Zelda Timeline

Legend Of Zelda Timeline theory is perhaps the object of greatest debate amongst fans of the series. Nintendo's unconventional formula of "Gameplay first, Story Later" has arguably produced some of the greatest games of all time, but it has also resulted in an incoherent chronology - full of loose ends, contradictions, and general confusion. Fortunately, this has motivated fans to do all they can to sift, sort, and organize the Legend of Zelda canon.

Overview
Since the days of Pong, videogame storylines have endured an amazing evolution, moving from simple "slay the dragon" conflict, through "save the princess" heroism, and into wonderfully deep epics. Early installments of the Legend of Zelda series emerged at a very interesting point of this process; a point where the market was divided between casual platformers and plot-focused RPGs.

Zelda found a niche market somewhere in the middle. This is reflected in the storyline of such games as The Adventure of Link and A Link to the Past, which are simple and yet inspiring. Over the years, Nintendo has kept to this trend. Developers often focus foremost on gameplay and theme, and generally only decide on a definite storyline close to the completion of development. Resulting games are well-connected to the overall Legend of Zelda universe - and consider elements of games past - but do not often present immediate or obvious chronological connections.

In the early stages, this worked wonderfully. The first five Legend of Zelda releases were easily understood and organized. In 1998, the timeline had room even for the content of the Legend of Zelda television show and manga, as well as the mistakes of NoA, which would later be considered non-canonical.

Unfortunately, as time went on the sheer amount of information being introduced into the Legend of Zelda canon made a complete understanding less possible. Games such as The Wind Waker and Four Swords Adventures seemed to strain the connection between older games, and many fans began to wonder whether the Four Swords series had a place in the timeline at all.

English fans of the series wanting to learn more of the timeline began to discuss the concept on the Internet, slowly reaching conclusions on those issues which could be resolved and falling into bitter debate on those which could not. They continue to argue, as they eagerly await the relase of Twilight Princess and Phantom Hourglass.

Timeline principles
Timeline theory is often accused of being a collection of irrelevant fan-fiction with no real truth to it. In actuality, a large part of our timeline knowlege is strictly canon; a good deal more consists of simple, well supported inferences based on this canon and the intentions of Zelda's creators. These principles are held to be true by almost all Timeline theorists:

Canon
A canonical statement is one which cannot be reasonably denied within the context of the Legend of Zelda universe. To be more specific, when an official Zelda authority (i.e. a "canonical source") makes an informed, intended statement, that statement must be considered a fact in the timeline. Furthermore, when such a source makes such a statement, it is assumed to be intended and informed (and therefore canonical) unless an excellent argument is made to the contrary.

Those sources agreed upon as canon in principle are:
 * The Legend of Zelda (LoZ) Original release: properly translated textual game content and game manual
 * The Adventure of Link (AoL) Original release: properly translated textual game content and game manual
 * A Link to the Past (ALttP) Original release: properly translated textual game content and game manual
 * Link's Awakening (LA) Original release: properly translated textual game content and game manual
 * Ocarina of Time (OoT) Original release: textual game content and game manual
 * Majora's Mask (MM) textual game content and game manual
 * Oracle of Ages (OoA) textual game content and game manual
 * Oracle of Seasons (OoS) textual game content and game manual
 * Four Swords (FS) textual game content and game manual
 * The Wind Waker (tWW) textual game content and game manual
 * Four Swords Adventures (FSA) textual "Hyrulean Adventure" content and game manual
 * The Minish Cap (tMC) textual game content and game manual
 * Twilight Princess (TP) as-of-yet uncontradicted developer announced placement
 * Phantom Hourglass (PH) as-of-yet uncontradicted developer announced placement

Intent
When trying to understand a creation, one should always consider the creator. Shigeru Miyamoto, Eiji Aonuma, and their colleagues at Nintendo provide the best possible perspective on the Timeline because their own intention shape the series. When these intentions can be understood, they provide an excellent (albeit incomplete) blueprint for theorists and are followed with due care.

