the expertise he did possess.

However, I feel I ought to point that Decker says Voyager 6 was launched over 300 years ago.

Which would still work just fine with the 2279 TMP dating even if we didn't advance the launch of Voyagers 2 and 1 at all, and merely added the missing four in quick succession.

We have some info on early space exploration milestones that may or may not suggest that pre-TOS space feats, and indeed feats till the late 1970s or early 1980s (say, the STS), went more or less the same way as in our universe. Perhaps the significant picking up of pace in the 1990s was due to the Augment supergeniuses kicking in?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[T'Girl]

putting TOS in the 22nd century is that it makes things too tight continuity wise

Even the mid-2260's makes things a little crowded, the later we can push the timeline back the better. At the very begining of TWOK the words "In The 23th Century" appears, which could mean the year 2299.

If the Botany Bay left Earth and the Sol system no earlier than 1996

Khan ruled (among other places) India.

The Indian Saka era calendar has the year zero in the Christian era calendar's year 78, so when Spock refers to the reign of Khan being from the years 1992 through 1996 (India's calendar), he really means the years 2070 AD through 2074 AD (gregorian calendar).

Decker's line can be taken to mean that, in the Star Trek universe, the US had a much more vigorous space program,

Good point, the Star Trek universe would seem to depend on the US (and Russia's) space program continuing at the aggressive pace of the 1960's, who knew that we would abruptly stop?

However, I feel I ought to point that Decker says Voyager 6 was launched over 300 years ago.

Voyager 1 and voyager 2 were launched in 1977, as I recall the novelization, voyager 6 was intended to explore a "nearby" black hole. So maybe launched in the later part of the twentieth century.