16

Wikipedia notes that ‘Star Trek: The Next Generation’ was set in 2364 (and beyond), and that that’s “about 100 years after the original series timeframe”.

However, the Wikipedia article on The Original Series doesn’t state what year it was set in.

Did The Original Series mention what year it was set in, or were its events later deemed to have occurred in a specific year, e.g. after The Next Generation stated it was set in 2364?

  • 5
    Our old friend The Making of Star Trek indicates that Gene and the other producers of TOS deliberately didn't want to pin down the date in which it took place, and that's why Star Date was used. – DJClayworth Mar 9 '12 at 11:54
19

While there's no mention within the Original Series of when it took place, there are a number of clues from other series that narrow down the mission time period.

For example, we know—based on Star Trek: The Next Generation's stardate schedule—that Star Trek: Generations took place in 2371. In it,

Captain Picard remarks to Captain Kirk that he's been dead for 80 years.

Therefore, we know the original mission ended before 2291, and substantially before that given how much occurs after the original mission ends.

We also know that it had to have happened substantially after 2063, which is when First Contact occurred.

TrekGuide.com has a much more accurate conjecture, based on dates and ages from episodes in all the series, but the key fact to me is (emphasis mine):

In the Voyager episode "Q2," Icheb states that Kirk completed his historic five-year mission in 2270. Therefore, all episodes of The Original Series must have taken place after January 1, 2265 (assuming it was exactly five years), and before January 1, 2271.

  • @user366: I object to the TrekGuide.com analysis trying to be so precise because probably no one can cite evidence that the mission was five years to the day. A mission which lasts 50 months would still be called "a five-year mission". – ThePopMachine Jan 13 '15 at 20:58
  • Looking back on this two years later, I obviously meant to say 62 months, not 50. The point still stands. – ThePopMachine Apr 7 '15 at 14:35
11

The original series never stated exactly what year(s) it occurred in. There were a few inconsistent hints.

In "The Squire of Gothos", an early episode, Trelane has been observing Earth as if through a telescope from 900 light-years away. Failing to account for the speed-of-light delay, Trelane reproduces an Earth-like environment approximating the early 19th century or so (he mentions the death of Alexander Hamilton, who died in 1804), implying that the episode takes place in the 27th or 28th century.

In "Tomorrow is Yesterday", a 20th century U.S. Air Force officer threatens to lock Kirk up for two hundred years. Kirk says "That ought to be just about right", implying that the episode takes place in the 22nd century. Kirk's comment was a joke, and it could have been imprecise.

Clearly these are inconsistent, indicating that the producers didn't (yet) have a specific idea about just when the series took place, something that's supported by other sources. Stardates were also not entirely consistent, and there are several different systems for converting between stardates and Gregorian calendar dates.

According to Memory Alpha, the original series took place from 2265 to 2269, almost exactly three centuries after the episodes aired.

  • 6
    This is why we need Douglas Adams' new time-travel tenses from Hitchhiker's Guide. "the original series will have to on-tooken place from 2265 to 2269" – Mark Beadles Mar 9 '12 at 16:35
4

In Star Trek (2009), which is set prior to TOS, George Kirk dies/James Kirk is born in 2233. This is consistent with the Memory Alpha TOS dates of 2265-2269 when the junior Kirk would have been about 35.

The 2233 date is pre-timeline-split, so I think it can be regarded as canon for both timelines.

3

The official Star Trek chronology in Star Trek Chronology: The History of the Future by Michael and Denise Okuda puts Star Trek: The Original series in 2266 to 2269.

This chronology has been followed by the creators of most Star Trek productions from about the early 1990s, so there is a lot of chronological information in various productions which more or less agrees with the dates in Star Trek Chronology: The History of the Future.

However, Star Trek Chronology: The History of the Future is not canonical and thus there is the possibility that it is not correct, as is acknowledged in the introduction, where it is presented as one possible chronology out of many.

In fact it is my belief that it is possible to scientifically disprove the official dates of a couple of Star Trek productions and to disprove many of the assumptions made in Star Trek Chronology: The History of the Future. I hope to someday write a much better chronology.

  • 2
    Money where your mouth is, pal. Get a Tumblr and write dat sh—. – Paul D. Waite Apr 7 '15 at 7:23
2

In ‘The Savage Curtain’ (series 3, episode 22 — the one with Abraham Lincoln and Surak, the greatest ever Vulcan), Scotty says to McCoy that it cannot be the real Lincoln as the real Lincoln died 3 centuries ago.

