Author Topic: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!  (Read 4108 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline yendor

  • Junior Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 80
  • Karma: +12/-35
  • I love DS!
    • View Profile
Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« on: October 27, 2002, 03:24:52 AM »
Like many of you, I have always been bugged by time paradox storylines--so I won't even bother discussing "Terminator" and "Back to the Future" (two films that defy Time's logic)! But I must address Dark Shadows own forays into Time travel, most specifically 1795 and 1897.

Ok, first 1795. Victoria Winters participates in a seance and finds herself thrust into the not too distant past...1795 Collinsport, Maine, to be exact. Her own time period, 1967, supposedly is "suspended" in Time--or so we're led to believe by the opening narrative to every 1795 episode. Yet, how frozen is it? Certainly there's enough "time" for Roger, Liz, Carolyn, Julia, and Barnabas to react to the sudden presence of Phyllis Wick. Barnabas even says "what are YOU doing here?" as if he somehow recognizes her. So, are we to believe Time froze AFTER all this takes place?

And if Phyllis Wick was the original 1795 governess, originally hung as a witch, and all the events unfolded as they did with Vicky, why would Barnabas (in 1967) have such a nasty reaction to Phyllis' appearance? Throughout his experience with the 1795 Vicky, he's been nothing but kindly and courteous. His reaction to Phyllis, however, is anything but.

And if Victoria returns to 1967 (actually, 1968 ) at the exact moment in Time when she disappeared, Phyllis Wick should also return to 1795 at the exact moment of her disappearance. That means SHE'D stumble to the Old House in a daze from the carriage accident, not Victoria. And none of Victoria's experiences in 1795 would've happened. Right?

Wait, there's more! When Victoria returns to 1967/68, allegedly NO time has passed. She virtually disappeared and appeared in the blink of an eye, right? Well, we know that didn't really happen because Barnabas and the others had time to react to Phyllis (I'm getting confused--as you?). Then, after Victoria returns, there's absolutely NO mention of Sarah Collins again (though she was the whole reason behind the seance), Burke Devlin is NEVER mentioned (though Vicky was completely distraught over his death); Julia's incriminating red diary is conveniently forgotten, and Eagle Hill Cemetery is suddenly miles and miles away from Collinwood! Am I crazy, or have people been walking to it since then?

My theory: when Vicky returned to the "present," it was an alternate present...and not the one she left. How else could any of it be explained?

Now, for 1897! Barnabas goes back to the past to save David...and completely changes the timeline. If that were the case, wouldn't Janet Findley still be living when he returned to 1969? And how about old Ezra? He'd be living, too, correct?

Let's hear your take on all this!

Rod

Offline onyx_treasure

  • Full A ed Newest Fervor Post
  • Senior Poster
  • ****
  • Posts: 692
  • Karma: +3458/-2900
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #1 on: October 27, 2002, 03:38:48 AM »
Quote


Then, after Victoria returns, there's absolutely NO mention of Sarah Collins again (though she was the whole reason behind the seance), Burke Devlin is NEVER mentioned (though Vicky was completely distraught over his death); Julia's incriminating red diary is conveniently forgotten, and Eagle Hill Cemetery is suddenly miles and miles away from Collinwood! Am I crazy, or have people been walking to it since then?


    I think the writers hoped us dumb little kids would forget all this stuff so Barnabas and Julia could turn into good guys.  The new"dumb" Vicki would harp on Jeff/Peter.  Basically, we are just supposed to forget what we learned no matter what plot they make-up whether it jibes with what they wrote before.  These inconsistencies go on throughout the series.[spin]
There are two means of refuge from the misery of life--music and cats.  Albert Schweitzer

Offline kuanyin

  • Full A ed Newest Fervor Post
  • Senior Poster
  • ****
  • Posts: 690
  • Karma: +9/-92
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2002, 05:20:18 AM »
Do I take it that "12 Monkeys" is not one of your favorites either? Love that movie. There is no way that anyone could ever smooth out all the time wrinkles in the DS fabric, but let me get a few.

Barney reacted vehemently to Phyliss Wicke because he recognized her and he was afraid. Seeing someone you knew almost 200 years ago COULD do that to you! Didn't further his purpose because she could have been told he was a descendant of the original Barney. It was just the same reaction that Vicky had when she thought she recognized someone. Only in her case it was over, and over, and....  

