My Zelda Timeline Theory

[Alucard]

Three years ago, I posted this Zelda timeline theory on a previous account:

At the time, I had not yet beaten every Zelda game, so I excluded most of them (you'll notice that Minish Cap, Four Swords, Zelda II: The Adventure of Link, Link's Awakening, Breath of the Wild, and a few others are not included here)

Having beat all the games except for Four Swords (although I do understand the story), I thought it would be good to update this timeline.

Skyward Sword is obviously first; it is so far back in time that it has become legend by the other games. Then, hundreds, thousands, maybe even millions of years later comes the events preceding Minish Cap, which show a young man who looks very similar to Link defeating the monsters with the Picori Sword and sealing them in the Bound Chest. Then, 100 years later, Minish Cap occurs, and Vaati is defeated. At some point in the timeline after Minish Cap, the other Four Swords adventures occur, and Vaati is eventually defeated by the Four Links for good.

Ocarina of Time comes at least 100 years after Minish Cap, and a Civil War comes around 10 years before the events of the game, in which a baby Link is taken by his mother to the Kokiri Forest. Ultimately, the war continues on until Link is able to leave. (I'm not gonna disclose exactly how old Link is because this always gets people mad, but he's obviously older than 8 but younger than 12 in my opinion). Then comes Ocarina of Time when Link leaves the forest, meets Zelda, and goes through time with the Master Sword to defeat Ganondorf. At the end of the game, Zelda plays the Ocarina of Time to send Link back in time to live his childhood and stop Ganondorf before he could destroy Hyrule.

This is the "controversial" part that is gonna make people really mad. Back in the late 2000's, there was a battle between two groups of Zelda fans over the timeline (this was before the Hyrule Historia timeline massacre of 2011). It was between "Splitists," and ""Linearists," (more information here, https://youtu.be/cHIP9UtkQDQ). While the Splitists ultimately won the war, I personally believe that the "official" timeline was thrown together in the last minute and they did in fact have a timeline idea, but it wasn't that. This is just sort of what I think the timeline would really be/what I always thought of it as when I was little (I've been playing Zelda since I was 3-4). And in my personal opinion of the timeline, it is linear, or non-splitting (please don't @ me ).

So yeah, the timeline from here on does not split. I am very sorry.

So, the "Adult Timeline" is cancelled out when Link is sent back in time. He now has the Triforce of Courage, and nows Ganon's weakness. Though he is only a young boy, he has the skills and experience of an adult from his adventure. At some point later, Link goes after Navi in the Lost Woods, and the events of Majora's Mask occur.

After that, a war breaks out between Hyrule and the Allied Races (Deku, Goron, Zora), and the Gerudo. Link fights and loses his eye in the war, becoming the Hero's Shade. Ganondorf is excecuted by mysterious six sages (I don't personally think that they are the same sages seen in Ocarina of Time, but more similar to the Seven Wise Men of A Link to the Past, which we'll get to eventually). So, then at least another 100 years later, Twilight Princess happens and Ganondorf and Zant try to take over Hyrule, but Link, with help of Midna. stops them and defeats Ganondorf again. He gets sealed and the Master Sword is put in Hyrule Castle. These events of Link defeating Ganon become legend after some time.

When Ganon returns again, the people expect Link to be there to stop him. But, a Link is nowhere to be found. Ganon takes over, and the people pray to the Goddesses that they will be saved. A great rain begins, and rises the oceans, flooding Hyrule. Then, a hundred years after the flood, and two-hundred years after Twilight Princess, Wind Waker occurs. After, Link and Zelda survive but Ganondorf is sealed with the Master Sword leagues beneath the ocean, along with the Triforce.

So, the next part may also be seen as kind of controversial. Bear with me.

Phantom Hourglass shows the pirates searching around for new land. Sometime after, they do find a new land dubbed New Hyrule, and then comes Spirit Tracks. However, I've honestly heard a lot of people say that these games suck and are the worst duology of Zelda games ever made, and shouldn't be counted. If you're one of those people, please just bear with me for a moment.

Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks occur, and a new, safe Hyrule is established. Sometime after that, another Link descendant is called upon by the Goddesses to go to the lands of Holodrum and Labrynna, and save the Oracles from Onox and Veran; later revealed to be servants of a newly revived Ganon (additionally, the artwork of the Oracles also show a unused Ganondorf. Unlike his obese Wind Waker appearance, this Ganondorf is skinny, as if he'd been at sea for years and lived off only fish. Make of that what you will).

