Spoiler How Can TMC Be the Beginning of the Split Timeline?

[DuckNoises]

I tend to see a lot of people automatically place TMC at the beginning of every Zelda Timeline nowadays. I assume that most of this is because that:

• In the prologue to TMC, The Triforce was given to the Hylians by the Minish.
• Link doesn't have a hat in TMC. (Frankly, I do not believe that an absence of attire constitutes irrefutable evidence that no hat was ever previously owned by any Link, ever)
• A quote by Eiji Aounuma seems to imply that it is the first in the split timeline.

The Triforce:
It never directly says when the Minish give the Triforce to the Hylians. After all, the prologue is referring to a Hylian legend that occurred an indeterminable amount of time before the game in question. (Note that this is a point I will reuse in further arguments) The Minish giving the Triforce to the Hylians likely occurs shortly after the creation of Hyrule itself (shown as a legend/cutscene in OoT), but this does not mean that TMC necessarily occurs adjacent to the point in time where the Triforce is given to the Hylians.
The festival at the beginning of TMC is not the one-hundredth anniversary of anything, it is a centennial festival celebrating when the Minish enter the Hylian world. This celebration could be any multiple of 100 years after the portal opened first, (the first of which being presumably when the Minish gave the Triforce to the Hylians) and the festival in TMC is not necessarily the first of said centennial celebration.

Note, also, that every other Zelda game, with the exception of TLoZ, OoT, and ALttP, refers to a pre-existing Hero in some regard. TLoZ obviously does not refer to a prior Hero because a) It was originally intended to be the first game chronologically and b) the NES couldn't support that much text. ALttP is excluded as well, because at the time of its creation, it was also intended to be the first chronologically. OoT is also under similar circumstances as ALttP and TLoZ, because it too, was intended to be the first chronologically. However, I feel that there has yet to be sufficient evidence to debunk OoT as the first game chronologically in the series. I don't think it can be a coincidence that OoT doesn't refer to any pre-existing Hero, era, or severe villainy threatening all of Hyrule in the past.

That brings me forward to the notion of a pre-existing Hero; during the prologue of TMC, it mentions a Hero coming to save Hyrule. This makes me feel that it is highly improbable (although not entirely impossible) that TMC Link is the first Link. Thirdly, it also said that the Hero mentioned in TMC's prologue defeated the Great Evil with wisdom and courage. How could the Triforce of Wisdom and the Triforce of Courage have existed individually before the Triforce was broken into the three fragments in OoT? Surely this cannot just be a play on words.

Moreover, Vaati is searching for the Lightforce (clearly the Triforce), and it is said in-game that part of the Golden Power is inside the royal lineage of Hyrule. This implies that Princess Zelda already has the Triforce of Wisdom, which fits in with the prologue to the game and statements I have made earlier, meaning the Triforce must have already been split into three pieces.

In regards to the phrase "wisdom and courage," there have been several instances where Princess Zelda and Link have both been active in defeating Ganon(dorf) in the final battle; OoT, TWW, and TP -- all instances in which Zelda gives Link the Light Arrows. Essentially, this means that TMC could only occur at any instance after the beginning of each segment of the timeline. Essentially, anywhere else but the very beginning of the entire split timeline, the adult timeline, or the child time line.

The Hat:
The very notion of a hat being evidence for altering the entire Zelda universe is absurd. That is all.

Quotations:
MrMosley just wrote a thread about the Seal War/Imprisoning War, in which he briefly debunks the credibility of quotations about the Zelda Universe. The directors of the games, and the whole notion of the continuity and linearity of the Zelda universe, change entirely with the placement of every new game in the franchise. It is quite unlikely that any quotation made by a game director in regards to the Zelda universe is still accurate. With every new game in the series, the timeline is newly jumbled, and all previous quotations made by Nintendo staff are no longer applicable. This means that, quite simply, we will have to figure it out for ourselves with knowledge from the games, as we are all doing.

This brings me back to my original point; considering all these arguments I have brought forth, how is it that TMC can be the beginning of the split timeline?

At this point, I am left to assume that a) TMC does not belong in the "main" Zelda time line, or b) Its position cannot be determined as of this point in time. I feel similarly about FS and FSA, and all three of these games are exempt from my timeline.

I will post my interpretation of the Zelda timeline in a signature, but please do not comment on it unless a) all discussion of this topic has ceased, everything ever in existence has been clarified, and all is well with everything in the universe or b) an alternate thread specifically regarding my timeline is created.

Also, hello! I just joined the forum today.