General Knowledge
Through the study of canon and intent, theorists have come to the following conclusions, which they claim to be almost as "true" as the canon itself.
 * LoZ and AoL center around the same Hero.
 * ALttP and LA center around the same Hero, and precedes LoZ/AoL.
 * OoT and MM center around the same Hero, and precedes AlttP/LA.
 * TP stars the newest Hero, and suceeds OoT
 * OoS and OoA center around the same hero.
 * tWW and PH center around the same hero, and succeed TP.
 * TMC, FS, and FSA occur in that order, and are a part of the timeline.
 * There is a "Fierce War" preceding OOT.
 * There is a "Seal War" preceding AlttP (which may or may not be represented in OoT)
 * There is a "Conquest War" preceding LoZ.
 * The curse of the "Legendary" Zelda of AoL succeeds AlttP/LA [possibly even featuring the same Princess Zelda from those games].
 * Vatti [presumably] attacks Hyrule a fourth time, between TMC and FS.

We can combine this information and conceive three timeline "arcs"


 * OoT/MM - TP - tWW/PH
 * TMC - FS/FSA
 * ALttP/LA - LoZ/AoL
 * OoS/OoA

Beyond that, all timeline theory is an attemp to combine these arcs and achieve an final chronology.

Common Points of Debate
Beyond these simple arks, the amount of helpful canon begins to decrease. At this point, disagreements inevitably arise between various theorists who have naturally formed differing interpretations of the small amount of "truth" they have to work with.

Foursword Related Arguments
Nintendo went out on a rather interesting tangent when they expanded the multiplayer minigame featured in 2002's ALttP GBA release. The styles and storylines of the Foursword games were so different from the convential Zelda that, at first, many theorists did not accept them as a true part of the storyline. Nintendo has since confirmed their place, but the contreversy continues.

Where is FS placed in relation to OOT and FSA?

For obvious resons, FS has many stylistic elements that mirror those of tWW (the principle Zelda of the generation) and AlttP (with which it shares a cartridge). Despite this, the game contains no story elements whatsoever that would enable a theorist to place it in the timeline.

Aonuma temporarily solved this problem in a 2004 GamePro interview (prior to the release of FSA and TMC) when he stated that Nintendo was "thinking of [this game] as the oldest tale in the Zelda Timeline". A simple and concrete answer, which was, of course, too good to be true.

When FSA was released later that year a dilema was created. It was both chronologically after OOT AND (apparently) the direct sequel to FS. If FS occured only a few short years before FSA, and featured the same incarnation of Link, then it would have to occur later in the timeline, after OOT. Thus making Aonuma's previous statement incorrect.

Theorists are now forced to decide what is more true; a possibly outdated expression of developer intent, or their own logical conclusions.

Where is TMC placed in relation to OOT?

Tha FS argument became doubly conflicted with the release of TMC, which was a very obvious prequel to FS. Theorists maintaining that FS was an "older" tale then OOT now placed TMC at the very begining of their timeline, those theorists in opposition to this cited TMC images showing a flooded world and that facts that Humans (in general) were the dominant race of TMC, and that were it truly prior to OOT, would have been much more Hylian focused.

In the end, arguers were again stuck debating principles. What was more important: A developer's quote or contrary canonical evidence?

Is FSA the prequel to AlttP?

Hand Held Related Arguments
Non-console Zeldas have never garnered the attention or prestige of their home based cousins. Miyamato himself has lamented that LA, OoS and OoA lack any grand connection to the timeline as a whole. Theses games are not only difficult to place, but also somewhat irrelevant. Still, in the meticulous world of timeline theorists, no detail goes unargued.

Is LA the sequel to the Oracles?

When the a full Oracle Series Linked Game is completed, the credits end with a shot of Link sailing away from the land in a one-man sailboat. The opening LA scene showcases Link battling a storm in a similar boat. Most fans are quick to correlate these events and conclude that LA is the sequel to the Oracle Series.

