Canonical Proof for Zelda Timeline!

[GoldenWolf12]

I consider myself a Zelda timeline theorist and I have created multipule timelines. But I have finally found absolute canonical proof for the Zelda timeline.......


THERE IS NONE.

There is absolutely no timeline. I have read a great amount about different Zelda timelines by other people and have found problems with all of them, including my own timelines. The only timeline that is perfect is ones that say there is none. Don't get me wrong, I love all things related to the Zelda timelines, but I've simply come to see that it is impossible to create a fully canonical timeline. Please tell me what you think, if you agree or disagree.

 

[zeldafreak101]

I totally agree i believe the master timeline document Miyamoto said exists does not really. I think the zelda timeline was something fans started and Nintendo tried to run with and ultimately failed.

 

[Locke]

"Canonical" isn't the same thing as "Perfectly consistent." We've received several indications of a "canonical" overall timeline between the games. But as you said, there is no timeline currently that doesn't have its fair share of problems. Miyamoto just recently scolded us theorists for being too picky with the timeline. I think the trick is to deduce their intentions rather than examine every little detail and try to fit everything together with as few problems as possible.

 

[DeletedUser9]

I agree, but what you have to realize Wolf, is that pretty much everyone realizes that. I really don't think there's many timeline theorists who think they've actually deduced a real, canonical timeline. There are always flaws with timeline theories, and the only reason is because there isn't a perfect timeline. Nintendo's claimed they have an official timeline document, and while I believe them on that, I'm sure even it possesses connection flaws. These are the sort of issues that would be solved by retcons or additional material (books, canonical manga, official statements, etc.), but as of right now they have a lot of logistic issues.

The point about timeline theories is to have fun and try to line up facts in the Zelda storyline to figure out which parts come first. Although, I do agree with Locke that figuring out their intention is the best way to go about it. I think there's a lot of examples of things in the timeline that Nintendo probably intended, but that have little details in the games that cause problems for those intended connections. Even if that's the case, there can always be unspoken details that supposedly occur between games to clean those up, so Nintendo's intentions are still paramount, especially over little game details.

 

[JuicieJ]

There is a timeline, it's just somewhat broken. Nintendo's mending it at the moment by writing new stuff. Surely Nintendo has a general idea of what they're going to do. There are some games that are official, though.

............/WW/PH--ST
SS--OoT
............\MM--TP

There'll be one in the future. I'm pretty sure of that.

 

[DeletedUser9]

Yeah, actually, Locke and JJ have a point there. There is a canonical timeline, but there is no perfectly consistent one, nor any complete one. We have a partial timeline that is canonical. It just has a lot of holes that need to be filled still.

 

[Hero's Shade]

It all depends on whether you consider a game canon in the timeline or not.

Zelda 1 - The timeline was not around
Zelda 2 - The timeline was not around
ALttP - The timeline was not around
LA - Originally thought to be a sequel to ALttP
OoT - Only considered to have a set in stone place after the release of WW
MM - Direct sequel to OoT
OoX - Developed by Capcom, should they really be treated as canon?
WW - Position (pretty much) set in stone
MC - Same as the oracles
TP - Same as WW
PH - Confirmed position
ST - (Pretty much) confirmed position
SS - Confirmed position

So, that gives us:

............/WW/PH--ST
SS--OoT
............\MM--TP

ALttP--LA (debatable)

Z1--Z2

I have no understanding of the four swords games whatsoever, so can not comment on them.

 

[JuicieJ]

It all depends on whether you consider a game canon in the timeline or not.

Zelda 1 - The timeline was not around
Zelda 2 - The timeline was not around
ALttP - The timeline was not around
LA - Originally thought to be a sequel to ALttP
OoT - Only considered to have a set in stone place after the release of WW
MM - Direct sequel to OoT
OoX - Developed by Capcom, should they really be treated as canon?
WW - Position (pretty much) set in stone
MC - Same as the oracles
TP - Same as WW
PH - Confirmed position
ST - (Pretty much) confirmed position
SS - Confirmed position

So, that gives us:

............/WW/PH--ST
SS--OoT
............\MM--TP

ALttP--LA (debatable)

Z1--Z2

I have no understanding of the four swords games whatsoever, so can not comment on them.

You're right on pretty much all of this, although the first two Zeldas are confirmed sequels to ALttP, as well as LA being a direct sequel to it (that was confirmed by the developers long ago), and the OoX most likely goes in-between those two. The FSS has nowhere to go right now without any kind of major contradiction, though, so not commenting on them doesn't really make a difference. There is an open gap in-between TP and ALttP for Nintendo to make a game, though. It would, once again, involve Ganondorf getting back his Triforce of Power, somehow re-combining the Triforce, and wishing upon it, thereby creating the Dark World, which then brings about the Seal War. That's why I always do this:

............/WW/PH--ST
SS--OoT
............\MM--TP__ALttP/(OoX)/LA--LoZ/AoL

-(?)MC--FS/FSA

 

[Red Baron]

The problem is that people want and try to make a solid brick wall timeline, where everything fits nicely (with some rough edges at the beginning and end).

The truth is that the timeline is more like swiss cheese. There are some solid parts, but there are a great number of holes. And there should be, as Nintendo is still producing Zelda games and they obviously aren't releasing them in a linear timeline progression.

 

[Capitaine]

OoX - Developed by Capcom, should they really be treated as canon?

Well, yes, considering Hidemaro Fujibayashi, who was previously employed at Capcom developing OoX, FS, the ALttP GBA port, FS, and TMC, now works for Nintendo and developed PH and SS. Not to mention the facts that TP wouldn't be what it is today (the wolf idea was inspired by the Minish idea) and that FSA wouldn't exist if it weren't for Capcom.

Unless you want to say that all those games aren't canon...?

 

[Locke]

I don't think my point was understood. Canon has nothing to do with consistency. Zelda's canon is known to be inconsistent. Therefore, just because the timeline is inconsistent does not mean it's not canonical. Just because OoT-...-FSA-LttP doesn't fit together perfectly doesn't mean it can't be canon (not saying it is; just an example). Canon is whatever the developers decide to make of the timeline. They may in following this canon attempt to facilitate logical connections, but they can never fix every problem with a constantly evolving canon. Yes, there is a big chunk of the timeline that is confirmed, but that section doesn't comprise the entire canon. It only represents what we know of the canon, and we're left to guess at the rest, where inconsistencies lie. There is no perfectly consistent timeline, but there is a canon one.

tl;dr: I think the OP misused the term "canon."

 

[BamaLynx]

Nintendo's mending it at the moment by writing new stuff. Surely Nintendo has a general idea of what they're going to do.

I agree with this part of your statement, JJ. I think early on Nintendo cared very little about maintaining a consistent timeline, but probably around the time after OoT and MM I think they (mainly Aonuma) started really taking it to heart that the fans really liked this idea of having a connected timeline. So with WW, and subsequent games, I think they started making much more of an effort to follow and create a timeline, and I think it is only going to get stronger with each game that comes out from now on. In a few games from now, I really believe most of the timeline holes will be filled in.

JJ...I know you seem to be a strong supporter of having a game that connects TP with ALttP (and I am as well), and I really think there is a really good possibility that is the direction they go with Zelda WiiU...especially if Aonuma continues to have a lot of control over the franchise.

 

[Hero's Shade]

Well, yes, considering Hidemaro Fujibayashi, who was previously employed at Capcom developing OoX, FS, the ALttP GBA port, FS, and TMC, now works for Nintendo and developed PH and SS. Not to mention the facts that TP wouldn't be what it is today (the wolf idea was inspired by the Minish idea) and that FSA wouldn't exist if it weren't for Capcom.

Unless you want to say that all those games aren't canon...?

What I was trying to get at, albeit confusingly I'll admit, is that, can something fit into a plan (the timeline) before the concept of it was even created?

People only started theorising the timeline with the release of WW and even moreso with TP. Now I don't think Nintendo has been planning the timeline ever since the 1980s.

 

[Capitaine]

What I was trying to get at, albeit confusingly I'll admit, is that, can something fit into a plan (the timeline) before the concept of it was even created?

People only started theorising the timeline with the release of WW and even moreso with TP. Now I don't think Nintendo has been planning the timeline ever since the 1980s.

The existence of the timeline does not depend on when people start theorising about it; it was there from the beginning, ever since AoL came out continuing LoZ's timeline (and establishing events that took place before LoZ as well). The timeline was especially existent when OoX was released, at which point Miyamoto had already said that the timeline was OoT - ALttP - LoZ/AoL.

 

[JuicieJ]

The existence of the timeline does not depend on when people start theorising about it; it was there from the beginning, ever since AoL came out continuing LoZ's timeline (and establishing events that took place before LoZ as well). The timeline was especially existent when OoX was released, at which point Miyamoto had already said that the timeline was OoT - ALttP - LoZ/AoL.

It was actually OoT--ALttP/LA--LoZ/AoL, but what you said still holds fast. In all reality, though, at the OoX's release, the "timeline" was supposed to look something like this:

....../ALttP/(OoX)/LA--LoZ/AoL
OoT
......\MM

OR

OoT--ALttP/(OoX)/LA--LoZ/AoL
.....\MM

But WW retconned ALttP as a sequel to the adult side of OoT, and OoT was made to not be the Seal War. So, due to that, ALttP was left with no official placement, and still remains so today.