And if you are one of those people who hates the DS games, this is for you. After Wind Waker, Link and Zelda pray to the Goddesses for the flood to recede, and eventually, by some unknown means, it does, and Hyrule is restored. Hyrule is re-established, and Tetra/Zelda's descendants become the royal family again.

However, Hyrule is not alone, there is also a land called Holodrum (which always reminded me of the Benelux countries, Belgium, Nederland, and Luxembourg, due to their floodgates and whatnot, and the arcitecture and clothing of the villages/villagers always seemed West European to me); as well as the land of Labrynna (which seems like France to me; there's even a giant tower which is basically en evil version of the Eiffel Tower).

Generations after Wind Waker, young Link, who is from Hyrule, is called upon by the Goddesses to save the Oracles, Nayru and Din, and stop Ganon's forces once again. In the end, Link defeats Onox and Veran, and Ganon is revived.

Whether you care about the DS games or not, the Oracle Series happens, ending with the defeat of Ganon. After that, Link sets sail and defeats the Nightmares (who I believe to be Vaati) during the events of Link's Awakening.

After at least another hundred years, a great war known as the Imprisoning War occurs in Hyrule, in which the knights of Hyrule face off against Ganon and his armies. Ganon obtains the Triforce and becomes very powerful, so the Knights of Hyrule team up with the Seven Wise Men and kill Ganon, sealing him in the Golden Land. Unfortunately, since he has the Triforce, Ganon transforms the Golden Land into the Dark World. Nevertheless, peace ensues in Hyrule

Sahasrahla mentions that this war happened three or four generations ago. A generation is generally considered to be around 25-33 years, so we can assume that this war happened almost exactly one hundred years before A Link to the Past. Then comes the game. In the end Link defeats Ganon and uses the Triforce to revive everyone who was injured by the monsters, and to destroy the Dark World. The Master Sword is put back in the Lost Woods, and it does in fact sleep forever.

Unfortunately, Ganon does not.

The events of the Legend of Zelda and Zelda II: The Adventure of Link happen after that. In these games, Zelda and Ganon have the Triforces of Wisdom and Power, respectively. Zelda gets kidnapped by Ganon, so she splits the Triforce into eight pieces and spreads out throughout Hyrule. Link, with help of some cave-dwelling elderly people, and uh, Hagrid from Harry Potter? (https://zelda.fandom.com/wiki/Merchant), Link makes it through eight levels, fighting monsters and obtaining the Triforce of Wisdom pieces. In the end, he goes to Death Mountain and fights Ganon, defeating him and taking his Triforce of Power. He then saves Zelda. 2 out of the 3 Triforce Pieces are now in the hands of good.

A bit later, Zelda is placed under a sleeping spell by the armies of Ganon, led by Dark Link, one of Ganon's top generals. To save her, Link will need the Triforce of Courage in order to have all three pieces, so he can wish her awake. To do this, Link has to explore a different area of Hyrule, and place six crystals on six monster-guarded alters throughout Hyrule in order to break the barrier in the Valley of Death, and take on Dark Link, who took the Old Man hostage (the Old Man has the Triforce of Courage, so who knows, maybe he's a past Link?). Link makes his way through, and defeats Dark Link. With all three pieces, he wakes up Zelda.

Then, after that, thousands of years pass, and Breath of the Wild happens. So, the end, for now.

And that's my theory. Let me know what you think.

 

[Moblinking5000]

This is the "controversial" part that is gonna make people really mad. Back in the late 2000's, there was a battle between two groups of Zelda fans over the timeline (this was before the Hyrule Historia timeline massacre of 2011). It was between "Splitists," and ""Linearists," (more information here, https://youtu.be/cHIP9UtkQDQ). While the Splitists ultimately won the war, I personally believe that the "official" timeline was thrown together in the last minute and they did in fact have a timeline idea, but it wasn't that. This is just sort of what I think the timeline would really be/what I always thought of it as when I was little (I've been playing Zelda since I was 3-4). And in my personal opinion of the timeline, it is linear, or non-splitting (please don't @ me ).

So yeah, the timeline from here on does not split. I am very sorry.

Some major problems here:

1) The Split Timeline was confirmed around TWW's release, and it was even apparent upon OoT's release; the ending of the game shows the Adult Timeline continuing to exist after Link is sent back(the party at Lon Lon Ranch celebrating Ganon's downfall or the Awakened Sages hanging out on Death Mountain for example).

