Chronology questions

Peepiceek

Peepiceek

Well-known member
Although there are snippets of discussion about chronology in other threads, I can’t find a thread specifically devoted to the subject. There are many theories about the children’s ages and about the years that the adventures took place, not least from the much-disputed timeline. What I want to do in this thread is, firstly, to collect together any evidence FROM THE BOOKS that might have a bearing on anyone’s age and/or on the year each adventure takes place, and then, if possible, to use that evidence to put together a chronology of when each adventure took place.

The most extensive previous discussion on this topic was on the thread Lucy was only ten!, so it may be worth your reading the final three pages of that thread before posting on here.

Here are the pieces of evidence that I can think of from the books. Please post to add any others that I have missed out.

TMN
- Sherlock Homes was still living in Baker Street and the Bastables were looking for treaure in the Lewisham Road (ch 1)
- It was the beginning of the summer holidays (ch 1)
- “If Polly had been a very little younger she would have wanted to put [a ring] in her mouth” (ch 1) [Note: this seems to suggest to me that she was only 5 or 6, although her behaviour and speech through the book as a whole suggests she is at least 9 or 10.]

LWW
- They had been sent away from London during the war because of the air-raids (ch 1) [Note: This has traditionally been viewed as being 1940, but previous discussions show it could have been as late as 1944.]
- The Professor was a very old man with shaggy white hair (ch 1)
- Lucy is the youngest and Edmund the second youngest (ch 1)
- It’s summer (ch 2)
- Peter is the first-born (ch 12)

PC
- The events of LWW had “happened a year ago” (ch 1)
- They are going back to school after the holidays (ch 1)
- Lucy is going to boarding school for the first time (ch 1) [Note: We assume, therefore, that this is the start of the Autumn Term, ie. the first week of September.]
- Caspian is about the same age as Peter (ch 12)

VDT
- Their Father has got a job lecturing in America for sixteen weeks that summer (ch 1)
- Peter is working for an exam (ch 1) [Note: I have argued here that this was probably a university entrance exam, which would probably make Peter 18 in VDT.]
- The events of LWW had taken place "long ago in the War years" (ch1) [This implies VDT takes place after 1945 and therefore LWW after 1943. Although at a stretch "the War years" could be taken to refer only to the Blitz, if it is coming from the children's perspective.]
- Edmund tells Caspian, “It’s a year ago by our time since we left you just before your coronation” (ch 2)

[Question: Does it say somewhere that Eustace was a year younger than Lucy, or am I making that up?]

TSC
- It’s autumn (ch 1)
- The events of VDT had happened in the holidays immediately preceding this term (ch 1)
- They are two weeks into a thirteen week term (ch 1)

TLB
- Peter was “hardly full grown, certainly younger than Tirian himself” (ch 4), and Tirian is “between twenty and twenty-five years old” (ch 2)
- Eustace tells Tirian that their last visit was “more than a year ago by our time” (ch 5)
- Jill and Eustace are the only ones still at school (ch 5)
 
Last edited:
I seem to remember reading somewhere that Eustace was Lucy's younger by a year, but I can't put my finger on just where. I'll keep looking.

Complicating all this is the fact that Lewis wasn't at all consistent about keeping his chronologies in order, or sensibly corresponding events. For example, in Horse it is plainly stated that two thing happened the year that the Tisroc began his reign: Arsheesh found Shasta in the boat, and Narnia was freed from the dominion of the White Witch. In the same book it says that the newborn Cor was brought to a centaur in Narnia and had a prophecy said over him. The latter would have been impossible if Narnia was still under the White Witch's rule, and if her rule had been broken, that would imply that the centaurs got back onto the business of blessing infants pretty darn quickly, and that King Lune and his queen would have resumed the tradition with surprising speed for the circumstances.

It's this kind of sloppiness that drove Tolkien mad about the Chronicles.
 
I am aware that such things might make finding a coherent chronology impossible, but I hold out hope. The issue about the centaurs in Narnia was addressed previously in, I think, the thread 'Did the Winter last 100 years?' (or it might have been the 'Cair Paravel' thread).

