History Headscratchers / FiveLittlePigs

** Remember that a key theme of the novel is the unreliability of memory. All of these people are reflecting on the age of a woman who's been dead for years, one of them never met her, none of them witnessed her attack on her sister and only got the details secondhand, and any of them could have misremembered dates, ages, etc at any point. I don't know if Christie ''intended'' for these details to reflect this or whether they were genuine errors, but the fact that they create ambiguity about precisely how old Caroline would have been when she committed this act is certainly appropriate for a novel about how different people can remember the same people and events in very different ways.

** Remember that a key theme of the novel is the unreliability of memory. All of these people are reflecting on the age of a woman who's been dead for years, one of them never met her, and none of them witnessed her attack on her sister and only got the details secondhand. I don't know if Christie ''intended'' for these details to reflect this or whether they were genuine errors, but the fact that they create ambiguity about precisely how old Caroline would have been when she committed this act is certainly appropriate for a novel about how different people can remember the same people and events in very different ways.

** Remember that a key theme of the novel is the unreliability of memory. All of these people are reflecting on the age of a woman who's been dead for years, one of them never met her, and none of them witnessed her attack on her sister. I don't know if Christie ''intended'' for these details to reflect this or whether they were genuine errors, but the fact that they create ambiguity about precisely how old Caroline would have been when she committed an act that none of these people were around to witness is certainly appropriate for a novel about how different people can remember the same people and events in very different ways.

** Remember that a key theme of the novel is the unreliability of memory. All of these people are reflecting on the age of a woman who's been dead for years, several of them never met her, and none of them witnessed her attack on her sister. I don't know if Christie ''intended'' for these details to reflect this or whether they were genuine errors, but the fact that they create ambiguity about precisely how old Caroline would have been when she committed an act that none of these people were around to witness is certainly appropriate for a novel about how different people can remember the same people and events in very different ways.

** Remember that a key theme of the novel is the unreliability of memory. All of these people are reflecting on the age of a woman who's been dead for years. I don't know if Christie ''intended'' for these details to reflect this or whether they were genuine errors, but the fact that they create ambiguity about precisely how old Caroline would have been when she committed an act that none of these people were around to witness is certainly appropriate for a novel about how two different people can remember the same people and events in very different ways.

* It is stressed that the incident of Caroline throwing a paperweight at baby Angela happened "in a fit of uncontrolled adolescent rage" during her "undisciplined girlhood" (Poirot's words), while in relation to this, Mr. Johnathan calls Caroline a "poor child". However, in their written statements, Miss Williams writes that Angela had been "then a girl of thirteen" when she was hired by Caroline two years prior to the murder (making Angela fifteen), while Meredith recalls Caroline saying to him "I'm thirty-four, you know, Merry. And we’ve been married ten years."[[note]]Some editions of the book omit this line, but the fact that Amyas, Meredith and Philip, all of whom were approaching forty, interacted with her as peers when whey were children means she must be around this age.[[/note]] But this would mean Caroline would have already been nineteen when Angela was a baby, which is ''definitely'' too old for an act of violence toward a baby to be put down to "adolescent rage" and "undisciplined girlhood". Is there something missing in this picture, or is it WritersCannotDoMath?

*** Yup, I (OP) believe it is the most plausible explanation.

** Consider also that tone and nuance can be tricky things at times, especially for a third party who is (seemingly) not privy to the entire conversation and is only overhearing a random part of it. As far as anyone is aware, Elsa only overheard that part of the conversation, not the rest that made it clear that Caroline was being affectionate, and so might have assumed that it was meant in a more hostile and threatening tone than Caroline intended (especially in light of what later happened). It's only because Poirot surmises that Elsa overheard the entire conversation that he realises that she also had to be aware what Caroline's real tone was, and that she was lying on the stand. As far as Caroline was concerned, Elsa was simply misinterpreting a fragment of a conversation that she heard out of context.

* Poirot only arrived in UK when he was already a mature man. How come he became obsessed (to ear worm degree) with English nursery rhymes he'd never heard in his childhood?

* Poirot only arrived in UK when he was already a mature man. How come he became obsessed (to EarWorm degree) with English nursery rhymes he'd never heard in his childhood?
** That's the thing about EarWorm's - they're usually about the strangest, and often very unlikely things. Most of the time, it's simply a phrase or piece of music that for some reason, strikes a chord with a situation you've seen or experienced lately, one that seems very vivid to you for some reason. Who knows? Maybe Hastings' most recent letter to Poirot mentioned one of his children learning their nursery rhymes, he mentioned the five little pigs specifically because they saw some at the market. It might even play into one of the themes of this book; that the smallest incidents can be the most illuminating in the memory, which is also a major recurring theme - even a trademark - or the Satterthwaite and Quinn stories.

*** It's very unusual to get an EarWorm from reading alone though. Even if there was musical notation on those books (and if Poirot can read notes), one still usually has to actually hear the music for it to be drilled down in one's head.