Talk:Discworld Timeline

All Threads older than one year have been archived Discworld Timeline/Archive 1 If any user wishes to comment on these discussions please do so here. All new threads should be started here also.

There is unlikely to be any addition to Lspace's original Timeline, so we may now add new and missing dates (or argue with others), here.

Dates should only be added after an explanatory page has been created (i.e. no red dates). Do not simply copy the original here without verification in an article, there is no reason to duplicate it.

new timeline

So is this definatly where the redone timeline will be? And also, could someone please take down the lspace.org timeline. --ArchchancellorJoe 17:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

This is where the wiki's timeline goes. I don't think there's any intention of removing the original from the L-Space Web. --Old Dickens 18:18, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Why not? I thought it was agreed that it was wrong? --ArchchancellorJoe 19:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Agreed by whom? I disagree with bits of it; other people disagree with other bits. How could we prove it's wrong? Anyway, you'd have to argue with the Cabal, or maybe Esmi: this is our area, others have theirs. --Old Dickens 19:55, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Night Watch issue

In Men at Arms Vimes had been in the Watch 25 years. Would that not then require five years between Men at Arms and Night Watch? Solicitr 02:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The DWTL and I make it four; perhaps a rounding error. --Old Dickens 02:58, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

But then- is the Night Watch time-hole exactly thirty years, or is that just a 'round number'? If we know Feet of Clay to be in 1987 (one year before the Tercentenary), and Guards! Guards! two years before that (1985)- there at least we're on solid ground, with Men at Arms roughly right between, i.e. 1986. Isn't that, at least, solid? Solicitr 03:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

My suggestion was thirty-two years; the rest is pretty well accepted and follows Orin Thomas's findings. --Old Dickens 03:35, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

That's good- it also cleans up the Susan Sto Helit problem- exactly 30 years doesn't allow any time between Mort and Susan's birth. Solicitr 04:05, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Query, though- is there any basis besides Orin's bare assumption that Jingo occurs a mere year after Feet of Clay or, really, that the whole chronology after Feet of Clay really has to be so jammed up? The only idea of the passgae of time in the later books, IIRC, is the fact that Night Watch prertty much has to occur within 9 months or less of {T5E}- plainly the end of the previous year, since it's winter. But why does The Fifth Elephant have to be crammed into the same year as Jingo? Solicitr 22:59, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I think Orin has the whole period of the Watch Series pretty well laid out with explanatory notes. I've written before about the odd compression of events, attributing it to the impossible demand on the History Monks. --Old Dickens 01:28, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, I've read Orin's notes, and I'm not entitrely convinced. And although the History Monks are a convenient catchall excuse for everything, they really should only be a last resort, when a real temporal impossibility crops up. I just don't see anything that necessitates stacking the sequence Feet of Clay-Jingo-The Fifth Elephant so closely together.

What I'm playing with right now is taking Vetinari's graduation date of 1968 seriously, without postulating a decade-long Grand Sneer. It occurs to me that perhaps Pterry didn't choose that year any more arbitrarily than he did 1688- Roundworld 1968 was the year the barricades went up again in Paris and abortive 'revolutions' full of Reg Shoes and calls for steeply-discounted love happened all around the world, when two very major political assassinations took place, when Nixon replaced LBJ ("meet the new boss...") Solicitr 16:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Crazy idea: suppose we assume ex hypothesi that the Patrician in Mort is actually Winder- whom we know to have held the office for eleven years. This would place Mort one year before the Revolution, so let's assume it to be 1967. Susan could easily be born a reasonable three years later, i.e. ca. 1970, and puts Night Watch ca. 1998, coming up on the 00-millennium. (Although the Time Hole can certainly be viewed as a millennial event, it's not a calendar bullseye since it takes place in May, not on Hogswatch.)Solicitr 17:32, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Urg. Won't work. Bear with me, I'm thinking out loud. Based on Vimes' dates of service we can't reasonably stretch the spread between Men at Arms and Night Watch beyond 8 years at the absolute max (if we assume that in Men at Arms he means "24, nearly 25"- since it's in the summer sometime, whereas the impression Night Watch gives is that young Sam first signed up in the winter- and if "30" in Night Watch can be fudged up to 32).