Peeps
 
It's true about the hundred years, but it's hard to escape the fact that the end of the White Witch's reign and Cor's kidnapping both happened the same year, according to explicit statements in Horse. You're right, it may be impossible.

One thing that does establish, though: if we presume that Shasta/Cor is between 10 and 12 years old, 13 at the max, then the events in Horse happened about that long into the Golden Age.
 
Going through the wardrobe into Narnia and back distorted time. Perhaps going from book to book also distorts time. ;)
 
PrinceOfTheWest said:
I seem to remember reading somewhere that Eustace was Lucy's younger by a year, but I can't put my finger on just where. I'll keep looking.

.
Click to expand...


I checked Dawn Treader, and it's not in there like I thought...hmm, maybe I should re-read the books to find out. :p

Peepiceek, well thought out list. I wonder if the publishers used something like that to determine the "new" order of the books or not.
 
I like discussing this. When it comes down to the movie, though, I don't mind them playing a little bit with the ages as long as they keep things coherrent and relative. I do wish they had made Caspian younger in the movies, but I don't mind it so much I guess. I personally won't be offended if Jill and Eustace are 18 or so in "The Last Battle." I really want the main actors for the Pevensies for "The Horse and His Boy."
 
LB: tirian says its been 200 years since rilians death, yet the brian sibley narnia book timeline says its been 199 years since eustace rescued rilian.

also, why do the beavers say "theres never been any of your kind (humans) in narnia before" when we know there was cos of MN. what happened to frank and helens offspring?

there are so many indiscrepancies in these books. i wished CS lewis had fixed them.
 
cor, the timeline is suispect. Don't rely on it for accuracy. Tirian tells Eustace and Jill that it has been "over two hundred years" and that he was "seventh in descent from {Caspian}."

As for Beaver's statement, that is just Lewis not planning ahead. Tumnus has a book called "Is Man a Myth?" even though there are humans living just south of the Narnian border and in the islands.

MrBob
 
In The Last Battle it says that Eustace and Jill were younger than Lucy, but it doesn't say how young.
 
VDT says that Eustace couldn't even stand up to Lucy, let alone Edmund, in a fight. In The Last Battle, they say that they're the only ones left in school, so we can assume that Lucy is the elder. Now if she's a year or two older than Eustace and Jill, they would be 17 or 18 years old (another example of how LB is so much more mature than the other Chronicles; the main characters are all older).

I have to say I'm glad they cast Caspian older than in the book for the simple reason that he's supposed to be Peter's age. Of course, if William Mosley had been younger, then whoever played Caspian would need to be younger.

"'If Polly had been a very little younger she would have wanted to put [a ring] in her mouth' (ch 1) [Note: this seems to suggest to me that she was only 5 or 6, although her behaviour and speech through the book as a whole suggests she is at least 9 or 10.]"

I always thought they were 11 or 12 myself, but that is a very debatable topic. And certainly she cannot be five years old. That's ridiculous!
 
cor said:
LB: tirian says its been 200 years since rilians death, yet the brian sibley narnia book timeline says its been 199 years since eustace rescued rilian.
Click to expand...
As Mr Bob said, the timeline is suspect. That's why I specifically set up this thread to discuss what we can deduce from the books alone about chronology.
also, why do the beavers say "theres never been any of your kind (humans) in narnia before" when we know there was cos of MN. what happened to frank and helens offspring?
Click to expand...
My assumption is that the White Witch had a misinformation campaign, as happens in many totalitarian states, so that much of Narnia's true history had been forgotten, even by the faithful.

Peeps
 
Arvan said:
"'If Polly had been a very little younger she would have wanted to put [a ring] in her mouth' (ch 1) [Note: this seems to suggest to me that she was only 5 or 6, although her behaviour and speech through the book as a whole suggests she is at least 9 or 10.]"

I always thought they were 11 or 12 myself, but that is a very debatable topic. And certainly she cannot be five years old. That's ridiculous!
Click to expand...
My starting point in this thread is to assume that nothing is too ridiculous to be suggested, if it can be justified from the books. What age would you say Lewis has in mind from that line in TMN?

Peeps
 
Peepiceek said:
My assumption is that the White Witch had a misinformation campaign, as happens in many totalitarian states, so that much of Narnia's true history had been forgotten, even by the faithful.
Peeps
Click to expand...
Yes, that's it. She had an evil talking Turkey named GobbleGobbles as her minister of propaganda!!
 
Peepiceek said:
My starting point in this thread is to assume that nothing is too ridiculous to be suggested, if it can be justified from the books. What age would you say Lewis has in mind from that line in TMN?
Click to expand...

I always thought Digory and Polly were 11-13 years old. Thirteen at the definite highest. I can't see them under 11 years of age, though.
 
Arvan said:
I always thought Digory and Polly were 11-13 years old. Thirteen at the definite highest. I can't see them under 11 years of age, though.
Click to expand...
Yes, I did too. But the book never says that. And the only thing it does say that has a bearing on their age is the thing about Polly wanting to put a ring in her mouth.

Peeps
 
Well, Digory and Polly can read and write well--Polly is writing a story in her smuggler's cave, remember. It can't be a story like we all wrote when we were little that was just lots of lines that no one else could read, though, because she won't let Digory read it, implying that it can be read by both of them. I don't really know what minimum age that would give them, but older than 5, certainly!
Polly calls her father "Daddy" when she says that he thought the old house was empty because of the drains, while in LWW both Lucy and Edmund specifically say "Mother" and Peter says "Father" when discussing their parents. So, though while not certain by any means, this does seem to imply imply that Polly and Digory were younger than Lucy and Edmund.

Another thing for the general chronology is that Hoovers (vaccuums) had not been invented at the time of MN. I don't know when that happened, though, so maybe it doesn't tell us anything.

Also, in LWW, Mr. Tumnus tells Lucy about when Silenus and Bacchus would come in the summer. This means that Mr. Tumnus had been alive and old enough to remember when the Winter began, and so it cannot have actually been 100 years long...unless fauns live longer than people, in which case it doesn't tell us anything! Also, Mr. Beaver has a dam that he himself has built, something that has to be done on a thawed river, not a frozen one during the winter, so that the winter cannot really have been 100 years, but then we run into the same trouble as with Tumnus: how long do Narnian creatures live? Because that would make a big difference in how long the Winter could have lasted.
 
Laurel said:
Well, Digory and Polly can read and write well--Polly is writing a story in her smuggler's cave, remember. It can't be a story like we all wrote when we were little that was just lots of lines that no one else could read, though, because she won't let Digory read it, implying that it can be read by both of them. I don't really know what minimum age that would give them, but older than 5, certainly!
Click to expand...
Mm. Good point, good point.

Polly calls her father "Daddy" when she says that he thought the old house was empty because of the drains, while in LWW both Lucy and Edmund specifically say "Mother" and Peter says "Father" when discussing their parents. So, though while not certain by any means, this does seem to imply imply that Polly and Digory were younger than Lucy and Edmund.
Click to expand...
I know a perfectly mature (more than most, actually) eighteen-year-old who calls his father "Daddy". Just sayin...
 
I always imagined Polly to be about nine. Old enough to be allowed to explore some on her own; old enough to write a story. The statement about putting the ring in her mouth always confused me.

My little sister is four. She certainly could not write a story! :p And her language skills, though advanced for her age, are certainly not of equal caliber to Polly's. It is difficult to believe that Polly could be a five year old, since she is so articulate.
 
^That is exactly why I can't believe that she's under 8 years old... I just think she's at least ten. She's a bit too articulate, too good at expressing herself... but I have a feeling that nine-year-olds in the 1890s were a lot more mature than they are now; for the most part, anyway. Things were more strict back then, so I can understand a nine-year-old reading, writing, and talking like an modern eleven-year-old. Still, I see them as more like 11.
 
Back
Top