Consequent vs subsequent

The English language simply loves giving us words that have similar yet very distinct meanings. One slight linguistical mishap and you could have a predicament on your hands!

Let’s say our protagonist is explaining to their boss how our favourite mythical dragon-cow Mildred was once again suffering from her dreadful season allergies. Poor little Mildred had sneezed and set yet another innocent merchant’s wagon on fire. The merchant wasn’t happy, but that’s not how the cargo was lost. The consequent riot led to the destruction of a whole village, including the precious cargo!

This makes the riot seem to be all dear Mildred’s fault! Her fiery sniffles could be heard from outside the building while the boss berated our protagonist for Mildred’s clumsiness.

The word our protagonist was looking for here was subsequent.

Consequent means ‘following as a result or effect’. It implies a direct correlation between the event (Mildred setting the merchant’s wagon on fire) and what happens next (the riot). Claiming the consequent riot led to the destruction of the cargo indicates that the cause of the riot was Mildred’s sniffling misadventure.

Let’s say the real of the riot was a wage dispute in the village. The villagers had already planned this riot weeks before Mildred’s dainty hoofs blessed the town with her presence.

Subsequent means following. Subsequent does not imply a relation between what happened and what happened next. The subsequent riot simply means that after Biscuit ruined a merchant’s whole livelihood, there was a riot, and in that riot, the cargo was destroyed.

Consequently, Mildred demanded five tubs of ice cream from our protagonist for this blasphemous grammatical error.