Regarding the (fictional) Culter motto: Volume 1 of The Companion gives it as being ambiguous and meaning either

“Despite the (misleading) evidence of ours lives, we die honest”
or
“We die honest, despite Life’s efforts to thwart us”.

Some people have questioned whether this can be correct as a literal translation but it certainly captures the sense of what Dorothy intended, playing with words and ideas as always.

On the question of paintings, Archie was the only character that she ever painted. It was done as a commission for a reader in Canada who simply asked that she paint one of the characters and left the choice to her. Unfortunately he died before it was finished and so it remained in Dorothy’s house, displayed on the main staircase for many years.

The “backstory” of the Chronicles has often been discussed in the online groups and I think it’s fair to say that most people accept that there are a number of little holes in it as regards the timeline. Some of the timings seem to have become compressed at some time and there is a suspicion that perhaps Lymond’s age was changed slightly during the planning stage of the book. Further study of the archive may show us more about this as there are some early drafts containing ideas that were clearly dropped later, but before publication. Whether some changes were made at the editing stage is also a possibility.

We have to remember that this was Dorothy’s first book and was an astonishing achievement compared to the stories common at the time – we are accustomed to “sagas” now but then most books were much shorter and far less complex. While the later books were absolutely meticulous in their construction there is some understandable looseness in Game of Kings – the surprising thing is that there aren’t more problems and that she was able to write the Niccolos as a prequel without the whole thing falling apart.

However I think we can absolve her of most of this on the university elements, as it was common for young nobles to attend at a much younger age than is the case now. By 16 they were expected to have completed their education and be taking a full part in adult life. Whether at court or in battle. I can imagine Lymond being looked after as an early teenager by Martine’s girls in Paris.

So he first met Lennox on the galley in March 1543, then again in Sept.
1543, ie one summer in the galleys. He states he then escaped to Lennox
who fled Scotland in May 1544.Francis seems to be indicating that he
escaped around Sept of 1543, but the latest he possibly could have
escaped is before Lennox fled to London in May 1544. So if he joined
him before he defected, as he says, he could only have been in the
galleys from at the earliest Dec 1542 until at the latest sometime in
the Spring of 1544, ie one summer and at most, 17 months. His statement
“Between those dates I stayed with him as secretary” really indicates
he escaped in Sept 1543 when he was still only 16 and had only been in
the galleys for 9-10 months. Though he also said he was in the galleys
until 1544, so I suppose he could have escaped in Jan or Feb of 1544 to
spend 3-4 months with Lennox. But in either case there is no way he
could have been two summers or two years in the galleys.

This also seems to be reinforced somewhat by Francis’ earlier statement
to Richard as he was recovering outside Hexham that he came home to
Culter in ’44 from Dumbarton, ie from Lennox., though it doesn’t give us
any seasonal reference. From the “between those dates” statement, it
seems clear that by May 1544, when Lennox fled to London, Francis did
not go with him but had already been working for him for some and was
no longer a rower in the French Kings galleys.

Then one of the other puzzling things that comes up in Checkmate is
that when he and the Huguenots escape from the meeting in the Latin
quarter, he takes the women to what seems to be a University contact he
knew when he went to University in Paris. The man and his son fondly
recall some of Francis’ exploits, ie the glue in the boots, his use of equations to spell out some scatological or sexual innuendo. But I just don’t see how Francis could have gone to University anywhere given his age and history he gives at his trial. He was just 16 when captured. We know his time in
the galleys, his time with Lennox.. In GK at his trial he said he fought
for the English for 4 months in ’45′. He says he took the gold he’d
stolen from Lennox and started a troupe of soldiers, which eventually
earned money on the continent. At the first of GK, it says he is just
coming back from his soldiering. I think its during Francis’ recovery
after Hexham, that Richard reminisces about his time in Paris at
University, but Francis doesn’t. At no other time during the 12 years
Dunnett covers could he have gone to University, so unless he went at
age 12 or 14, I just don’t see how this fit in his very cram packed life.
I wonder if anyone ever asked Mrs Dunnett these questions.