2) The HH/ZE timeline has had almost all of its placements confirmed ingame, through supplementary materials, and/or interviews for years, ever since Zelda 2 was released, not to mention that Nintendo continues to officially push it to this day, such as the official Japanese Twitter and Official JP and US sites. Pretty sure that's a good indicator that it's canoncity should be taken seriously.

3) Do you have any logical reasoning to back up WHY you think the timeline is linear?

After that, a war breaks out between Hyrule and the Allied Races (Deku, Goron, Zora), and the Gerudo. Link fights and loses his eye in the war, becoming the Hero's Shade. Ganondorf is excecuted by mysterious six sages (I don't personally think that they are the same sages seen in Ocarina of Time, but more similar to the Seven Wise Men of A Link to the Past, which we'll get to eventually). So, then at least another 100 years later, Twilight Princess happens and Ganondorf and Zant try to take over Hyrule, but Link, with help of Midna. stops them and defeats Ganondorf again. He gets sealed and the Master Sword is put in Hyrule Castle. These events of Link defeating Ganon become legend after some time.

Considering that the Hero's Shade is not remembered as a hero, it seems unlikely that he fought against Ganondorf prior to TP.

When Ganon returns again, the people expect Link to be there to stop him. But, a Link is nowhere to be found. Ganon takes over, and the people pray to the Goddesses that they will be saved. A great rain begins, and rises the oceans, flooding Hyrule. Then, a hundred years after the flood, and two-hundred years after Twilight Princess, Wind Waker occurs. After, Link and Zelda survive but Ganondorf is sealed with the Master Sword leagues beneath the ocean, along with the Triforce.

Don't you find it odd that prior to TWW's backstory, Ganon was sealed, not killed as he was in TP, and that the Hero of Time(the title given to OoT Link, NOT TP Link) was the one that had a hand in it? Isn't it a bit crazy that the events of OoT(especially events from the adult part, such as the Hero of Time defeating and sealing Ganon and the Awakened Sages being remembered as seen in the stained glass windows of Hyrule Castle despite your timeline outright DELETING these events from existence) are given such prominence, especially how it is specifically the OoT seal that Ganon escapes from prior to TWW, leading to The Great Flood with no reference to TP whatsoever and not leaving much room between the Hero of Time sealing Ganon and The Great Flood for other conflicts with Ganon?

Also, Daphnes wishes for Ganon's demise with Hyrule, and we know from SS that Triforce Wishes annihilate Demon Kings permanently, and HH says that it's the end of the cyclic battle for the Triforce on that timeline(and Ganon is always one of the major players in games that focus on the Triforce aside from SS where he wasn't born yet), so Ganon is permanently gone at the end of TWW, leaving room for New Hyrule to have new villains like Cole and Malladus.

After Wind Waker, Link and Zelda pray to the Goddesses for the flood to recede, and eventually, by some unknown means, it does, and Hyrule is restored. Hyrule is re-established, and Tetra/Zelda's descendants become the royal family again.

That would complete destroy the message of TWW's ending, for one, and also, how do you know anyone would even remember Old Hyrule? No one seems to do so in ST. Even ''New Hyrule'' is called ''Hyrule'' in game.

Whether you care about the DS games or not, the Oracle Series happens, ending with the defeat of Ganon. After that, Link sets sail and defeats the Nightmares (who I believe to be Vaati) during the events of Link's Awakening.

What evidence do you have that Vaati is any of the Nightmares? Also, how do you explain the fact that one of the Nightmares appear in the shape of Agahnim from ALttP?

After at least another hundred years, a great war known as the Imprisoning War occurs in Hyrule, in which the knights of Hyrule face off against Ganon and his armies. Ganon obtains the Triforce and becomes very powerful, so the Knights of Hyrule team up with the Seven Wise Men and kill Ganon, sealing him in the Golden Land.

Ganon isn't killed prior to ALttP; he's just sealed with the Triforce, as you said. Also, Golden Land is a product of early localization; the JP version refers to it as the Sacred Realm, as does HH and ZE.

A bit later, Zelda is placed under a sleeping spell by the armies of Ganon, led by Dark Link, one of Ganon's top generals. To save her, Link will need the Triforce of Courage in order to have all three pieces, so he can wish her awake. To do this, Link has to explore a different area of Hyrule, and place six crystals on six monster-guarded alters throughout Hyrule in order to break the barrier in the Valley of Death, and take on Dark Link, who took the Old Man hostage (the Old Man has the Triforce of Courage, so who knows, maybe he's a past Link?). Link makes his way through, and defeats Dark Link. With all three pieces, he wakes up Zelda.