Yuck. Bloody Susan is 16 between 1985-87 maximum possible range; that is, born 1969-71 and we can't escape it. In Thief of Time (ends the same day as all of Night Watch "present") she is 20. Exactly 20 or about 20? Solicitr 22:14, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

No, I didn't think it would. I've been at it about three years and nothing dissuades me from 1957 (maybe +/-1) for the G.R. and centuries ending on the eights. Vetinari taking over the Tyranny straight out of school doesn't sound likely, either. --Old Dickens 23:16, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

HM! Well, whaddya know! Thief of Time, unless I missed it, never mentions Susan's age at all- it is *not* pegged four years after Soul Music. Well that relaxes things a bit. Guess I just assumerd the statement in the DWTL was based on text, rather than its own dating.

Ok, let's review the bidding. Anchor point- Feet of Clay occurs in Grune 1987. Declared fact: Susan is 16 in Soul Music, which necessarily follows Guards! Guards!- which happens "nearly two years" before Feet of Clay, or in 1985. All this just repeats Orin, and there's no wriggle-room at all. Now, Men at Arms comes before Soul Music, and 1986 is the sensible assumption, although as hard limits all we can say is between 1985-87. Still, '86 is close enough because the only matter of chronological import is that Men at Arms is (I believe) roughly (not nec. exactly) 25 years after Vimes' enlistment and hence the Revolution (we have to assume that young Sam in Night Watch has less than a year in the Watch, prob just a few months).

From this we have to conclude that Susan was born circa 1970, and the Revolution was circa 1960. There's fudge room for both dates, but not too much. All of this of course just repeats Orin- but it's the wriggle room that matters here, especially if we want to "uncrowd" the late 80s. If we accept for the moment that Men at Arms is in 1986, and that 25 and 30 are exact numbers, then Thief of Time/Night Watch are in 1991 and the Revolution in 1961. These numbers work for both Vimes and Susan. But how much "stretch" do we have in them? The later we can get away with placing Thief of Time/Night Watch, not only can we uncrowd, but we can minimize the rather large gap between Night Watch (past) and Vetinari's graduation in 1968. Solicitr 00:01, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

"Vetinari taking over the Tyranny straight out of school doesn't sound likely, either". There we're trapped between hard dates. Lord V graduated school in 1968; he became Patrician by the time of Sourcery. We can't change that.Solicitr 00:11, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

But even if we consider 1968 a "hard" date (and it's an isolated datum with no support itself) it doesn't mean he's ten years younger. He's still likely to have returned to graduate after some hiatus. --Old Dickens 21:20, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Maybe he had to re-take Concealment. Solicitr 22:18, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Although published between Thief of Time and Night Watch, The Truth plainly cannot happen between them. The Truth opens on an "icy night" with "freezing fog" with slush and patches of ice, and so must be set in the winter before, since The Times is in existence by Night Watch; but must take place after The Fifth Elephant, since the Watch has an Igor. Therefore The Truth must take place at the start of the year, tentatively 1989. Solicitr 02:20, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

The Equal Rites question

Why does the L-space timeline and derivatives postulate 14 years or so for the events of Equal Rites, not counting Esk's birth? I don't recall anything that suggests Granny and Esk spent more than a few months in A-M prior to the Dungeon Dimensions breakin. Solicitr 20:21, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

No one seems to know. It's probably a typo/pasting error. --Old Dickens 21:20, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok. Which means therefore that we don't have any particular dates for it at all, save coming after The Light Fantastic and before Wyrd Sisters. Right? Solicitr 22:17, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

There's no mention of the rest of the Lancre cast, so we assume it precedes Wyrd Sisters. The coven's time seems to be accounted for afterward. I don't see any particular evidence for 1966, but there isn't much leeway. Anyway, Eskarina Smith is now in her late thirties! --Old Dickens 00:25, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Unless of course she went back to Lancre, and 'saved' 15 years. Solicitr 00:45, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

How long is a century?

