Jonathan Archer, pre-Enterprise

[HCBailly]

Was Jonathan Archer ever mentioned before the creation of Star Trek: Enterprise? If not, why?

I'm surprised I've never heard anyone ask this before, considering Archer was the first captain of Enterprise, he founded the Federation, and he later became its President, which begs the question. I would think that if the TNG era showrunners wanted to do a prequel, they would have to either reference someone who was already known to do all these important things or have a very good explanation as to why history never mentioned him. Yet, to my knowledge, I don't think his name was ever mentioned until the show started. It seems like a huge oversight to not cover such a basic question to the premise of the show, but maybe I'm forgetting something.

Thanks for the info!

 

[NCC-73515]

I suddenly feel 20 years younger

 

[Phoenix219]

IMO, he didn't do any of those things, until the events of First Contact changed the timeline, and put him in position to do those things. In the series proper, before First Contact, he didn't exist as a person of import. (Also, as this point, introduce the greatest Enterprise conspiracy theory ever, haha.)

https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/al-calavicci-is-to-blame-for-captain-archers-incompetence.309155/

 

[HCBailly]

IMO, he didn't do any of those things, until the events of First Contact changed the timeline, and put him in position to do those things. In the series proper, before First Contact, he didn't exist as a person of import.

That makes the most sense of any reason I've heard. I would think Riker couldn't have had a holodeck program of Archer pre-First Contact, though your theory could retroactively explain that, too. After all, Riker didn't have that program in the original timeline.

 

[dupersuper]

he founded the Federation

Well, no...

 

[HCBailly]

Well, no...

Upon further review, you are technically correct. However, he still created the alliance that led to the founding of the Federation. He's certainly more than important enough to have made the history books.

 

[dupersuper]

Upon further review, you are technically correct. However, he still created the alliance that led to the founding of the Federation.

Again, no. As the captain of Earth's first warp 5 (TOS scale) ship he certainly facilitated it and supported it, but he didn't create anything. Diplomats came together and signed accords and treaties. He gave a few speeches and as a hero of Starfleet became a higher up and eventually an early president.

He's certainly more than important enough to have made the history books.

So are Zefram Cochrane, Garth of Izar, Robert April, Col. Greene, Una, Scotty, Sarek, Georgiou, Emory Erickson, Surak, Richard Daystrom, Kirk, Spock, Nathan Samuels, Rene Picard, Elizabeth Garrett...but except the time or two those characters specifically come up or guest star, TNG era characters don't sit around talking about them. A couple have ships named after them that are mentioned, and Daystrom of course has his institute, and likewise a ship and colony are both named Archer and those are retroactively assumed to be named after Archer.

 

[HCBailly]

Again, no. As the captain of Earth's first warp 5 (TOS scale) ship he certainly facilitated it and supported it, but he didn't create anything. Diplomats came together and signed accords and treaties. He gave a few speeches and as a hero of Starfleet became a higher up and eventually an early president.

So are Zefram Cochrane, Garth of Izar, Robert April, Col. Greene, Una, Scotty, Sarek, Georgiou, Emory Erickson, Surak, Richard Daystrom, Kirk, Spock, Nathan Samuels, Rene Picard, Elizabeth Garrett...but except the time or two those characters specifically come up or guest star, TNG era characters don't sit around talking about them. A couple have ships named after them that are mentioned, and Daystrom of course has his institute, and likewise a ship and colony are both named Archer and those are retroactively assumed to be named after Archer.

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Jonathan_Archer?so=search#Signing_the_Federation_charter Unless this source is wrong, it says he signed the charter creating the Coalition of Planets, which led to the formation of the United Federation of Planets. Also, in the mirror universe episode, his profile said, "Archer is widely credited with saving Earth from the Xindi and paving the way for the founding of the United Federation of Planets." I suppose it could be argued that the source material from the Defiant was from a different timeline and/or a completely different universe from the Prime timeline.

Regardless, I'm nitpicking here. It just seemed rather odd to me for him to have never been mentioned before, especially considering that removing him from the timeline prevented the Federation from existing.

