Well you know what I find it stupid. But that’s just my opinion. I like the times I find when I look up stuff in memory alpha, but whatever
when did TOS take place, 23rd century or 22nd century
- Thread starter Gabriel
- Start date
Whenever the plot suited it, hehe! Early TOS seemed resolute in that it was two centuries ahead ("Space Seed", "Squire of Gothos". Other episodes would implicate the 23rd century, as would "Star Trek II" - the same movie that forgot Chekov wasn't on board the ship at that time, fanon/headcanon/makeitup really doesn't count for much as we're not getting paid to script edit the show after it's released... so I'd vote for both if I could. The show's penchant was discussing the human condition and canonical details didn't matter until later. Especially when episodes like "The Enemy Within" had to consciously write around the lack of shuttlecraft despite having the ship have one until the second half of the first season and even by then the 200/300 year juggling act was still not resolved... Never mind Kirk and other characters were not fully fleshed out as Spock had emotions, Kirk was not always consistent in attitude, that and TV was made rather differently in the 1960s with no arcs, no planned out ideas, it's just a western set in space and they worked by the seat of their pants and came up with some rather awesome stuff along the way. Continuity came in afterward. Then came TNG, which didn't nimbly nor neatly toe the line either... then by VOY there was no such thing as continuity of any sort anymore, since too much continuity pegs one in and that's not going to keep viewers so they had to do something at the risk of breaking it, but thankfully the 1996 Borg movie already did that - even if VOY's first three years' worth of Borg stories acted as if the Queen didn't exist - not until 1998 with season 5 of the show... and insinuated Q introduced the Borg, which isn't true because "The Neutral Zone" telling of scooped up elements that were confirmed in "Q Who" show the Borg were already there and there are loads more examples... ugh, pedantry, pedantry, the scripts written in your name...
I'm more than willing to accept TOS, the movies, TNG, and it's God Awful films as separate entities because altho the actors were the same, it's clear the characterizations were different. I can enjoy them for what they are but canon they are not; they don't look the same nor feel the same.
No, "Gothos" was the one that put it more like 700 years ahead. "Tomorrow is Yesterday" was the other 200 years reference. And two passing mentions -- one an admitted estimate, the other an obvious joke -- hardly constitutes "resolute."
And continue to forget on Gothos' time is not the 22nd Century, Gothos is not Earth time. As for "Tomorrow'" the joke was obvious because according to Kirk that was approximate estimate for him and his crew in getting back to his timeline. Too much retroactive thinking to constitute TOS was in the 23rd Century.
'Fraid the films are canon.
Yep, like Chekhov and Noonien Singh knowing each other when Koenig was not in the episode "Space Seed", and the Enterprise is 20 years old when what we know the ship had to have been older.
Consistency with other canon isn't a requirement to be canon.
It's like how different first season episodes of TOS, all canon, imply it's set in different centuries. You know, what we've been talking about.
It's like how different first season episodes of TOS, all canon, imply it's set in different centuries. You know, what we've been talking about.
It's canon as long as the studio says so, it's Prime, and Dime, Welvin, and Kelvin universe as long as the studio says so, and I understand that fully. For fans, bending over backwards has become the norm.
"Space Speed" made it very clear that only ~200 years passed since the launch of the SS Botany Bay (~1996). Too many lines of dialog to retcon:
- KIRK: How long have you been sleeping? Two centuries we estimate.
- KHAN: I remember a voice. Did I hear it say I had been sleeping for two centuries?
MCCOY: That is correct.
- KIRK: Yes, I understand. You have two hundred years of catching up to do.
Consistency with other canon isn't a requirement to be canon, but it makes more sense in the long run. I respect your resistance.
Maybe morrow meant 20 years after refit. Because allot of people agree the enterprise was 40 years old at time of destruction.
"We estimate." The word "estimate," by definition, means it is not exact or certain. And people round off numbers in casual speech all the time.
Besides, it doesn't matter, any more than "James R. Kirk" or "lithium crystals" or "Vulcanian" matters. Series fiction is a work in progress that refines and adjusts itself as it goes, that tries things out early on that get abandoned later. Newer information supersedes older information. That's how it works. The explicit references putting TOS in the 23rd century are vastly more abundant by now than the few first-season references that don't fit because they were still making the universe up as they went along. The lines in "Space Seed" are the equivalent of that early Spider-Man issue where Spidey was Peter Palmer for a month because Stan Lee forgot what he'd named the character the first time. Early-installment weirdness isn't binding.
I agree. Basically they've got the 23rd century equivalent of Boone's Farm rotgut.
I thought of that line, too; Kirk only estimated once, and prior to and after the line, he and team were extensively discussing late 20th century ships and history. He meant around 200 years, not 270 years. If I was to retcon it this would be the new dialog:
- KIRK: How long have you been sleeping? Centuries/Almost 3 centuries we estimate.