I personally don't think time travel has to adhere to strict rules. Vicky could have been returned to five minutes after she left or a week. Time being relative, just because she was gone __ # of weeks, doesn't mean that she would have to be returned __# of weeks later. Same with Phyliss, she could have been returned at time she left, or later as she was. If there are definate rules about this, I do so hope someone will set me straight. I would HATE to be poorly mannered in such matters. Given Einstein's theory of time moving differently for the guy on the rocket ship and him coming back a few years older to an ancient wife, I don't think this is all as ludicrous as it sounds. Or as it really is, I don't know.

For the change in story line, I think the writers used a little diversion tactic to get out of a sticky wicket. There was ONE reference to Carolyn no longer wanting to kill Julia and then no reference was ever made to Carolyn knowing Barney's secret again. Live and let non-live, I guess was her motto. OK, for that part of your questioning, the answer is they cheated. Though for Vicky, while she did RETURN to the same moment or shortly thereafter, she herself had been gone long enough to forget Burke and fall in love with someone else.

I would think that Janet Findley IS alive and never was called to Collinwood. My guess is that Ezra wasn't long for this world, either way. Later, when Quentin eventually shows up in Collinwood, noone gasps and runs away in mortal fear. So I think his ghost had ceased to be.

As for Eagle Hill Cemetary, it must be right next to Wyndcliffe! Either hours away or just a short walk, have your pick. I don't think the time travel created THAT inconstancy.
"If a thing is worth doing, it is worth doing badly, rather than not at all." G.K. Chesterton

Offline Joeytrom

  • Senior Poster
  • ****
  • Posts: 1053
  • Karma: +98/-946
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #3 on: October 27, 2002, 07:59:58 PM »
Prior to 1795, the writers had written Barnabas into a corner, he was evil for all of the 1967 storyline and Julia helping him kill Dr. Woodard didn't make her look good either.  The other members of the cast were given lesss screen time and made extremely ignotant of all the events around them.  

1795 was 5 months long and enough time for viewers in those days to forget what happened before.  Ther were no VCRs, Soap Opera Digest, internet, etc.

I am sure DS wasn't the only soap that changed plots and histories back then.  They still do it today.

Offline jennifer

  • Full A ed Newest Fervor Post
  • DSF God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2784
  • Karma: +541/-615
  • Gender: Female
  • we'll always love you Don!
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #4 on: October 27, 2002, 08:23:27 PM »
You're right Joey they still do it today when an actor leaves then comes back etc.. the writers never remember what the fans do and fans can get quite mad. Now we have tapes and can check back but back when we were kids i don't suppose too many of us checked. We lived for the moment of DS and waited for each episode never really thinking back to the last storyline
sometimes it is quite funny to rewatch them as an adult
because there are so many mistakes! Time travel always makes my head spin anyway [spin] when i try
ti think it through!

jennifer
we are the champions!!!!
 2007 Boston Red Sox
PAV

Offline Gerard

  • NEW ASCENDANT
  • ******
  • Posts: 3588
  • Karma: +559/-6686
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #5 on: October 29, 2002, 04:41:03 AM »
Quote
Now, for 1897! Barnabas goes back to the past to save David...and completely changes the timeline. If that were the case, wouldn't Janet Findley still be living when he returned to 1969? And how about old Ezra? He'd be living, too, correct?

Let's hear your take on all this!

Rod
You are absolutely right.  If Barnabas had changed history, there never would've been a haunting of Collinwood in 1968/69.  Okay, for now, let's forget the whole thing about you-can't-change-history (e.g., if you went back to April 14, 1912 and convinced Captain Smith to do what was needed to avoid the iceberg, thus the Titanic would never've sunk, she would still've sunk, because since she didn't, you wouldn't know to go back to 4/14/12 to prevent her from striking the iceberg, blah-blah-blah).  Let's say that Barnabas

[spoiler]and Julia did change history and returned to their own time of 1969, discovering that no haunting ever took place, no one has memory of it since it never happened, but they remember the alternate time line because, through their time-travels, they are somehow "protected" from forgetting.

Now here comes another SPOILER.