This is wrong; the Zelda 2 backstory explains that the Zelda in this game is a different one from the first game, and she was placed to sleep long before the events of the NES games. She also wasn't placed under this spell by the Eyes of Ganon, but by a wizard who was under orders from the prince. Also, Link's Shadow was created in Link's image to serve as a final test to prove his worth for the ToC as per HH or ZE IIRC; he isn't a follower of Ganon.

Some more questions:

-Where is A Link Between Worlds and Tri Force Heroes?

-It's a bit odd that FSA Ganon never pops up in any games after FSA, isn't it, despite the fact that you have countless games after? Wouldn't the King of Hyrule in OoT be wary of trusting OoT Ganondorf?

-How does Ganondorf get the ToP back between TP and TWW?

-Can you explain the Triforce placement between TWW and the Oracle games? Or between the Oracle games and ALttP?

 

[thePlinko]

Literally the entire point of the ending of OoT was that there was a split timeline.

Literally the entire catalyst of WW was the fact that there was a split timeline.

Literally the entire reason MM can exist is because there is a split timeline.

This is not a debatable point, its an objective fact.

This is not some timeline Nintendo cobbled together because of the fans making a theory because there was no theory. The idea of a split timeline has been completely canon since 1998.

I said this already in the SB, but trying to pretend that there isn’t a split timeline is the Zelda fandom equivalent of being a flat earther, though even round earth was a theory that had to be proven first. Split timeline has been definitively canon in the fandom ever since the first person beat OoT.

It’s one thing to not like certain aspects of the timeline. It’s another thing entirely to completely ignore entire major plot points because you don’t like them.

 

[Mikey the Moblin]

Did you know there's an official timeline

 

[GZ Zelda]

The HH/ZE timeline has had almost all of its placements confirmed ingame

We all agree that the split timeline was officially confirmed to explain how MM and WW both happened, but it is not true that the current timeline has been confirmed using in-game evidence (and the theory doesn't take the canonicity of HH, ZE or dev interviews as a given).

Considering that the Hero's Shade is not remembered as a hero, it seems unlikely that he fought against Ganondorf prior to TP.

This is contrary to in-game evidence. The Hero's Shade says "Although I accepted life as the hero, I could not convey the lessons of that life to those who came after." At last, I have eased my regrets" which suggests that a) he was considered a hero and b) There were others who came after.

Also, Daphnes wishes for Ganon's demise with Hyrule, and we know from SS that Triforce Wishes annihilate Demon Kings permanently, and HH says that it's the end of the cyclic battle for the Triforce on that timeline(and Ganon is always one of the major players in games that focus on the Triforce aside from SS where he wasn't born yet), so Ganon is permanently gone at the end of TWW, leaving room for New Hyrule to have new villains like Cole and Malladus.

Daphnes only wishes for the erasure of Hyrule, but, as I've argued plenty before, Hyrule is not erased (the new kingdom is literally called New Hyrule with an identical political structure...and the Great Deku Tree has specific goals to resurrect the buried kingdom (believe me, I spent hours helping him execute his plan).

Also, to the SS point, there are a significant amount of shenanigans going on with generated time loops and transient matter, and Link doesn't actually eradicate Demise within the timeline (considering Ghirahim is able to travel back in time (within the same timeline) to resurrect Demise).

However, the TP before WW thing is not very defensible, especially as it doesn't account for the missing hero in the opening to Wind Waker.

That would complete destroy the message of TWW's ending, for one, and also, how do you know anyone would even remember Old Hyrule? No one seems to do so in ST. Even ''New Hyrule'' is called ''Hyrule'' in game.

Spirit Tracks already destroys Wind Waker's ending; having the Great Deku Tree's plan work out which continues Demise's cycle is more thematically consistent with the rest of the series anyhow.

What evidence do you have that Vaati is any of the Nightmares? Also, how do you explain the fact that one of the Nightmares appear in the shape of Agahnim from ALttP?

This is because DethI and Vaati have almost identical designs, suggesting, at the very least, a similar magic use.