- KHAN: I remember a voice. Did I hear it say I had been sleeping for centuries/3 centuries?
MCCOY: That is correct.
- KIRK: Yes, I understand. You have many/almost 3 hundred years of catching up to do.
In reality, you are right, but we have so much FUN explaining them away or coming up with bizarre excuses or some other retconning.
In universe, I've explained those three items at least to myself. 
Last edited:
No maybe, what's in the script is what Morrow exactly meant, just like 1701-A was a new starship, and Kirk hinting his century was the 22nd in TOS.
Nonsense, because the producers could've easily reference or correctly mention Star Trek was in the 23rd in seasons after which they never did in seasons 2 or 3. I don't know of the Peter Palmer reference you're making but I did some research on how Robert Banner "The Hulk" got his name. Originally Bruce Banner but the Hulk's book was cancelled and the character was guest starring in other comic books but it was an issue of the Fantastic Four where the character was mentioned as Bob. Fans addressed it and Stan didn't fight and added his name was Robert Bruce Banner. The 22nd Century mentioned was not a mistake, it was clear. The mention of the 23rd century came from the poster from TMP, could the series been in the later end of the 22nd Century? Probably, but all the inconsistencies that some fans are hailing as gospel were based on movie scripts were handled by multiple writers TMP, and a film which was hailed by many as the very best TWOK was hacked and re-written based upon 5 different scripts and completed it just about 3 weeks before approval.
TOS may have had a steady term of growing pains but the writers, SF writers I might add, who wrote those scripts were well thought out, and not like the Frankenstein stitch work done in those movies. I value TOS than the bullshit work that a lot are heavily praising from those mish-mash movies.
I thought of that line, too; Kirk only estimated once, and prior to and after the line, he and team were extensively discussing late 20th century ships and history. He meant around 200 years, not 270 years. If I was to retcon it this would be the new dialog:
- KIRK: How long have you been sleeping? Centuries/Almost 3 centuries we estimate.
- KHAN: I remember a voice. Did I hear it say I had been sleeping for centuries/3 centuries?
MCCOY: That is correct.
- KIRK: Yes, I understand. You have many/almost 3 hundred years of catching up to do.
In reality, you are right, but we have so much FUN explaining them away or coming up with bizarre excuses or some other retconning.
Maybe, you could also explain how dramatically different ST: Enterprise and Discovery looks compare to TOS and how does it fit... in universe?
Last edited:
By happen chance, I just got done doing that very thing on another thread about the mirror universe. Let me find it...
[URL="https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/did-the-enterprise-stop-the-mirror-universe-from-happening.297868/page-2#post-12768631"]Did the Enterprise stop the mirror universe from happening ?[/URL]
Um TOS - "Squire of Gothos" actually puts TOS in the 28th century. Why?
Trilane speaks of Napoleon - meaning he's viewing events from the 1800's.
From the episode:
http://www.chakoteya.net/StarTrek/18.htm
1800 + 900 = 2700 equals 28th century.
Every use of "two centuries" was an estimate, because people tend to talk about time units as wholes rather than subdividing them with mathematical precision. If it's 10 AM Tuesday and you want to talk about something that happened at 9 PM on Sunday, you'd say it happened "two days ago," not "slightly over one and a half days ago." Many people would probably think of any event from the 19th century as "two centuries ago" even if it was late in the century; they wouldn't use the phrase exclusively to talk about January 1819. Believe me, I've spent my entire life as a literal-minded person being annoyed by how routinely people don't use those terms exactly.
Not at this point of their meeting. Kirk just "woke up" into the drawing room and didn't have a lot of time to look around, yet. Here's the early dialog:
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.
The period Jaeger was suggesting to Kirk in his very hasty briefing was perhaps about the Castle and some of the suits of armor which were the most obvious objects at this point, which could have been circa 1367. Yes, after more inspection, there were other and varied time periods both older and newer, but this confirms that Trelane's planet moved around a lot and looked in at different distances and times. In all later conversations, nine hundred years was never mentioned, again. I bet Jaeger was red faced that he gave an incomplete report to the captain. 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.
I'll buy it. So now I won't need to plug my ears during the episode.
Prior to estimating two centuries to Kahn, the time period was always "centuries" in their previous analyses. The "two hundred years of catching up" may be that Kirk thought Kahn would need that period of technical background to begin to understand the current three hundred year gap in his knowledge? Or he only needed to focus on the last 2 hundred years since the 1st hundred years nothing really didn't change, especially after a world war on recovery, or most likely, Kahn said he was interested in starships, since warp drive was discovered 200 years ago, then he would only need the last 2 hundred years to catch up. That one's kind of iffy. 
Last edited:
