Chronology questions

Forgive my double-posting, but do you think it's possible that the reference about putting the ring in her mouth was not talking about Polly's age but about the rings' physical appearance? Consider the fact that they're described as being very beautiful, and almost rather seductive (nothing like the One Ring, of course ;)).

There's also the fact that Uncle Andrew appealed to Polly's beauty, and "Polly began to think he might not really be mad after all." This tells us something about Polly's character, but I don't know if that tells us anything about her age. Opinions?
 
Arvan said:
Forgive my double-posting, but do you think it's possible that the reference about putting the ring in her mouth was not talking about Polly's age but about the rings' physical appearance? Consider the fact that they're described as being very beautiful, and almost rather seductive (nothing like the One Ring, of course ;)).

There's also the fact that Uncle Andrew appealed to Polly's beauty, and "Polly began to think he might not really be mad after all." This tells us something about Polly's character, but I don't know if that tells us anything about her age. Opinions?
Click to expand...
I always assumed that the statement about putting the ring in her mouth must be talking about the ring's appearance... I don't think it ever occurred to me that Polly could be that young.

As for the next point, I don't remember anything about that. I'll need to re-read the book!
 
Arvan said:
Forgive my double-posting, but do you think it's possible that the reference about putting the ring in her mouth was not talking about Polly's age but about the rings' physical appearance? Consider the fact that they're described as being very beautiful, and almost rather seductive (nothing like the One Ring, of course ;)).
Click to expand...
I think you must be right I think you must be right. The impression you get from the book as a whole certainly makes an age younger than 8 fairly implausible, and 10 to 12 much more likely. Besides which, most children grow out of putting things in their mouth by the age of about 2! Maybe Lewis had a mental aberration when he was writing that line, or maybe he had in mind that they were brightly coloured like sweets or something. But the fact that he says that she would have put them in her mouth "if she was a very little younger" is quite confusing.

There's also the fact that Uncle Andrew appealed to Polly's beauty, and "Polly began to think he might not really be mad after all." This tells us something about Polly's character, but I don't know if that tells us anything about her age. Opinions?
Click to expand...
I don't think that is particularly significant with regard to age. He could have said the same to a girl of any age, I think.

Peeps
 
Arvan said:
I know a perfectly mature (more than most, actually) eighteen-year-old who calls his father "Daddy". Just sayin...
Click to expand...

True, and I am not saying calling your dad "daddy" is immature, but it is a name that is usually used by kids younger than those who use Mother and Father. It doesn't necessarily mean anything, but it would make me say that Polly at the beginning of her adventures was younger than Lucy at the beginning of hers. I always thought that anyway though, without too much reasoning, so maybe that's just my bias :p.
 
Laurel said:
True, and I am not saying calling your dad "daddy" is immature, but it is a name that is usually used by kids younger than those who use Mother and Father. It doesn't necessarily mean anything, but it would make me say that Polly at the beginning of her adventures was younger than Lucy at the beginning of hers. I always thought that anyway though, without too much reasoning, so maybe that's just my bias :p.
Click to expand...
I think that is a valid point. In that time period, it was mostly younger children that would say 'Mummy' and 'Daddy'.
 
First, where does it say that Polly put the ring in her mouth?
Second, chilren's names for their parents are very personal.
Third, Polly's mannerisms, thought processes, and vocabulary are all someone who is around 8-12. That she tried to mathematically calculate the space in the attic to determine where the empty house was implies she is very much into critical thinking.

MrBob
 
It doesn't say she put a ring in her mouth, but it does say that when she saw them, she thought them so pretty that had she been just a little younger, she would have been tempted to. Check the part of the story where they just come out of the attic space into Uncle Andrew's study.
 
We seem to have got rather sidetracked by the question of Polly's age. Actually, my main aim in this thread was to pin down the Pevensies' ages in LWW, PC, VDT, TSC and TLB, and the years in which they took place. The events of TMN don't have much bearing on that. From the evidence I have gathered, the most plausible chronology looks like this:

LWW - Summer 1944
Peter 16, Susan 14-15, Edmund 13-14, Lucy 12

PC - Early September 1945
Peter 17, Susan 15-16, Edmund 14-15, Lucy 13

VDT - Summer 1946
Peter 18, Susan 16-17, Edmund 15-16, Lucy 14, Eustace 13

TSC - September 1946
Eustace 13, Jill 13

TLB - Spring 1948
Peter 19-20, Edmund 16-18, Lucy 15-16, Eustace 14-15, Jill 14-15

Can anyone see any evidence in the books that speaks against those dates and ages?

Peeps
 
Last edited:
I have imagined Lucy to be much, much younger in LWW. After all, were she 12, wouldn't she be old enough not to go with a stranger? (Mr. Tumnus.) Also, it doesn't seem that any child of twelve would likely be accused of imagining things. After all, wouldn't she be old enough not to ever do that sort of thing? I know I was, when I was twelve.

I hope this makes sense. :eek:
 
I think a 12 year old would be more likely to think they were old enough that those childish rules didn't apply any more. A younger child would have been scared and run away.

The others were older than her, so maybe treated her as more babyish than she actually was.

The reason for saying she's 12 is that she has left school by the time of TLB (so must be at least 15 by then).