As for LA coming before ALttP, that also isn't very defensible, especially if we are to take packaged manuals into account (which I generally do to canonize elements from Z1 and Z2). However, LA's manual says "Though you fulfilled the Hyrulean prophecy of the Legendary Hero and destroyed the evil tyrant Ganon" and Oracle of Seasons' manual points out Zelda's prophetic abilities, so that might explain the discrepancy. Also, Agunima, a mini-boss from OoS I believe, takes the same shape as Agahnim and that game comes before LA in this timeline.

 

[thePlinko]

We all agree that the split timeline was officially confirmed to explain how MM and WW both happened, but it is not true that the current timeline has been confirmed using in-game evidence (and the theory doesn't take the canonicity of HH, ZE or dev interviews as a given).

The split time was made before the idea of a sequel to OoT was even thought about. It wasn’t created to “explain” anything.

This is contrary to in-game evidence. The Hero's Shade says "Although I accepted life as the hero, I could not convey the lessons of that life to those who came after." At last, I have eased my regrets" which suggests that a) he was considered a hero and

He accepted the life of a hero. That’s completely different from being considered a hero afterwards.

b) There were others who came after.

Because it’s completely unheard of for there to be more than one swordsman in a generation. Nobody can possibly wield a sword other than the hero.

Daphnes only wishes for the erasure of Hyrule, but, as I've argued plenty before, Hyrule is not erased (the new kingdom is literally called New Hyrule with an identical political structure...and the Great Deku Tree has specific goals to resurrect the buried kingdom (believe me, I spent hours helping him execute his plan).

You clearly misunderstand the entire point of the ending of WW if you think that “naming a new kingdom after the old one” means it’s the exact same as old Hyrule.

Also, to the SS point, there are a significant amount of shenanigans going on with generated time loops and transient matter, and Link doesn't actually eradicate Demise within the timeline (considering Ghirahim is able to travel back in time (within the same timeline) to resurrect Demise).

How would killing him in the present get rid of him in the past?

Spirit Tracks already destroys Wind Waker's ending; having the Great Deku Tree's plan work out which continues Demise's cycle is more thematically consistent with the rest of the series anyhow.

This statement alone proves that you didn’t understand a single aspect of WWs ending.

 

[Moblinking5000]

We all agree that the split timeline was officially confirmed to explain how MM and WW both happened, but it is not true that the current timeline has been confirmed using in-game evidence (and the theory doesn't take the canonicity of HH, ZE or dev interviews as a given).

The split was confirmed in game in 1998 as I and thePlinko said above. And alot of the placements and such were confirmed either in game, interviews, and supplementary materials before HH.

This is contrary to in-game evidence. The Hero's Shade says "Although I accepted life as the hero, I could not convey the lessons of that life to those who came after." At last, I have eased my regrets" which suggests that a) he was considered a hero and b) There were others who came after.

Yeah, he did accept life as the hero...in the AT, which doesn't necessarily mean that he reestablished himself as one in the CT. The fact that he couldn't pass on his lessons is evidence that he wasn't remembered.

Daphnes only wishes for the erasure of Hyrule, but, as I've argued plenty before, Hyrule is not erased (the new kingdom is literally called New Hyrule with an identical political structure...and the Great Deku Tree has specific goals to resurrect the buried kingdom (believe me, I spent hours helping him execute his plan).

The kingdom isn't actually called ''New Hyrule''. It's just called ''Hyrule''. ''New Hyrule'' is just a helpful fanon term to differentiate ST Hyrule from the Hyrule in the other games.

Also, to the SS point, there are a significant amount of shenanigans going on with generated time loops and transient matter, and Link doesn't actually eradicate Demise within the timeline (considering Ghirahim is able to travel back in time (within the same timeline) to resurrect Demise).

The fact that he had to go back in time to revive Demise is proof that the wish destroyed Demise permanently in the present.

Spirit Tracks already destroys Wind Waker's ending; having the Great Deku Tree's plan work out which continues Demise's cycle is more thematically consistent with the rest of the series anyhow.

Demise's cycle DOES continue, though(yes even without Ganon; you don't need him to continue the cycle)

This is because DethI and Vaati have almost identical designs, suggesting, at the very least, a similar magic use.

So because they have a giant eye? So does Kholdstare, Vitreous, and all the Gohmas of the world.

Also, Agahnim's Shadow is the official name given to the Nightmare form in LA, not Agunima's Shadow.

 

[GZ Zelda]

He accepted the life of a hero. That’s completely different from being considered a hero afterwards.