Is it necessarily 100 years? Or is it an English word used to translate a Morporkian term for a period of about a hundred years? A-M uses the apparently ancient animal-name year cycle, like the Chinese and Maya and others; we don't know how many are in the cycle, and whether a 'century' represents one or multiple times around, although we can assume it's an even number of cycles.

I've played around with powers and multiples of 8, and counting in base-8, which seemed to make sense; but doing it that way doesn't produce a 'century' ending anywhere near ~1990, whether we start with UC 1 or AM 1 = UC -2564. But in further messing around I came up with this: The 40th 'century' after the founding of A-M hits in 1996- a reasonable year- if a 'century' is 114 UC years or 57 AM Great Years: 57, Pterry's favorite number.

One might suppose that an animal cycle of 57 years was part of the AM calendar, long predating the UC and numbered years. Perhaps (just to play a bit) the introduction of the UC four-season year involved splitting the 57 Great Years in two, so that (for example) the 8-season Year of the Serpent became the Year of the Notional Serpent and the Year of the Ephemeral Serpent.

Making 1996 the turn of the Fruitbat/Anchovy to me at least feels a lot more comfortable, and alleviates the severe crowding of what the existing timeline wants to back densely into 1988/89. Solicitr 04:27, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

You said that, but the history around 1988 is pretty well documented and seems to indicate 1989. How do you insert seven years? --Old Dickens 05:36, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, is it so documented? For the period following Feet of Clay, we can I think state firmly that the narrative order follows publication order (except The Truth); but IIRC the only indication we have for any particular period of time having passed between books is that Night Watch falls in May following the winter of The Fifth Elephant (Sybil's pregnancy). We can also I think deduce that Thud! has to take place when Young Sam is at least 2 years old. But how much time passes between Feet of Clay and Jingo? Between Jingo and The Fifth Elephant? Solicitr 00:41, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Young Sam is 14 months old to begin Thud!. (Story-reading scene, p 123 of 398 in H-C pb.)
Sam Jr was born at the end of Night Watch. Various comments suggest this was 1989.¹
Sybil was pregnant in The Fifth Elephant the previous autumn. What's the gestation period out of a 400-day year?
Jingo (1988) and
Feet of Clay (1987) are internally dated by the Civil War.
Feet of Clay states Carrot has been in A-M two years, placing
Men at Arms between 1987 and
Guards! Guards! in 1985.

(1) I assume the Krullian/animal century changes after `88, having found no workable alternative. --Old Dickens 23:38, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Feet of Clay is definitely set in 1987, agreed, and the previous Watch books approx 1 per year. But is Jingo internally dated relative to the Tercentenary? If so, I've missed it.

As for what follows, that is the sequence The Fifth Elephant-Night Watch-Thud!, their dating depends on the end of the century, which is the whole problem.

Solicitr 00:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

So you'd like to insert several years between Feet of Clay and Jingo, making Sam and Sybil noticeably older yet before having their first child? I'm pretty sure there's a mention of the anniversary in Feet, but even without, a large gap sounds unlikely. Where's any evidence? --Old Dickens 01:09, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Bigger Table

On the other hand, another way of lining these up might be to look at each calendar year (after things settle down) as covering one episode in each of the primary story-arcs (Watch, Witches, Wizards/Rincewind and Death/Susan)

On this line of thinking, we would get the table below:

Year		Witches	Wizards	Death	Watch		Civic Progress
1985		Witches Abroad	Eric (or subplots in Moving Pictures and Reaper Man)	Reaper Man	Guards! Guards!		Moving Pictures
1986		Lords and Ladies	Interesting Times	Soul Music	Men at Arms		Soul Music
1987		Maskerade	-	Hogfather (turn of year)	Feet of Clay		-
1988		Carpe Jugulum	The Last Continent	-	Jingo The Fifth Elephant (turn of year),		(The Fifth Elephant)
1989		diverted to Tiffany Aching series?	diverted to Science series?	Thief of Time (May)	Night Watch (May)		The Truth (start of year)
1990					Thud! (fall)		Going Postal
1991			Unseen Academicals				Making Money

There is however a problem here with Susan's age. If she's 16 in Soul Music, then we have to allow her at least another full school year (graduating at 17), plus another X months as a governess before Hogswatch. Hogfather thus could take place at the end of 1987; but a problem comes up in that by Thief of Time she is in at least her second year as a teacher (other teachers are 'complaining' about her former students' precocity). That would mean we would have to allow her, at minimum, the 88-89 and (most of) the 89-90 school years before Thief of Time.

Why do we need to allow her another full school year? It's common to leave school at 16 in the UK with your basic (GCSE) qualifications in public schools. Given that she appears to be at a private school however it's quite possible she's been studying at a higher level. Having said that I'd always assumed that she was in her very late teens/early twenties during the events of Hogfather.--Megahurts 09:33, 26 October 2010 (CEST)

Well, given the rules and discipline circumscribing Susan in Soul Music, it certainly doesn't appear to be a uni enviironment at all, but a school; especially since UU is "Discworld's only institution of higher learning." At any rate, the book explicitly states that she's 16 years old. Hogfather is 'a few years' later: but that's the problem. --Solicitr 18:52, 15 November 2010 (CET)

Sybil's age? The text makes it clear that she's old enough to make childbearing a risky proposition; besides, we have no idea how old she really is anyway, save that she's older by some than Vimes. Solicitr 19:19, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

The great thing about links is that you don't have to put everything on one page and I think the six-column table is far too busy and complex, especially when extended to three or four screens long. I'd rather keep it down to one line per year and you can link to the year article or a book article or some other highlight.

We can say definitely that Sybil is NOT older than Sam, from his statement that she'd looked sixteen when he met her adolescent self in Night Watch. Sam was at least that old; I've had to age him to near eighteen after some recent comments. To speculate from that, she was a big girl and girls mature a little faster: she may have been fourteen. --Old Dickens 22:51, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, you're right about Sybil. That would put her in her mid-forties as of Night Watch and Young Sam's birth, which seems about right. Now, what about the general proposition that, more-or-less, each year contains one 'installment' from each principal story-arc? It pretty much fits what you have- although given the matter of Susan's age I think it works better if the books from The Fifth Elephant onward were moved down a year, and also avoids piling The Fifth Elephant up with Jingo a mere six months or less apart.

On another matter: According to Men at Arms the Assassins' Guild offered a post-grad program, which could be the excuse we need to explain Veninari's 1968 diploma. Solicitr 18:28, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Ridcully

I've tipped in a couple of dates which aren't quite those of the DWTL. In Soul Music we learn that the Dean is 72 and Ridcully seven months younger. Since this is at the end of the year (1986) we can fudge Mustrum's birth year to 1915 and his departure at age 27 to 1943. I don't believe this causes a problem re Granny, since the numbers in Lords and Ladies are fairly approximate. I don't see a problem with their meeting in about 1933 or so, with Esme born ca. 1912. (Remember also that Granny "loses" fifteen years of age relative to Ridcully thanks to the Lancre Timeslip).--Solicitr 01:47, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

The Last Continent- where does it fit?

Interesting problem, here, since this book explicitly takes place during (A-M) winter. When? Can hardly be that of The Fifth Elephant/The Truth, so it must be the previous winter. Is it then the winter before Jingo, which happens in early summer? But if so, how did the Wizards sail all the way back from Fourecks in so short a time?

It seems that all the pieces fit best if The Last Continent is set the winter following the Leshp War, and {T5E} the winter after that; in other words, moving that book and those that follow down a year. Solicitr 02:42, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

More on this, following the turning seasons of the books during this period.