The biggest paradox should've happened with the 1840/41 storyline because that is where history was REALLY changed.  In the unchanged history, Gabriel (and Edith) becomes the master of Collinwood, and the lineage passes through him (Gabriel/Edith; unknown children; Edward/Lara, siblings; Jamison/unknown-wife, Norah; Elizabeth and Roger).  BUT..........because Barnabas (and Julia and Eliot) change history, they change the lineage to pass through Quentin I and his son Tad, thus completely changing the progeny/descendents.  When Barnabas, Julia and Eliot returned to 1971, they should've found a completely different family living there.  By the way, if the series had continued, that would've made a fascinating storyline, somehow getting our three heroes to restore the original line.[/spoiler]

Gerard

Offline Cassandra Blair

  • Full Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 492
  • Karma: +57/-94
  • Gender: Female
  • Hey sailor, how 'bout I light your Lucky?
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #6 on: October 29, 2002, 08:23:33 PM »
A caveat for those who haven't seen the show from 1897 on - this posting is spoiler laden.

[spoiler]But didn't they show Quentin and Daphne going away together at the end of 1840?  Who's to say that they ever returned?  And Tad might have died young, so that Collinwood passed to Gabriel's kids. Or, perhaps Gabriel was the older of the two brothers, so his sons naturally inherited.

I too have often wondered about these time paradoxes.  Of course the reality is that the writers just didn't figure anyone would ever know the difference, as others have pointed out.

But in thinking about it all now, I prefer to think that all that time travelling messed things up, creating all kinds of parallel times. The Collinwood that Barnabas, Julia & Stokes returned to after the 1840 storyline HAD to be a parallel of the original, since Liz obviously had no knowledge of the problems they'd gone back in time to fix (Gerard, etc.).

You have to wonder what the meddling around in the time continuum (sp?) did to the storylines that had come before.  For example, did the 1840 shenanigans negate the Leviathan story somehow?  Angelique was killed in 1840.  How then does Sky Rumson come into the picture in 1969?  And what does this do to the Dream Curse subplot?  For that matter, what is Stokes even doing returning from 1840 at all? Or at the very least why does Liz know who he is?  Stokes, if I remember correctly, was first brought onto the show as Cassandra/Angelique's teacher.  If she had died in 1840, how the heck did he come to know the Collins family?

Which brings me to the myriad time paradoxes Angelique's existence poses.   When B and co return to 1970 from 1840, they shouldn't mention Cassandra to Roger, he can't have married her if she was killed in 1840.  And does this mean Sam Evans is alive upon their return to 1970?  Cassandra killed him.

Remember that the 1840 Angelique knew nothing of any other times except 1692 and 1795.  And I think that 1897 Angelique doesn't seem to know about 1968/69.  The Angelique who shows up as Mrs. Sky Rumson during the Leviathan storyline seems to know about everything but 1840. And my namesake Cassandra didn't indicate she knew anything about 1840 or 1897. Maybe she just deliberately withheld this information from the other characters.  ::)

Now if anyone had been able to transcend all this temporal mess, it was Angelique.  But she seems to be as in the dark about all of this as Elizabeth, Roger or for that matter the lovable but eternally clueless Victoria Winters.[/spoiler]

Okay, this is all starting to make my head hurt.  ???
My lady abandoned heaven, abandoned earth...to Ray's Wig World she descended.

Offline Dr. Eric Lang

  • Full A ed Newest Fervor Post
  • Senior Poster
  • ****
  • Posts: 636
  • Karma: +8/-154
  • Gender: Male
  • Julia . . . Julia . . . when you do the experiment
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #7 on: October 30, 2002, 12:38:43 AM »
I'll address the 1795 time travel first. This one is the easiest.

By going back in time and trading places w/Phyllis Wick, Victoria creates a parallel timeline. The time "split" occurs at the moment the carriage overturns.

In the original timeline, Phyllis Wick survived the carriage accident and went on to Collinwood, where historical events proceeded as "normal." Presumably, Phyllis Wick was framed as the witch, met Peter Bradford and was hanged.

In the parallel timeline Victoria creates, she takes the place of Phyllis Wick and proceeds to Collinwood. The Phyllis Wick of this parallel timeline switches places w/her and ends up at the seance in 1967, where Barnabas recognizes her from the original timeline.