I mean he never says that he wasn't considered a hero afterwards. Even if I were a splitist, the idea that the man who provided the information that eventually led to Ganondorf's sealing and who formed a close personal bond with Princess Zelda and who ended up dying in combat with his soldier's armor and his eye cut out and was not considered a hero would be preposterous.

You clearly misunderstand the entire point of the ending of WW if you think that “naming a new kingdom after the old one” means it’s the exact same as old Hyrule.

Daphnes wants them to create a new land, "it will be yours" he says. But it isn't theirs. The Land of the Spirits of Good is not Link or Zelda's: it is, as Moblinking points out, still called Hyrule. Tetra could have said, "wow, the Land of the Spirits of Good sure is a good name, and my dad did wish upon the actual Triforce for the erasure of Hyrule so let's leave it." But instead she said "I'mma go against all of that and set up an identical system to the Hyrule we just left and that is now literally under the sea, that's the whole point of what happened two games ago, right?" It still has the monarchy, the same races, the same demon king, the same clothes with the same Triforce pattern, the same "Force" in the force gems, the same seven sages except this time they have little cars. Daphnes' wish, to destroy Hyrule, erase Hyrule, did NOT come true.

How would killing him in the present get rid of him in the past?

Idk i guess i thought that the "wish for the destruction of Demise" part would, like, destroy Demise. But then Demise comes back. That's all that I'm saying.

Yeah, he did accept life as the hero...in the AT, which doesn't necessarily mean that he reestablished himself as one in the CT. The fact that he couldn't pass on his lessons is evidence that he wasn't remembered.

He accepted the life of the hero of Termina, and he didn't learn any of the sword techniques we saw him use in TP in OoT or MM (dude was legit 17 and picked up a sword, like, a couple months before ultimately winning). I get that's for gameplay reasons, but it just seems silly that a man who died in military clothing didn't train anybody in how to use a sword.

The kingdom isn't actually called ''New Hyrule''. It's just called ''Hyrule''. ''New Hyrule'' is just a helpful fanon term to differentiate ST Hyrule from the Hyrule in the other games.

This supports my point....It's not even a New Hyrule. All Daphnes did was sink the old land of Hyrule that had really only been around for one game. It's so bleeeh.

The fact that he had to go back in time to revive Demise is proof that the wish destroyed Demise permanently in the present.

But I don't understand why Demise wasn't also destroyed in the past. Unless the Zelda universe uses cause-and-effect physics, which is my argument.

Demise's cycle DOES continue, though(yes even without Ganon; you don't need him to continue the cycle)

Malladus is not part of Demise's curse. He happens the first time before Spirit Tracks, during the events of Wind Waker or PH, or maybe even before that. Spirit Tracks has insane lore that doesn't make any sense and is bad and it should be cast off with Tri Force Heroes into the bin of non-canon. Nintendo makes Spirit Tracks not canon and the linear timeline theory falls apart, we save Wind Waker's ending, and I never have to think about using the Spirit Flute ever again.

So because they have a giant eye? So does Kholdstare, Vitreous, and all the Gohmas of the world.

A giant, malice-colored, central-eyed, two-pronged boss with immense transmutation powers? Looking at characteristics, both of magic used and phenotypic traits: Kholdstare and Frostare are probably the same species, Vitreous is an evolved Chuchu eye, and Gohmas are crab-spiders that evolved when a cute little crab spider couple experienced speciation in the Silent Realm trials.

This statement alone proves that you didn’t understand a single aspect of WWs ending.

"The old Hyrule, the evil and the traditions, and the rituals and the land need to GO and we need to rebuild from there. You, future generation, need to make a new land that is your own. That isn't tied to the Deku Tree, or Hyrule, or the demon king and his tyranny." That's my read, I might be reading wrong, but that's what I took away from the game. It's my favorite part of Wind Waker, it was beautiful, I love it, the message is perfect, it makes me cry.

But, and I guess this is my fault for playing Spirit Tracks VC b4 buying Wind Waker HD, I already knew that the ending that the game just promised me was not how the story (and later, I would learn, the ENTIRE timeline) would end. It just seems perverted to me that Tetra would ever build a castle to rule from. And so, maybe the ultimate message was that old habits die hard, and I would like to have some belief that, if the Great Deku Tree wants something to happen, he can make it happen. And Hyrule coming back in Spirit Tracks does ultimately negate the point of the Wind Waker's ending for me, which was my favorite part of the game, so it would make more sense for the themes to connect it to the lessons of the downfall timeline: that this cycle is endless; even a flood cannot rat out evil, and so it is up to the courageous heroes and the wise leaders to stop a never-ending tyranny.

