Talk:History of the Pokémon world (anime)

It might be useful to note what is dated in the backstory. Here's the stuff on the top of my head:

• 2 million years - First Pokémon dated by archaeology (EP163)
• 200 years - Orange League taking place (EP095)
• 50 years - Sammy Oak born (Pokémon 4Ever)
• 40 years - Sammy Oak goes on his Pokémon Journey (Pokémon 4Ever)
• 10 years - Misty born (EP003)
• 10 years - Ash born (EP001, Shopro)
• 10 years - May born (AG001, Shopro)
• 10 years - Dawn born (DP001)
  • The four were born in that order
• 7 years - Max born (Shopro)
• EP005 - 2 weeks have passed
• EP031 - Several months have passed
• EP063 - A year has passed
• Pikachu and Pichu - Second year has passed

--FabuVinny ^T-C-S 23:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

All good ideas to add. --Pie ^~♪♫ 23:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Problem, which I noticed when I went to take the anime info out of history of the Pokémon world - that article says 400 years ago. And the one on the Orange League itself says 300 years. What's the number? --Pie ^~♪♫ 07:08, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

---

I am a bit sceptacle on Jessie and James joining Team Rocket before Max's birth. --FabuVinny ^T-C-S 23:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Eh, true... --Pie ^~♪♫ 23:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Ash turns 10

I'm pretty sure there's nothing in Episode 1 saying Ash turned 10 on that day. All he says is "Now that I'm ten years old..." which means he could have turned 10 any time recently. The day seems to be one where numerous 10-year-old trainers are leaving Pallet - hence why Gary and the other two mystery trainers leave on the same day. Unless they're supposed to have the same birthday. --Pie ^~♪♫ 16:25, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Even though it is possible that he did turn 10 the night before he got Pikachu, which is chronicled in the episode itself, it is far more likely that he and the others turned ten just fairly recently, and had to wait for Oak's give-away day. --TTEchidna 06:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Birth years of Ash, May, Dawn

According to this article, Ask, May, and Dawn were all born within the same year. From my own knowledge, one of the movies that took place before the Advanced Generation (or, perhaps, it was in The Battle of the Badge as stated in the article itself) stated that it had been one year since Ash set off - making him at least eleven years old if May was ten at the beginning of Advanced Generation. Later, in "Date Expectations" (AG114), Ash says to May, "There's not going to be another Grand Festival for a whole 'nother year!" If we assume the most recent Grand Festival in the anime was the one in Kanto during Battle Frontier, that means that at the end of Battle Frontier, Ash would be at least twelve, and May at least eleven. If we assume that Dawn was ten at the beginning of Diamond & Pearl, then at the beginning of Diamond & Pearl, Ash would be at least twelve, May at least eleven, and Dawn ten. This shows at least a TWO-YEAR SPREAD of birth years, even though the article says that they were all born in the span of less than ONE year. Could this be resolved please? Thank you. Ultraflame 00:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I second this. Each of them are at least a year younger then the last, however I don't want to change it without seeing more peoples thoughts on it. I also thought that in one episode it mentioned something about Misty being a year older then Ash, but I could be wrong.Can anyone else back me up on that?Ai Hikari 03:39, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

See the aging in the anime article for our policy on that. The only official statement we have on this issue is that Ash and May were both 10 at the start of AG despite claims of two years passing since the beginning of the series. The writers apparently don't pay attention so the logic doesn't work.

The Grand Festival argument is not valid, though. Each region's Grand Festival is a seperate competition. --FabuVinny ^T-C-S 17:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Could it at least be changed to a ??? instead of 10 years ago? Or something like 10< or 10+? The thing is, even with the lack of logic or ageing, Ash has to be older than 10 because they've mentioned passing years in several episodes. The other thing is that if he's still 10 none of his achievements have existed unless the leagues are about a quarter of a year long. I also think it's odd how Misty is the same age as Ash - I would have thought she was at least a year older. This will all probably be dismissed because against no-aging rule these arguments are weak but wouldn't it make more sense if Ash's age (and birth) was left an enigma? --☆Woodland:M ☆ 22:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I also thought Misty was a year older than Ash, but maybe someone just started this and it spread into every site and fanfic, so that we all might have been wrong about it. Anyway, it must definitely be true that Ash is around a year older than May who should be around a year older than Dawn. Just add the time they need to travel. It's always like "several days have passed, and now our heros have arrived in..." Even if the anime doesn't care about aging, I think it's logic to do so. Eevee-Girl

Well.

This is the longest page on Bulbapedia, and it will continue to get longer. In addition, it's not in our best interests to separate the page into several different pages. Interesting, eh? --ニョロトノ666 22:38, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

2 million years ago?

Does it really make sense that "Sir Aaron tried to stop the war. He seals his Lucario in a staff" happened two million years ago? The castle is still standing. --Coolbho3000 18:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right... --ニョロトノ666 18:40, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Makes no sense whatsoever. Especially since it's dated alongside "First Pokémon existed, according to archaeology. That war showed a plethora of Pokémon. Just because it happened before Poké Balls existed, and features an ancient art doesn't mean it happened 2 Million years ago. 2 Million Years ago, Homo Erectus was just getting going. Does this mean that Sir Aaron and Princess Rin are Homo Erectus? What's more, does this mean Princess Irene is a descendant of a Homo Erectus? Such placement of Movie 8's prologue is absolutely ridiculous. Probably would make more sense alongside the Otomegasaki reference at 2000 years ago. But heck, we have no idea, so why are we labeling a timeframe for it? Smells awfully like fan speculation to me - and you know what they say about fan speculation... Satosuke 06:34, 1 October 2008 (UTC)