After hanging, Victoria returns to the original timeline where she started. The idea that "time stood still" isn't literal; upon traveling into the past (or future) one could return to their point of origin regardless of how much time they spent in another century. (If you can travel thru time, you can 'land' at any given point in time.) The Phyllis Wick at the seance again switches places with Vicki and returns to the parallel timeline at the point where Vicki was hanged.

Victoria does not travel from 1796 PT to 1967 PT - otherwise, that Barnabas would remember her from 1795. He does not - he remembers Phyllis Wick, and tells Julia so. He realizes the implications of what Vicki may have learned by trading places w/Phyllis Wick.

What's important to realize is that it's the Angelique and Peter Bradford of the parallel timeline Victoria created who follow her to 1967 RT. The Angelique and Peter of the original timeline had no knowledge of Victoria Winters, just as Barnabas did not.

Here's where it gets even trickier. After Jeff/Peter draws Victoria back into the past again, she creates yet another parallel timeline. We do not know at what point in 1795/1796 she has returned - it could be she went all the way back to the beginning again (carriage overturns) and had to relive the experience all over again. She may have had the opportunity to make a few changes this time - hence the perceived "discrepencies" when Barnabas goes back in time to save her. Victoria recognizes Barnabas from the future instead of perceiving him to be the Barnabas of 1795; this indicates it is not the first parallel timeline he travels back to but the second. (Also, if Victoria had returned to the first parallel timeline she had created, she would find another Vicki there already!)

I have an excellent diagram of this to illustrate but no way to "post" it here. But despite our criticism of the writers they were obviously aware of the implications of parallel timelines created by time travel, hence the eventual 1970 PT story line.

Offline yendor

  • Junior Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 80
  • Karma: +12/-35
  • I love DS!
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #8 on: October 30, 2002, 12:56:16 AM »
I accept the idea that a "parallel time" stream was created by Vickie going back to 1795--and that would certainly explain why she apparently had no memory of Sarah Collins or Burke Devlin upon her return (for that matter, nobody else remembered them, either!). But I must disagree about 1967 time "freezing," since the writers made it perfectly clear, on several occasions, that time was "standing still" at Collinwood during the seance. In fact, they even show all the particulars sitting around the table, allegedly "frozen" (though we can see them breathing). So, if time did indeed "freeze" in 1967, and Victoria returned within a breath of when she disappeared, it would stand to reason that time should continue as it had been...but now incorporating whatever changes Vicky's foray into the past caused. One of these changes is the sudden reapparance of Peter Bradford/Jeff Clark, followed by Cassandra/Angelique. But there's no way Sarah Collins, Burke, and Julia's red diary should be alterered or change in any way. And what about poor dead Dave Woodard? He's another convenient memory that nobody remembers!

I think the REAL point behind 1795 was to show the origin of Barnabas, which the writers did very well.  But when Vicky returned to 1967 (now 1968 ), a NEW writer had come on board...someone who took Dark Shadows down many a wacky, inexplicable road. Continuity went out the window, and plots began to be "cribbed" from other sources. His name: Sam Hall.

Rod

Offline Gerard

  • NEW ASCENDANT
  • ******
  • Posts: 3588
  • Karma: +559/-6686
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #9 on: October 30, 2002, 01:15:34 AM »
Quote
Okay, this is all starting to make my head hurt.  ?!?


And just think if the writers had thought that all the time-travelling might've created alternate present-times, they could've come up with a myriad of new stories!  The show might've possibly gone on, at least for several more seasons (who knows? - maybe still be on the air today, just like As the World Turns, et. al.).

Gerard

Offline Dr. Eric Lang

  • Full A ed Newest Fervor Post
  • Senior Poster
  • ****
  • Posts: 636
  • Karma: +8/-154
  • Gender: Male
  • Julia . . . Julia . . . when you do the experiment
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #10 on: October 30, 2002, 02:46:03 AM »
Quote
I accept the idea that a "parallel time" stream was created by Vickie going back to 1795--and that would certainly explain why she apparently had no memory of Sarah Collins or Burke Devlin upon her return (for that matter, nobody else remembered them, either!).


Nothing has changed upon Victoria's return to "real time" 1967. They may not mention Sarah or Burke, but it's not because they are now in a parallel time line. They are simply fickle and easily distracted by new situations. Vicki does not return to 1967 in the parallel timeline she created; she returns to 1967 in the original timeline. Remember, Barnabas does not remember her from 1795/6. He remembers Phyllis Wick.