Given that Lincoln died in 1865 this would mean that Star Trek was set in the mid-22nd century.

  • mid 22nd cetury ? any more specific ? – Rocket Jan 13 '15 at 18:56
  • @Rocket: well, no, because Scotty isn’t any more specific. He says “three centuries ago”. – Paul D. Waite Jan 13 '15 at 20:08
  • Scott said: "Lincoln died three centuries ago on a planet hundreds of light years away, and then Spock corrected him: "More that direction, Engineer." Yes, Spock was picky enough to correct Scott about the direction to Earth but not the time since Lincoln died. We might assume that 3 centuries could be as vague as 200 to 400 years, putting the Savage Curtain" sometime between 2065 and 2265. The creators of the official chronology assumed that X centuries would always be exactly X hundred years, putting the episode in 2165. See the introduction to the chronology. – M. A. Golding Aug 5 '15 at 6:11
1

I'm partial to the year 2260 as the mission start date.

As fandom emerged, this was the year it circled around. A handful of on screen clues set the date nicely as well, such as the piano in "Miri". (see link for more detail).

I think that this has possibly been contradicted by later canon, but earlier canon and later canon don't always exactly jibe well in the first place.

http://stng.36el.com/st-tng/trivia/timeline/trek7-notes.html#1

0

To bad cause I just found some link to proove my answer but it is only in french, the english version of this page is not really accurate compared to this french version filled with links.

2254

  • Cadet James T. Kirk, recently graduated from the accademy, is assign to the USS Farragut under the commandment of Captain Garrovick.

2265 :

  • Start of the 5 years mission of the Enterprise NCC-1701 under the commandment of Captain James T. Kirk.

  • Hikaru Sulu is affected as a physicist on Enterprise NCC-1701.

  • Montgomery Scott is affected as chief engineer on Enterprise NCC-1701.

  • Doctod Mark Piper becomes the chief medical officer on Enterprise NCC-1701 succeding Philip Boyce.

So the begining of the 5 years mission with Captain James T. Kirk at the command of The Enterprise NCC-1701 is 2265

For any more information regarding dates from the star trek univers !

  • 3
    How is an article on French Wikipedia proof? What sources does it cite? – Paul D. Waite Jan 13 '15 at 20:05
0

In "The savage Curtain" Scott said: "Lincoln died three centuries ago on a planet hundreds of light years away, and then Spock corrected him: "More that direction, Engineer." Yes, Spock was picky enough to correct Scott about the direction to Earth but not the time since Lincoln died.

We might assume that 3 centuries could be as vague as 200 to 400 years, putting "The Savage Curtain" sometime between 2065 and 2265. The list of assumptions in the introduction to Star Trek Chronology: The History of the Future says the Okudas who wrote it assumed that X centuries would always be exactly X hundred years, putting the episode in 2165.

This assumption of course invalidates the official date of 2269 for "The Savage Curtain". Even assuming that "The Savage Curtain" could be as much as 400 years after 1865 without Spock correcting Scott could only make it as late as 2265, still years before the official date.

This shows how carelessly Gene Roddenberry, Richard Arnold, and the Okudas chose whatever dates they wanted, without bothering to check if those dates were consistent with the evidence in the episodes.

  • 1
    This seems to be more of a rant than actually providing a specific answer to the question to me – Often Right Aug 5 '15 at 7:49
  • N_Soong - It shows that there is strong evidence that "The Savage Curtain" probably happened more than a century before its official date. And if TOS happens that early one must deduce that Earth developed FTL interstellar travel TWICE, once before Khan left in 1996 and the second time in or after year 2018. – M. A. Golding Aug 6 '15 at 6:07
  • Did you ever consider that Scotty mightn't have been terribly good at history and Spock didn't think it logical to correct Scotty about that as there were probably more pressing matters to attend to? – Often Right Aug 6 '15 at 7:48
  • @Often Right - when Scott said 300 years ago on a planet hundreds of light years away he made a gesture that can be interpreted as pointing. Mr. Spock corrected Scott about the direction to Earth, which was being really, really picky. I think Spock would have corrected Scott about the 300 years if the actual time span was not sometime between 200 and 400 years, and even that was allowing the humans to be very vague and imprecise. – M. A. Golding Mar 15 '18 at 1:44

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.