 

[Ember Incubus]

(The hat has nothing to do with it. And the Minish brought the Picori blade with them, not the Triforce. > .> When they said Courage and Wisdom, they ment the characteristics, not the actualy sacred triangles.) Well, where TMC is depends on a few other games. First of all, ignoreing MC and ZSS, OoT is first on the timeline. After MM on the child timeline, is TP. It is a highly beleived fact that because of were the Temple of Time is, that ALttP is after TP and OoT. In the GBA version of ALttP, there is the palace of the Four Sword gaurded by four Dark Links. In the end of FSA, Ganon was scealed in the Four Sword, which means that he could have escaped the Palace of the Four Sword and took the trifoce where he was in the same form as before because he still had the Trident. So it is established that MM, TP, FSA, and ALttP are all after OoT. Now, in ZSS, the Master Sword is barely being created, which imediatly puts it before everything prevously mentioned except MC which we are ignoreing for a moment. MC can be anywere except before ZSS and after FSA. In the beggining of MC, it speaks of the Hero of Men who scealed all the evil in a chest using a blade brought from the sky. In ZSS what we know is that Link gets the Skyward sword in Skyloft, then goes down to banish the evil. So people think Link from ZSS is the Hero of Men from MC's prolouge. Which means that MC has to go right after ZSS. The only thing that can go between them is if there is a direct sequal of ZSS, or a direct prequal to MC.

So what we established.
ZSS -> MC -> OoT (Split Child) -> MM -> TP -> FSA -> ALttP

 

[DuckNoises]

Why then, would it have used the exact words 'courage and wisdom?' It can't be mere coincidence. People have based other major theory on the nuances of subtle phrasing; what makes this an exception?
TMC actually says that the Minish brought two gifts to the Hylians, the first being the Triforce, the second being the Picori Blade.

I think the evidence that places OoT at the beginning of the Split Timeline supercedes that of TMC.

I also think it unwise to start placing Skyward Sword in the timeline before it is even released. There could be tons of contradictory evidence within the game itself.

 

[Ventus]

No, they brought the Light Force with them, not the Triforce. What the light force is, I can't say. SS would most likely be first or second, depending on MC's placement. I'm starting to believe that MC is first, though.

@Ember
The Palace is non-canon as far as it goes, the Palace was only introduced as a reward for those who beat FS.

 

[Ember Incubus]

Correction, they brought the Golden Light, which was one triangle, not three. Which is actualy the Light Force.

Update: Ninjaed. > .< As for the Palace, it is made by Miyamoto, so it is canonical. Saying it is a not canoncial is like saying Four Swords is not canonical, which it is.

 

[Ventus]

I never read anything saying that the Palace was canon, but I'm not going to argue, because I'm stupid. I want to know what the Light Force is; is it a breakaway from the Triforce? Is it the Triforce of Wisdom? All these things and more are mysteries of MC that need solving.

 

[Hylian Legend]

Why then, would it have used the exact words 'courage and wisdom?' It can't be mere coincidence. People have based other major theory on the nuances of subtle phrasing; what makes this an exception?
TMC actually says that the Minish brought two gifts to the Hylians, the first being the Triforce, the second being the Picori Blade.

I think the evidence that places OoT at the beginning of the Split Timeline supercedes that of the TMC.

I also think it unwise to start placing Skyward Sword in the timeline before it is even released. There could be tons of contradictory evidence within the game itself.

The owl at the end of LA said Link showed Courage, Wisdom, and Power, and that game had nothing to do with the Triforce.

 

[Ember Incubus]

There are a few theories about the light force. A is that it is the Tetraforce which is the triforce with the missining peice. This is backed by the fact that vaati only had enough time to take part of it until while Link came. B is that it is the Triforce of Wisdom because it is inherited by allthe zeldas. C is that it is the missing peice of the tetraforce, but it has nothing to do with the three other peices. I do not beleive the Tetraforce stuff (, although I am making a game that includes the four triforce peice...), so it is possible that it is the Triforce of Wisdom. I have never heard anything saying that the Palace is NOT canon. Also, you are not stupid.

 

[DuckNoises]

I'm pretty sure it's the Triforce. It has been called many different things in different games, like the Golden Power in ALttP. In fact, it's quite probable that it's been called The Light Force. In the prologue to TMC, it is just called "a golden light." In regards to the shape, Ember, you are right; in the prologue of TMC, it is indeed a single triangle. But the Triforce has also been a single Triangle in several other games. (The prologue can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=db3prLhA1H4&vq=small )

 

[Ventus]

The Tetraforce is NOT in existence, and never was. In fact, TP's Hylian Shield lost the bottom triangle to disprove of that theory. In OoT, the Hylian Shield had the triforce and an eagle along with another triangle at the bottom. Around 2003 with Wind Waker, people started saying that it made the Tetraforce,which Nintendo instantly disproved. I'm pretty 0-10% sure that the Light Force is its own thing, unless it is the Triforce of Wisdom.
Edit: I am stupid, there is evidence everywhere

 

[Ember Incubus]

The only other time the Triforce was not three triangles was in the original LoZ were they did not think of the Triforce of Courage yet. Plus, the only time there was only one triforce was in MC.