 

[thePlinko]

"The old Hyrule, the evil and the traditions, and the rituals and the land need to GO and we need to rebuild from there. You, future generation, need to make a new land that is your own. That isn't tied to the Deku Tree, or Hyrule, or the demon king and his tyranny." That's my read, I might be reading wrong, but that's what I took away from the game. It's my favorite part of Wind Waker, it was beautiful, I love it, the message is perfect, it makes me cry.

But, and I guess this is my fault for playing Spirit Tracks VC b4 buying Wind Waker HD, I already knew that the ending that the game just promised me was not how the story (and later, I would learn, the ENTIRE timeline) would end. It just seems perverted to me that Tetra would ever build a castle to rule from. And so, maybe the ultimate message was that old habits die hard, and I would like to have some belief that, if the Great Deku Tree wants something to happen, he can make it happen. And Hyrule coming back in Spirit Tracks does ultimately negate the point of the Wind Waker's ending for me, which was my favorite part of the game, so it would make more sense for the themes to connect it to the lessons of the downfall timeline: that this cycle is endless; even a flood cannot rat out evil, and so it is up to the courageous heroes and the wise leaders to stop a never-ending tyranny.

The entire point of WW in canon was to let go of past mistakes, and that is exactly what they did in ST. The fact that there’s another conflict makes literally no difference because “New” Hyrule is ultimately a completely different place, that definitively does have a different government. It has no ties to old WW aside from the fact that the royal government was founded by the person who found the continent, one who just happened to take part in the destruction of old Hyrule. There’s no Triforce, no Master Sword, a villain that has no more connection to Ganon than Majora does, natives that have never even heard of the concept of Hyrule. There’s no mention of anything that even happened in previous titles outside of the fact that Niko is somehow alive and remembers the old hero. The entire world has moved on and left old Hyrule behind.

Its called Hyrule, so the hell what? How does that make it any similar to old Hyrule? Is New York City the same thing as York, England? Is New Zealand the same place as Zeeland, Denmark? You can name a place after another place without it being the exact same place.

That’s also not the entire story. Ultimately WWs ending has always been a commentary on moving on from OoT in general. OoT was amazing, but we can’t keep pretending that we can’t do anything better than that. Saying that ST somehow ruined that when if anything it went even further with that concept than even WW did proves that you did not understand the ending of WW.

 

[Ryuu Kage Desu]

I think the closest anyone will get to a linear timeline, is by that of an outside observer, although it still involves a split. I've proposed, before, that the natural events of Ocarina of Time is that Link has no chance of wining: no time travel shenanigans. Link dies, leading to the downfall timeline. At the end of it, the Triforce wish wasn't just to bring back Zelda, but involved a way for her not to have died to begin with, ending that time line, and altering the events of the past, creating the Ocarina of Time we play through. Sending Link back, at the end still creates a split, as I mentioned.

I'm a fan of complexity, as well as simplicity. Unfortunately, every no split theory I have read, seems like they try to jump through complex hoops to simplify something that doesn't need to be simplified. It may be the sci-fi fan in me, but I don't see the appeal in trying fit the series into one, straight, timeline.

 

[GZ Zelda]

The entire world has moved on and left old Hyrule behind.

Its called Hyrule, so the hell what? How does that make it any similar to old Hyrule? Is New York City the same thing as York, England? Is New Zealand the same place as Zeeland, Denmark? You can name a place after another place without it being the exact same place.

That’s also not the entire story. Ultimately WWs ending has always been a commentary on moving on from OoT in general. OoT was amazing, but we can’t keep pretending that we can’t do anything better than that. Saying that ST somehow ruined that when if anything it went even further with that concept than even WW did proves that you did not understand the ending of WW.

Maybe I don't understand the ending of WW. I've devalued ST because it doesn't change the issues that led to Ganon's tyranny in OoT, and I don't believe Tetra would ever create a monarchy. But, from a generalized distancing from OoT, I guess ST is an effective follow-up.

That brings us back to the theory:

However, Hyrule is not alone, there is also a land called Holodrum (which always reminded me of the Benelux countries, Belgium, Nederland, and Luxembourg, due to their floodgates and whatnot, and the arcitecture and clothing of the villages/villagers always seemed West European to me); as well as the land of Labrynna (which seems like France to me; there's even a giant tower which is basically en evil version of the Eiffel Tower).