Hogfather- the very end of the year

Jingo- the end of the academic year, late spring/early summer

The Last Continent- Winter (in Ankh-Morpork)

Carpe Jugulum- late winter or very early spring

The 5th Elephant- early winter

The Truth- winter

Thief of Time/Night Watch- May.

The last four necessarily take place in one stretch of six months or thereabout. I suppose one could shove Carpe Jugulum into that same winter, just after The Truth- but it's hard to imagine the presence of Otto and the fairly numerous Black Ribboners as being effectively simultaneous with the Magpyrs; it doesn't really matter a lot since Carpe Jugulum has no cross-references outside Lancre and the Witches. The Last Continent and The Fifth Elephant/The Truth cannot take place in the same winter- they have to be a year apart. All in all, I think it is unavoidable to conclude that these books cover a span of two-and-a-half years, not one-and-a-half; in other words

Hogfather last day of 1987

Jingo approx June 1988

The Last Continent winter 1988-89

Carpe Jugulum early spring 1989

The Fifth Elephant late 1989

The Truth early 1990

Thief of Time/Night Watch May 1990.

Carpe Jugulum might have to be taken as published out-of-order, if we are to accept that it occurs just before the end of the Century (assumed to be 1988). In that case Carpe Jugulum would slot in between Hogfather and Jingo. On the other hand, let's not forget that the Lancre calendar is 15 years out of sync with the UU calendar. --Solicitr 15:37, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

would this timeline work in with the current one?

Ages of Characters

A thought has occurred. This is by way of being momentous so I shall offer it up for discussion. We say "years" here and elsewhere, and then say e.g. "53 years old". BUT - if a year is 400 days (or even 800 for the full year), does that mean that "twenty years later" is actually (20 x 365 days = 7300 days) later or is it (20 x 400 days = 8000 days, which is 21 years and 11 months by Roundworld reckoning)?

Furthermore, if we say that Sam Vimes is "51" (based on difference between d.o.b. on his page and the date of Making Money), is he 51 as we understand it, or ((51 x 400)/365 = 55 years and 9 months) by our reckoning, with the concommitant further ageing and loss of youthful vigour - and the same for evey character we come across?

It's an intriguing point that has suddenly begun to bother me. --Knmatt 22:52, 24 October 2010 (CEST)

It's bothered me for some time, `cause I don't know how long the day is, either. --Old Dickens 00:47, 25 October 2010 (CEST)

Who says that disc humans must live an equivalent lifetime as roundworld? There's a strong magical field there. So the length of a day and a year can be irrelevant --Fhh98 02:36, 25 October 2010 (CEST)

you could infer similarity in human longevity from what the canon books have to say about the relative ages of men and dwarves - I believe where this is discussed there is a remark to the extent that Dwarves may only be half the height of humans but live three times as long. And three hundred eyars is quoted as a typical long-lived dwarf age, thus implying that a century is the upeer limit for humans (regard Windle Poons and some of the more senior candidates for the professinoal attention of Death, Mort and Susan). So if 70-80 is the average for modern Britain or the USA, Discworld humans might tend to live a little longer? --194.70.181.1 10:01, 25 October 2010 (CEST) a.k.a. AgProv

Yes but that is a relative measure. A day and a year arent defined in relation to roundworld. Therefore, a year that's 400 days long or 800 days long doesn't matter. --98.214.181.52 14:52, 25 October 2010 (CEST)

Moving Pictures, on page 1, says "...the Discworld, world and mirror of worlds." I think this means that a lot of the basics are the same from our roundworld to the discworld. Day length would be the same, even if the hours are not. The 400 days per year would allow for the jammed up time for Vimes, although it may mean that Lady Sybil's gestation period is a bit longer than roundworld's women.--Docsooter 12:10, 17 July 2011 (CEST)