Quote
But I must disagree about 1967 time "freezing," since the writers made it perfectly clear, on several occasions, that time was "standing still" at Collinwood during the seance. In fact, they even show all the particulars sitting around the table, allegedly "frozen" (though we can see them breathing). So, if time did indeed "freeze" in 1967, and Victoria returned within a breath of when she disappeared, it would stand to reason that time should continue as it had been...but now incorporating whatever changes Vicky's foray into the past caused.


No. Vicki did nothing to alter the original timeline, she created a parallel timeline which she left in 1796. What followed in the parallel timeline was a generation or more of citizens who recalled the strange day that the witch, Victoria (or Gloria, if you prefer) Winters was hanged on the gallows and when the hood was pulled off her head, a different woman was found there. No such legend exists in the original timeline, when Phyllis was governess and framed as the witch.

Time 'stood still' only for us, the viewers, and for Victoria Winters, who spent months in the past but returned to the present only moments after she'd vanished.

Quote

One of these changes is the sudden reapparance of Peter Bradford/Jeff Clark, followed by Cassandra/Angelique. But there's no way Sarah Collins, Burke, and Julia's red diary should be alterered or change in any way. And what about poor dead Dave Woodard? He's another convenient memory that nobody remembers!


Actually, Barnabas (with the help of Dr. Lang) reminds Julia of her part in murdering Woodard when she begins to phone the police about the Adam experiment. No one has lost any of their memories.

Offline Dr. Eric Lang

  • Full A ed Newest Fervor Post
  • Senior Poster
  • ****
  • Posts: 636
  • Karma: +8/-154
  • Gender: Male
  • Julia . . . Julia . . . when you do the experiment
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #11 on: October 30, 2002, 03:23:46 AM »
Now . . . to tackle the 1897 time travel dilemma. I have discussed this at great length with serious Sci Fi buffs who have a better head for such things than I do. (Understanding various theories of time travel would seem to require a strong grasp of mathematic formulas, which I have none.)

Those of you familiar with Star Trek: Deep Space Nine might already be familiar with the concept of non-linear time. As I understand it, Barnabas exists outside of linear time. He "jumps" from timeline to timeline rather than experiencing them in the ordinary, one day-after-the-next fashion the rest of us do. In other words, he goes from 1796, when he is chained in a coffin, to 1967, when he is freed by Willie Loomis. (This would also account for why he emerges from said coffin fresh as a daisy despite being chained up for almost 200 years with no blood to nourish him.)

Despite the most common perceptions, Barnabas actually was part of the original 1897 time line. However, he does not experience it between 1796 and 1967, but rather afterwards.

It's sort of like this. You and I experience the week thusly: Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday. However, Barnabas goes from Monday to Friday then back to Wednesday. We remember Barnabas being there on Wednesday when we get to Friday; he does not, since he has not yet experienced it.

In much the same way, Barnabas goes from 1968/9 to 1897 and lives for the first time what Judith, Quentin, Edward et. al already know about by this timeline's end.

Barnabas does not "alter" history by going back to 1897, after all. He is able to change events in the future, but only from the point at which he has already departed. When Julia travels back to 1897 to join him, she informs him that "David is now all right." Julia, however, has not lost her memory of David being possessed and stricken, nor has anyone else. They are only aware of his recovery. Nor is there any indication that the rest of the family has forgotten about Quentin's ghost haunting the house; they merely find it to be eventually gone and move back home.

If Barnabas prevents Quentin from dying in 1897 then how can his ghost haunt Collinwood in 1968? Much like Barnabas, Quentin exists outside linear time. Quentin haunts Collinwood only up until the time when Barnabas travels to the past. There is no original vs. revised history here; events proceed day by day until Barnabas has a chance to jump from 1968 to 1897. There's also the possibility that Beth, Jamison, or any number of other ghosts, simply projects Quentin's image in 1968 as a catalyst to draw Barnabas back to 1897 so history can proceed in the normal, linear fashion.

Offline Cassandra Blair

  • Full Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 492
  • Karma: +57/-94
  • Gender: Female
  • Hey sailor, how 'bout I light your Lucky?
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #12 on: October 30, 2002, 05:54:36 PM »
Well, that's certainly an interesting theory, Dr. Lang (non-linear time).  It seems to work, at least for the 1897 storyline.