 

[Phoenix219]

But originally he had to be saved from destruction, as well. No Federatuon without him does not happen until he was put into position to be able to do that when the NX was saved from destruction. I assume this is what the Temporal Cold War is all about, and I presume the need for interference occured after and because of
timeline contamination caused by the events of First Contact.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

Is the answer to the question 'why?' not obvious?

Hint. The same reason why there are no Borg in TOS.

 

[HCBailly]

Is the answer to the question 'why?' not obvious?

Hint. The same reason why there are no Borg in TOS.

The real world explanation would be that they hadn't been written/created yet, of course. I'm talking about an in-universe explanation, which the Borg have. In order for the Borg to appear in "Regeneration", they had to create an explanation as to why we never saw them again for a couple centuries. The episode clearly stated that it would take that long for a signal to reach the Delta Quadrant. To my knowledge, Archer has no such explanation. Someone that important couldn't have simply been forgotten, but I do like Phoenix's explanation.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

We still don't know who the first president of the Federation was and they're a pretty important historical figure too! The in-universe explanation for why no one mentioned Archer in TOS, TNG etc, is that the subject never came up.

 

[FederationHistorian]

Archer wasn’t mentioned before. Archer IV being named after him is a retcon.

A combination of Archer’s captaincy being pre-Federation history, and being surpassed by Kirk as an explorer is actually a sound reason as to why he’s never been mentioned before. Just like its sound reasoning that the Xindi crisis got overshadowed by the Romulan War, hence its lack of mention in the other shows too. Invoking FC and the TCW for changing history of isn’t necessary. Even early contact with the Klingons isn’t really an issue, since United Earth Starfleet isn’t the Federation.

We still don't know who the first president of the Federation was and they're a pretty important historical figure too! The in-universe explanation for why no one mentioned Archer in TOS, TNG etc, is that the subject never came up.

It’s supposed to be Thomas Vanderbilt; the was a newspaper clipping in Picard’s scrapbook in GEN that confirmed it, although the clipping itself never shown on screen. Vanderbilt being the first Federation President just hasn’t been made canon for some reason.

 

[F. King Daniel]

For what it's worth, the Suliban were originally to be introduced in Voyager's sixth or seventh season (as nomads in the Delta Quadrant after the Borg destroy their world in the 23rd century) but it didn't happen for whatever reason.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

For what it's worth, the Suliban were originally to be introduced in Voyager's sixth or seventh season (as nomads in the Delta Quadrant after the Borg destroy their world in the 23rd century) but it didn't happen for whatever reason.

Whoa, that's a bit of trivia I have somehow never heard before. I didn't even know Enterprise was being planned as early as season six. It would've been nice to get some hints about the prequel during Voyager, just to set up from the start that Enterprise really did take place in that timeline and it's not an alternate history.

 

[FederationHistorian]

For what it's worth, the Suliban were originally to be introduced in Voyager's sixth or seventh season (as nomads in the Delta Quadrant after the Borg destroy their world in the 23rd century) but it didn't happen for whatever reason.

Couldn’t that idea be reused and fleshed out in either an Enterprise reboot or one of the ongoing series now? In that the Suliban that escaped the Tandaran detention facility back in “Detained” resettled somewhere close to the Alpha Quadrant-Delta Quadrant border. Only for the Borg to come along and destroy their new homeworld due to them receiving the message from the transport ship from “Regeneration”, turning them into nomads by the 24th & 25th century?

It seems like it could also tie into why Future Guy took interest in the Suliban all the way back in the 22nd century to begin with. And thus the Temporal Cold War headaches Archer had to deal with.

 

[Farscape One]

Why was Archer never talked about by characters in the previous shows?

Very simple reason. How often do any of us talk about historical figures like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Winston Churchill, Ghandi, Nikola Tesla, Jonas Salk, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Hammurabi, Neil Armstrong, Oppenheimer, Marie Curie, etc... unless for a specific reason?

We forget that we only see very brief amounts of time in these character's lives, so we have no idea if Archer has been referenced offscreen by anyone.