Do You Think That LoZ and AoL Could Fit on the AT?

[TwilightKing]

Honestly.... NO. Well yes and no LoZ and AoL have to be on the AT because the towns in AoL are named after the sages who would never be awakened in the CT but they can't go in between PH and ST because why would Zelda specifically prat to Tetra if she wasn't the princess prior to then and 100 years isn't exactly enogh for two quests.

 

[kaimason1]

Except these quests are back-to-back, are they not? So really, one more Link in that hundred years, which still doesn't work. It might (*might*) work before the Great Flood, but that is contradicted by WW's backstory. They could not fit before OoT because LoZ has Ganon and AoL has towns named after the sages. As I now have convinced myself, they do belong on the AT due to the naming situation, so either the Great Sea receded, a completely possible situation, or they occurred in another region of New Hyrule than Spirit Tracks, also a hypothesis which has not been denied by other evidence other than Death Mountain's existence, which is not necessarily the same as OoT's Death Mountain. I'm guessing Skyward Sword could easily provide more answers, however, which we don't have at the moment, as to the nature of the Triforce.

 

[Faedeur]

I think there is a possibility they take place in the AT. Only many ages after ST in another part of the world (NOT New Hyrule). The locations (Death Mountain, Lost Woods, etc) can easily have had their names passed on from ancient times, or simply named such (coincidentally) due to the nature of the locations (ie. A dangerous and deadly mountain... Death Mountain? A forest in which you get lost... Lost Woods?). If we look at the locations of TLOZ/TAOL Hyrule, they don't match up with any other Zelda game, meaning they are a new location beyond what we see in all the other games. It is possible, however unlikely, that it was discovered/settled by people from New Hyrule many many ages after ST.

While it is a stretch, TLOZ and TAOL soom oddly placed no matter where they are in either end of the timeline. So it is all speculation.

 

[Satsy]

fadeur: They can't take place on the AT if they don't take place in a Hyrule, since that's where they're set. And since one's sunk and the other you've just excluded that means you're now coming up with a third land-mass with a Princess called Zelda that can be called Hyrule with all the trimmings of old Hyrule? That seems less feasible than just sticking them in New Hyrule and trying to work time in as a factor. If that's what you're saying, you should probably make that a little clearer since that isn't what I read.

Curiously of all the current Hyrule maps, ST probably has some of the closest placements to AoL's map. So long as you turn the map some, anyway. Also, the two first games don't have some specific landmarks that Zelda games since LttP have had (including a set Hyrule Castle, Kakariko village, Zora's domain (near as I can tell). Considering ST does contain a particularly hazardous mountain, and many woods where you can get lost, what means those weren't renamed after some time had passed?

As for the town names/sages, I'm quite sure those are a red herring. After all isn't there a town in Zelda 2 called Mido? He wasn't a sage, so why would his name have been passed on? Like how Malon was a cameo of Marin, it's not wise to put too much stock into naming conventions.

 

[MonkeyFightSquad]

I think Ganon doesn't really ever die; instead, he is banished over and over again back into the Dark World / Sacred Realm for 100 years at a time. I also think LoZ and AoL take place thousands of years after WW / TP, by which point New Hyrule could have easily been changed back to Hyrule. The Triforce could easily have returned to New Hyrule, and the Triforce of Courage could easily have been lost. Therefore, I think it's perfectly possible, and trying to place the two on either timeline is futile.

that is what i think.gannon just gets sealed in the dark world over and over againo.o

 

[Faedeur]

fadeur: They can't take place on the AT if they don't take place in a Hyrule, since that's where they're set. And since one's sunk and the other you've just excluded that means you're now coming up with a third land-mass with a Princess called Zelda that can be called Hyrule with all the trimmings of old Hyrule? That seems less feasible than just sticking them in New Hyrule and trying to work time in as a factor. If that's what you're saying, you should probably make that a little clearer since that isn't what I read.

Initially, I was thinking that TLOZ and TAOL Hyrule were a different land mass than what is seen in ST. That perhaps in the ensueing ages, something happens between ST and TLOZ (possibly another game) and it forces the people of New Hyrule to explore/discover a new Hyrule. But as I have no evidence to suggest stuff, I'm kinda stuck. But what you said below intrigues me.

Curiously of all the current Hyrule maps, ST probably has some of the closest placements to AoL's map. So long as you turn the map some, anyway. Also, the two first games don't have some specific landmarks that Zelda games since LttP have had (including a set Hyrule Castle, Kakariko village, Zora's domain (near as I can tell). Considering ST does contain a particularly hazardous mountain, and many woods where you can get lost, what means those weren't renamed after some time had passed?

Can you provide me a turned map of ST to show how the two maps are similar? I've only rarely seen the ST map, and this interests me to see how it is similar to TAOL's map.

As for the town names/sages, I'm quite sure those are a red herring. After all isn't there a town in Zelda 2 called Mido? He wasn't a sage, so why would his name have been passed on? Like how Malon was a cameo of Marin, it's not wise to put too much stock into naming conventions.

Good point. Though still, if we were to look at the towns (that had the same names as the sages) as being named after the sages, it only makes sense that they would go in the AT, as in the CT the sages weren't Darunia, Saria, Ruto, Nabooru, etc. They were more likely the glowing spirit-like guys from TP. As for Mido and Kasuto... I got nothing :/

 

[JuicieJ]

Curiously of all the current Hyrule maps, ST probably has some of the closest placements to AoL's map. So long as you turn the map some, anyway. Also, the two first games don't have some specific landmarks that Zelda games since LttP have had (including a set Hyrule Castle, Kakariko village, Zora's domain (near as I can tell). Considering ST does contain a particularly hazardous mountain, and many woods where you can get lost, what means those weren't renamed after some time had passed?

Really, I don't think that means anything. Using a mountain and a "Lost Woods" type area in a Zelda game isn't an uncommon thing. Both of these were used in Termina and Kolohint, and those aren't Hyrule by any means. And when geological features are added into future games, that means they're part of the landscape of Hyrule. It's a retcon of the map. In reality, the towns and other geological features would be in the Hyrule of the original games. They just weren't thought of yet when they were made.

 

[Satsy]

Really, I don't think that means anything. Using a mountain and a "Lost Woods" type area in a Zelda game isn't an uncommon thing. Both of these were used in Termina and Kolohint, and those aren't Hyrule by any means.

... well exactly. That's my point. They are the only landmarks that connect Loz/AoL to the other Zelda games at all, and don't have the benefit of the many others that came after. So effectively the games could be placed after ST.

And when geological features are added into future games, that means they're part of the landscape of Hyrule. It's a retcon of the map. In reality, the towns and other geological features would be in the Hyrule of the original games. They just weren't thought of yet when they were made.

The timeline itself wasn't thought of when the first 4 games were made. However now they're trying to tie them all together, you know this. It's clear from the lack of touching upon the subject that wherever the classic games were once laid out is very much thrown to question, and if they've been placed no olive branch has extended to it yet.

For what it's worth, however, both to you JuiceJ and Fadeur, I don't subscribe to this idea, because of other very significant factors that make it infeasible at this stage: The Triforce and Ganon. These are things that do not exist in Spirit Tracks and were prevented from being bound to New Hyrule after the events of Wind Waker. Whether or not the ST map (http://legendzelda.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/spirit-tracks-rabbit-locations-map.png) truly can match up or not could be entirely pointless unless there's a (good) explanation for how these two significant series points became tied into the new Hyrule once more.