If I'm not mistaken, during Wyrd Sisters Hewel and Vitoler are talking and Hewel says, roughly, half the height and twice the age so that the lives of humans and dwarfs average out the same. If the dwarves do live to be 300 years old than that would make the average human life 150 years. This extra length can be explained by the magical field. Though if the average life comes close to 150 years than why would a barbarian aged 87 be that impressive, he would be just past midlife.--Docsooter 12:10, 17 July 2011 (CEST)

As it was said by someone above, it was said somewhere dwarves live thrice as long, not twice (someone get a citation here, please. So, not only would a 87 year old barbarian be quite impressive if you see the age but...He's a BARBARIAN. They aren't expected to become older than maybe 40, 50 top.--LilMaibe 18:52, 17 July 2011 (CEST)

I understand that someone had already stated that dwarves lived three times as long. I also understand that "three hundred [years] is quoted as a typical long-lived dwarf age," like that person also said. So if my recollections are correct (and I will look for the citation when my texts are available) than a long lived human life would be 150 years. Therefore if a "BARBARIAN" were 87 years old he would be 58% of a long lived life span. If a long lived human life span were 100 years than he would be an equivalent age of 58 years old. If you are saying that a barbarian were 40 or 50 years old out of a 100 year long lived life, than that would be kind of impressive. However, if my information is incorrect, and Dwarves do live to be three times the age of humans than an 87 year old barbarian would be extremely impressive considering that he would be about twice the expected age of an average barbarian. This argument hinges upon what the texts say on the comparative life spans of dwarves and humans.--Docsooter 21:50, 20 July 2011 (CEST)

Well, whenever the topic of long life for humans came up, 100 was most often top, give or take a few years if one was a wizard(that managed to not be in anyone's way). Windle Poons is an outstanding example of old age. Another example, look at Ponder in The Last Continent: For a brief moment he becomes 104 and, after getting back to being 24 again feels as if he heard a (scythe-)blade being sharpened.--LilMaibe 22:18, 20 July 2011 (CEST)

Problems with the timeline

Hi all. I’m gently constructing my own timeline and agree with the bulk of the main timeline page and many of the points here, however there are 4 problems in the current timeline that need addressing.

1. The Wyrd Sisters Prologue needs to start two years before the timeslip not one. The book starts with the death of Verence in the Autumn which is followed by a jump of a year to Hwel in AM the following Autumn (page 57). The land then awakes that winter (page 61). Nanny Ogg is arrested the following Spring and then the timeslip takes place. Since we can’t move the timeslip forwards, Wyrd Sisters must start one year earlier in 1967. As a result I’d push Equal Rites back a year (to 1965) to leave room between the two books.

2. The date of Sourcery has to be wrong. In The Truth, Wuffles is stated as being 16. His first appearance is in Sourcery where he is described as being “extremely elderly”. The average life-expectancy of a wire-haired terrier is 9 years, which really means Wuffles should be 7 or more (unless Vetinari has a magically aged dog). Even if you allow a slightly lower age, Sourcery cannot take place in 1974 as Wuffles would be no more than a puppy. Given the dating of The Truth, 1981 would be more acceptable.

This, however, causes a problem down the line. Rincewind in Sourcery has been a wizard for 16 years (at least its 16 years since he first tried to attain level one, which must predate The Colour of Magic). If Sourcery is 1981, The Colour of Magic is a year too early, which thoroughly wrecks everything. The least destructive solution would be to put The Truth at the end of 1989 and so move Sourcery back to 1980, placing it 16 years after The Colour of Magic which therefore takes place some months after Rincewind leaves UU.

3. Maskerade is explicitly set only 3 months after Magrat’s wedding in Lords and Ladies. That takes place around midsummer, so Maskerade must take place in 1986.

4. The date of the start of the Century of the Anchovy can’t be right. It’s still explicitly the Century of the Fruitbat in Carpe Jugulum, The Fifth Elephant and The Truth. The first clear mention of the Anchovy is in Going Postal although it could already be in place for Thief of Time onwards. I know this wrecks the ’88 Century change but that’s the way of it.