More tradtional theorists argue that LA was at relase, is now, and will always be the sequel to Alttp. To support this claim, they use quotes from the Oracle game to show that OoX Link has never met Zelda and, therefore, cannot be ALttP Link, the argument continues that LA directly references AlttP with its backstory and boss battles, and must contain the same Link.

At this point, Oracle-LA supporters must either reject their theory or sever the tradional AlttP-LA connection. This is rare, as such a theorist must hold that LA's manual has been "retconned" and is no longer perfect canon.

Can there be a perfect Oracle placement?

For a particular spot in the timeline to possibly accomodate the Oracle series, it must only meet 2 conditions: Ganon must be dead, and the Triforce must be whole in Hyrule. This occurs atleast twice in the seires.

OoX may occur shortly after AoL. Both involve an enemy effort to resurrect a dead Ganon and AoL ends with the reniting of the Triforce.

OoX may occur shortly after AlttP. They share stylistic elements, simlar items, and AlttP easily meets the 'Dead Ganon, Whole Triforce" condition.

OoX may even occur shortly after tWW, as it two ends with a dead Antagonist and a whole Triforce. This idea, however, has little support amongst theorists as it requires speculation on the Triforces resting place post tWW.

At the moment, there is no "perfect" place for the Oracles, and most theorists are happy to let it be ambiguously "sometime after AlttP".

OOT/MM Related Arguments
Timetravel is a principle element of Fifth Generation Zelda, factoring in 3 of its 4 games. In developing the game mechanics for OOT, MM, and OoA, Nintendo was far more considered with being fun and interesting than being scientifically sound (or even consistent).

Attempts to Logic out the uncanny mechanics of Time in the Zelda series have been moderately successful, but the various implications of these conclusions have made the OO/MM connection the most hotly (and most commonly) debated timeline topic:

Is the Sacred Realm Timeless?

It is very often suggested that the Sacred Realm either exists outside of Hyrule's Timeline or is entirely timeless in itself. It is arued that, if this is the case, then Ganon's sealing at the end of OOT would somhow extend into the past and alter history, sparing History from him altogeather.

Dissenters quickly point out that there is no proof of this, that Link ages seven years in the Sacred Realm (supporting that it is temporal) and that seven years passed simultaneously in Hyrule (supporting that there is no difference in their "times"). It is also suggested that the concept of "timelessness" is beyond human imagination, inheirently unknwoable, and completely irrelevent.

Traditionally, it is a quick yet reoccuring argument. A new theorists will suggest the idea, and will be so quickly opposed that he quickly withdraws.

Is the Timeline "mutable"?

How does Zelda send Link through time at OOT's end?

How might a Single Timeline work?

How might a Double Timeline work?

AlttP/tWW Related Arguments
Both AlttP and tWW can be placed, with little doubt, a number of centuries after OOT, but there is hardly any connection between the game's themselves. Which comes first? How can both relationships be preserved? What has been changed be the release of FSA? This is the staging ground for the most brutal, least productive debate in the timeline. One that most theorists have given up on. Is the answer even out there?

Could Hyrule ever be recovered from the flood?

Does AlttP's backstory reference more than one event?

Does AlttP's backstory reference OOT?

Does AlttP's backstory reference FSA?

Could TP bring a solution?

Official Games that are Arguably Canon
There are four Nintendo licensed Zelda games that many consider not canon. These games being

BS: The Legend of Zelda This game is considered not canon since it replaces the hero (Link) with a different character and still tells of the same adventure.

BS Zelda: Kodai no Sekiban This game is arguably canon. It takes place in Hyrule during Link's absense after ALTTP and tells of a hero from another world who vanquishes Ganon shortly after he is ressurected. This story is never contradicted so it can be canon.

Zelda: Game & Watch This game is almost never thought of story wise by fans but its intended place is after AOL. Dragons steal the triforce and kidnap Zelda and Link stops them. Like Kodai no Sekiban, this game is not contradicted and can thus be considered canon.

The Legend of Zelda: Game Watch Thought of even less than its Game & Watch cousine, this game is an undetailed retelling of LOZ and is thus redundant to the timeline.