Can you explain to me Angelique's progression through time in this non-linear fashion?  'Cos I've tried, and am again finding the head hurting.
My lady abandoned heaven, abandoned earth...to Ray's Wig World she descended.

Offline yendor

  • Junior Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 80
  • Karma: +12/-35
  • I love DS!
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #13 on: October 30, 2002, 11:20:24 PM »
I enjoyed your theories, Dr. Lang...they're intriguing! But I must wonder--did Barnabas really "remind" Julia of Dr. Woodard's death? I recall him fumbling for the right words, finally blurting "Julia...Julia, remember someone!"

Rod

Offline Dr. Eric Lang

  • Full A ed Newest Fervor Post
  • Senior Poster
  • ****
  • Posts: 636
  • Karma: +8/-154
  • Gender: Male
  • Julia . . . Julia . . . when you do the experiment
    • View Profile
Re: Time Paradoxes--1795 & 1897!
« Reply #14 on: October 31, 2002, 04:14:14 AM »
Thanks to Midnite I can now illustrate the principal of parallel time regarding Victoria Winter's trip to the past. Please refer to diagram 1.



Vicki jumps from point A to point B which causes a split in the original timeline. Vicki does not proceed to points C-E, otherwise she would find Phyllis Wick there, as in the original timeline; or else if she had switched places w/Phyllis Wick at point B and proceeded to points C-E, upon returning to point A she would find history changed, at least to the extent that Barnabas would now remember Vicki from 1795. (If this was the case, Barnabas would have recognized Vicki upon meeting her in 1967, and likely would not have allowed Vicki to participate in the seance in the first place, knowing what would happen.)

Instead, Vicki proceeds from point B to points F-H. She then switches places with Phyllis at point A again, and returns to point A. This is the "parallel time" Phyllis; the original Phyllis goes from point B to point E. Parallel time Phyllis goes from B to point A, then switches places with Vicki at point H.

Vicki does not go from point H to point I. We do not know how different Collinwood would be at point I; it may be as different as 1970 RT is from 1970 PT. What we do know is that between points H and I, some people in Collinsport remember the incident of Vicki hanging and turning into another woman once the hood is removed from her head. At the very least, the Barnabas at point I would remember Vicki from points F-H. Barnabas at point A only remembers Phyllis Wick from the original timeline.

It is important to note that it is parallel time Angelique and Peter from points F-H that follow Vicki back to point A. The Angelique and Peter of the original timeline have no knowledge of Victoria Winters.

When "Eve" is sent back in time she goes to the parallel timeline. The Peter Bradford she finds there knows Victoria Winters, as does the jailer.

After Vicki returns to 1967 RT and the spirit of Peter Bradford from point H draws her back in time, she creates yet another parallel timeline. Please refer to diagram 2.



We do not know at what point Vicki is returned to 1795/6 parallel time; does she return to point B and have to relive points F-H all over again? Or does she return somewhere between points F, G or H? However, at whatever point she returns, she splits this parallel timeline once more. Since she does not switch places with anyone, if she returned to point F or G she would find another Vicki already there. (Otherwise, she would have had to switch places with herself, hence when she disappears from her bedroom in 1968 she would be replaced with an earlier version of herself at a time when she was somewhere between points B and H, and had no knowledge of eventually returning to point A after the hanging.)

For the sake of the argument, Vicki returns somewhere between point F and point G and creates yet another timeline at this point. Barnabas travels back to point J to meet her. He does not go to the original parallel timeline, or else the Vicki there would perceive him to be Barnabas of 1795, rather than recognize him as Barnabas from 1968 and fully aware of her predicament.

This accounts for the "discrepencies" when Barnabas travels back to 1796 to save Vicki - i.e. the Countess DuPres finds out about Barnabas at a different time and in a different way. It's possible this time around Vicki behaved differently, perhaps withholding the future knowledge from the Collins family history book from Natalie and Josette, thus keeping them in the dark about Barnabas' fate.

When Barnabas travels back to 1796 from 1897, we do not know if he returns to the original timeline or the initial parallel timeline, but we know that it's either point E or point H rather than point K since Natalie is still alive.

Thanks again to Midnite for helping me get these diagrams posted!