 

[DuckNoises]

Just to add to the confusion, I'm replaying TMC right now, which is what made me write this. I've found evidence disproving there only being one Triforce fragment in TMC; atop the bell in Hyrule town, there is a Triforce made of three individual triangles. There is also a three-triangle Triforce above the castle drawbridge, several of them above the entrance to the castle, and, above all, the picture above the stain-glass windows showing the legend where the Minish give "a golden light" to the Hylians. The text, when you read it, says, "The truth about the light force within Princess Zelda is depicted here." This adds further ambiguity; because of the wording, "light force" could refer to the entire Triforce, the Triforce of Wisdom, or the "light force," if it is indeed something separate.

 

[Zemen]

Firstly, welcome. It's nice to see someone so new who can already argue coherently. That's rare around here. I look forward to this conversation and future ones as well. Now for the reason I'm posting.

1. The Light Force is never stated or made obvious that it is the Triforce. If you'll notice, the Triforce symbol is visible in multiple paces throughout MC. It's pretty clear that the Trifroce is a well known item in Hyrule at the time of this game. So, if it's a common symbol then why would everyone throughout the whole game call it the Light Force, not the Triforce? There is no reason that a people who know the item well call it by a name that has never been given to it previously in any other game. There is no reason to believe that the Light Force is the Triforce.

Even if the Light Force was the Triforce that HELPS the argument of MC being first. It would mean that MC has to take place at a time when the name Triforce was not widely used. In every game, the Triforce is ONLY referred to as the Triforce, by name, thus meaning that if MC takes place in a time when the Triforce was only known as the Light Force (because the term Triforce is never used in MC), then it has to take place before OoT when the term Triforce is used by all. Regardless, I don't beleive there is any reason to believe the Light Force is the Triforce.

They have completely different BS'. Triforce was given to the world by the Goddesses and the Light Force was given to the world by the Minish. Completely different.

You laugh at how unimportant hats are, but the game seems to disagree with you. Ezlo is a magical hat for most of the game. The reason Vaati is all powerful is because of a wish granting hat. Link is given a hat at the end of his adventure and the hero in the BS is hatless but still wears a green tunic and we know that the hero in the BS is no known previous Link. The game makes it pretty clear that hats are important so I'm sure that the hero in the BS not having a hat and Link getting one at the end of his adventure isn't just coincedence.

Also, the game never says the hero in the BS used the wisdom and courage Triforce pieces. Only that he battled WITH courage and wisdom. Those are common traits of heroes and there is no real reference to the Triforce.

Also, MC is the only Hyrule based game to not feature or even mention Ganondorf's existence. ST doesn't count because it's part of a series of games in which Ganondorf had previously appeared in. MC has no mentioning of Ganondorf (the greatest threat to Hyrule) and he doesn't even get an easter egg of his existence to be known and MC is not clearly connected to any game that takes place before hand chronologically that did show Ganondorf. This could all mean that Ganondorf had yet to exist during the time of MC.

 

[DuckNoises]

I'm positive that the Triforce has been called other names. Here is proof. Right here, 55 seconds into this video of the GBA prologue to ALttP, the Triforce is referred to as "Golden Power." Although, your point about why it is solely referred to as "light force" has merit.
In this clip, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYMNX3bWz40) Zelda's relation to let's say, Zelda's yellow triangle, (to avoid confusion) is explained as Link gets the Four Sword. Here, Ezlo calls it the light force, whereas the text on the stained glass merely says "golden light." But, to your credit, Vaati does indeed refer to it as the "light force." But whatever the Light Force really is is certainly ambiguous; the image shows Zelda with a single triangle, possibly the Triforce of Wisdom or the "light force." My point here is that there are definitely instances where there are subtle wording differences, which we all seem to agree are of utmost importance. As I stated earlier, MrMosley wrote something about wording changes between the GBA ALttP and the SNES version, which changed people's perception of the time line.
This brings me to my second point again; if wording is so important, then why has everyone but me immediately discarded the possibility that the phrase "wisdom and courage" is something more profound? When I watched the prologue, that stuck out to me like a sore thumb. I don't think we're going to get anywhere if this isn't looked at closely by anyone other than myself.
As to your point about the hat, I will cede that it does have significance, but I still feel it is the least relevant argument.
Lastly, in regards to your final point, that statement is only true considering your interpretation of the events. If you step into my shoes, and look at it from my perspective, your final statement does not apply. In my interpretation, TMC is exempt because I have yet to find adequate (being non-contradictory, in my book) evidence that places it before OoT. If TMC were in my time line, it would mean that it is also exempt from references of Ganondorf for the same reasons you stated for ST.

 

[Zeruda]

I'm not necessarily going to argue against TMC being before or after OoT. What I would like to point out is that the text that said "with wisdom and courage" does not say that the hero had the Triforce of Wisdom and/or Courage, it merely states that he was both wise and courageous. I think it's okay to assume or theorize the possibility of him having the ToW/C, but there is not enough evidence to make it a fact that he had either piece. It can equally be argued that he had the ToW/C just as it can be argued that he was just wise and courageous. So, I don't think that line has much leverage....