Peeps
 
Last edited:
Peepiceek said:
We seem to have got rather sidetracked by the question of Polly's age. Actually, my main aim in this thread was to pin down the Pevensies' ages in LWW, PC, VDT, TSC and TLB, and the years in which they took place. The events of TMN don't have much bearing on that. From the evidence I have gathered, the most plausible chronology looks like this:

LWW - Summer 1944
Peter 16, Susan 14-15, Edmund 13-14, Lucy 12

PC - Early September 1945
Peter 17, Susan 15-16, Edmund 14-15, Lucy 13

VDT - Summer 1946
Peter 18, Susan 16-17, Edmund 15-16, Lucy 14, Eustace 13

TSC - September 1946
Eustace 13, Jill 13

TLB - Spring 1948
Peter 19-20, Edmund 16-18, Lucy 15-16, Eustace 14-15, Jill 14-15

Can anyone see any evidence in the books that speaks against those dates and ages?

Peeps
Click to expand...
Well considering the fact that the air raids in Britain ended in 1941, I don't think LWW took place in in '44. I always put it in 1941, which would mean the filmmakers were right in placing VDT still in WW2. Lucy's speech, behavior, and naivety make me think she was around 9 years old, not 12.
I do agree with the fact that the events of SC took place only months after VDT, but why does The Last Battle take place only 2 years after SC? Eustace does say "more than a year ago by our time", but the story seems to imply that some time has gone by, mainly in saying that Eustace and Jill are the only ones in school. I always thought three years, in 1945 or maybe '46. Of course that's only opinion.

Peepiceek said:
The reason for saying she's 12 is that she has left school by the time of TLB (so must be at least 15 by then).
Click to expand...

That's why I think the Last Battle was three years after The Silver Chair. She'd be 15 or 16 then.
 
"It doesn't say she put a ring in her mouth, but it does say that when she saw them, she thought them so pretty that had she been just a little younger, she would have been tempted to."

Read it, but it still doesn't invaidate her maturiy. Does "very little" mean slightly or a lot?

Regarding Lucy's age in VotDT, she is considered to be a little girl by the Dufflepods. 14 is not little, especially by Narnian standards.

As for Eustace and Jill's ages in TLB, 14 is the upper limit. I see them even younger, around 12. They were treated as children by Tirian. Fourteen would have been on the higher end of the scale for being treated a such.

MrBob
 
Arvan said:
Well considering the fact that the air raids in Britain ended in 1941, I don't think LWW took place in in '44. I always put it in 1941, which would mean the filmmakers were right in placing VDT still in WW2. Lucy's speech, behavior, and naivety make me think she was around 9 years old, not 12.
Click to expand...
As discussed in the "Lucy was only ten!" thread, evacuations continued right up until 1944, during the V2 bombings. Also, VDT says that the war years had been 'long ago'.

Can you give any quotes that wouldindicate decisively that Lucy was 9 rather than 12 in LWW?
I do agree with the fact that the events of SC took place only months after VDT, but why does The Last Battle take place only 2 years after SC? Eustace does say "more than a year ago by our time", but the story seems to imply that some time has gone by, mainly in saying that Eustace and Jill are the only ones in school. I always thought three years, in 1945 or maybe '46. Of course that's only opinion.
Click to expand...
One wouldn't say 'more than a year' if the period were in fact significantly more than two years.

Peeps
 
MrBob said:
Regarding Lucy's age in VotDT, she is considered to be a little girl by the Dufflepods. 14 is not little, especially by Narnian standards.
Click to expand...
I teach 14 year olds, and some of them are still quite little. Also, the Dufflepuds are not terribly clever or discerning. And Reepicheep objects to them calling her a little girl, and refers to her as a lady.

Peeps
 
True. So, Lucy in VODT must be an age that can reasonably be called both a little girl and a lady--and fourteen might make sense for that. In HHB, Aravis is considered a girl by Shasta, but old enough to be married in the Calormene world. So, I would think that, whatever age that is, Aravis in HHB and Lucy in VODT might be about the same age, since both are referred to as both girls and ladies. As to what age that might be, if we could assume that Calormen might work like, say, Medieval royalty, what age did royal girls get married then? I just did a Google search, and one site says royal girls married by fourteen. However, I feel like, by maturity level, Lucy in VODT might have been a little older. Still, probably about the same, and fourteen makes sense.
 
Last edited:
I always assumed that Lucy was, indeed, very young... perhaps 10 in VDT. But I never really focused on her age, so it wouldn't be astonishing for me to now establish her in my mind as a fourteen-year-old.

I think fourteen is a very good age for her in VDT, although I can't believe she could be 12 in LWW... this is confusing. :p
 
Actually, the more I think about it, the more I feel that my suggested ages above make more sense of the whole series. I could never imagine a 12-year-old Peter leading an army, or a 9-year-old Edmund fighting in it, nor a 13-year-old Peter fighting Miraz in single combat or a 10-year-old Edmund striking fear into the hearts of the Telmarine lords. But If Peter was 16-17 and Edmund 13-15, that is just about plausible, given the positive effect Narnian air has on visitors from our world. And Jill's navigational skills in TLB are those of a teenager, not those of a 10-11-year-old.

Peeps
 
Back
Top