Actually if we could get rid of the 1688 problem everything would fall into place nicely; putting Winder’s fall in ’68 (as per Vetinari’s graduation) would place Thief of Time just on the Millennium. Damned if I can think of a sensible way of achieving it though. In the realm of non-sensible ways, one could note that, although Stoneface is noted as being Commander in 1688 and as killing the last King. It isn’t explicitly stated that they happen in the same year. One could, at a pinch, presume that he became Commander in 1688 but didn’t kill the king until 1697. An ugly solution but just about viable.

An alternative approach would be to put Carpe Jugulum, Fifth Elephant and The Truth in the same year as Jingo and The Last Continent. This means that it is snowing in Unseen University in late Summer but, given the magical nature of the place, I’m not certain that’s a problem. It’s certainly not explicitly stated as being winter, just that there’s snow.

Looking forward to a lively discussion! LordJuss 15:48, 14 September 2011 (CEST)

Leaving 1,3 and 4 to the side... I dare say you answered your own question in 2. Granted, it's only a fan-theory, but some speculate that, upon restoring the city Coin also turned Wuffles into a puppy again to apologise for turning Vetinari into a lizard. (AND and EDIT) 'not stated as winter', eh? While yes, you musn't forget the basic rules that are there in the books: If weather not fitting the season happens it is mentioned. Therefore snow equals winter, on the campus and in the city.--LilMaibe 11:37, 15 September 2011 (CEST)

On the first one, it's an interesting theory but there's no evidence and, more importantly, it doesn't help. Coin may well have made Wuffles a puppy again and this would explain how a dog who should live roughly 9 years manages 16. But, unless Vetinari also started counting his age from 0 again, he's still 16 in The Truth, so Sourcery cannot be in 1974. Regarding the second point. Yup, couldn't agree more. Unfortunately that means the 1988 millenium doesn't work and we're back to trying to find a way to disbelieve the 1688 reference. All suggestions gratefully accepted. LordJuss 13:26, 15 September 2011 (CEST)

This may sound stupid but...What if the one thing where Vetinari is absolutely uncreative is naming pets. Just like Leonard fails at naming his contraptions, Vetinari might have this one weakness that so far all his pets were Terriers named Wuffles.--LilMaibe 15:04, 15 September 2011 (CEST)

That's actually funny enough to be viable. But the point is, it doesn't matter. The position of Sourcery is pretty harmless and it can be moved to 1980 without causing problems anywhere else. That way we match the text and don't have to invoke oddities - no matter how amusing. LordJuss 15:19, 15 September 2011 (CEST)

Pyramids(?)

The events of Pyramids do not show up anywhere in the timeline. This is important, especially as regards Mericet. Teatime mentioned that he had Mericet as a teacher, so knowing the time of Pyramids would be very useful in determining the old goat's age.

Sourcery

Upon re-reading Sourcery I stumbled about a few mentions of time: First, we, the readers, are reminded Rincewind's been a student at the UU for 16 years and achieved nothing when it comes to ranks. The same information was given in the first two books, what makes sense, if you take that students start at the age of 16 and that Rincewind's roundworld version is 33. Second, there's a mention of the Luggage having eaten a spellbook last year. This, while never said, is likely the Octavo. Third, Rincewind complains that he's been behind the staff for 20 years, which is, likely, rounding up from 16-17. All in all I think Sourcery is rather taking place one or two years after TLF and not 10. Thoughts? --LilMaibe 14:54, 11 April 2012 (CEST)

I'd rather think not, because if we stipulate that Vetinari was the Patrician a year after The Light Fantastic our heads will explode. Old Dickens 05:15, 14 April 2012 (CEST)

Well, the patrician in TLF was vetinari. written by a worse author. (Sir Terry's own words :) )--LilMaibe 00:14, 15 April 2012 (CEST)