Generations after Wind Waker, young Link, who is from Hyrule, is called upon by the Goddesses to save the Oracles, Nayru and Din, and stop Ganon's forces once again. In the end, Link defeats Onox and Veran, and Ganon is revived.

This seems like the most improbable part of the theory for me: the idea that Holodrum, Labrynna and New Hyrule all exist together. Where did the Triforce come from after it flew away in WW?

Unfortunately, every no split theory I have read, seems like they try to jump through complex hoops to simplify something that doesn't need to be simplified. It may be the sci-fi fan in me, but I don't see the appeal in trying fit the series into one, straight, timeline.

The sci-fi lens is why I'm a linearist. I was looking into multiversal science (specifically the validity of free-will-via-quantum-fluctuation and probability fields) because I was writing a paper, and it just seemed anti-science to have a split. Matter can't choose to do one thing over another, and matter can't choose to do a different thing than it did the first time. To say that matter can go back in time and have that change anything about the outcomes (as is required for the CT), or that what happened could have, within canon, happened differently (as is required for the DT) just doesn't seem to be the case.

This is why the Adult Timeline, the one in which all of Ocarina of Time occurred, is the only canon timeline, but it is also why Twilight Princess cannot come before Wind Waker, which is my main problem with the timeline here.

The split was confirmed in game in 1998 as I and thePlinko said above. And alot of the placements and such were confirmed either in game, interviews, and supplementary materials before HH.

We've gone over this in other threads, but it should be useful for OP. The timeline givens, as I see them, are SS first, MC-FS-FSA, ALttP-LA/OoA/OoS-ALBW-TFH, Z1-Z2, OoT-MM, WW-PH-ST after OoT, TP after OoT, BotW at the end. The split wasn't confirmed in-game: there is literally no evidence to suggest that Zelda sent Link to a different universe, one where his previous body does not exist.

 

[thePlinko]

We've gone over this in other threads, but it should be useful for OP. The timeline givens, as I see them, are SS first, MC-FS-FSA, ALttP-LA/OoA/OoS-ALBW-TFH, Z1-Z2, OoT-MM, WW-PH-ST after OoT, TP after OoT, BotW at the end. The split wasn't confirmed in-game: there is literally no evidence to suggest that Zelda sent Link to a different universe, one where his previous body does not exist.

The simple fact that we not only see both timelines play out in OoTs credits, but also the fact that we never see a 2nd Link during the adult potion of OoT is proof enough that it has to be 2 seperate timelines. The game itself makes a point that Link going back in time for the final time means that he will never be in the adult portion ever again, even when he grows up.

You mention that the sci-fi lens supports you, when if anything the fact that you use “cause and effect logic” to insist that a split timeline is impossible shows that you know nothing of how time travel works in popular sci-fi media.

As I said in the SB, there are 2 schools of thought when it comes to time travel.

1.Time travel can occur between 2 points on a linear timeline in either direction. This is the variant used in SS and OoA, as well as a handful of other time travel stories like Back to the Future and various pieces of Star Trek media (though it also dips into the other type from time to time). The issue with this is that Paradoxes tend to be much more common and harder to explain, which is why there are multiple unexplained bootstrap paradoxes in both games.

2.Time travel can either be used to move forward in your current timeline, or to move backwards to an alternate timeline. The idea is that since you are doing something in the timeline that wasn’t happening before, this can’t be the same timeline. This is the version used in OoT, or if you want a more recent example Avengers Endgame.

The fact that Link goes back in time at the end of OoT to a point prior to what he was at before he pulled it out the first time (he didn’t pull the Master Sword out for the first time until after Ganondorf attacked, whereas when he put it back for the last time he was warped to before Ganondorf attacked) and proceeds to never pull out the Master Sword again proves that it must be the latter, and therefore there are multiple timelines.

While the inconsistency in approach between SS, OoA, and OoT is never explained, the fact that there are inconsistencies does explain why OoT created branching timelines while SS and OoA didn’t.

Even if that wasn’t the case, if the timeline is linear, where is the other Link? If Young Link jumped forward in time, fought Ganon, then went back in time to relive his childhood, than why didn’t he show up to help fight Ganon after he lived out the next 7 years? Surely Zelda would mention the fact that he’d died or went somewhere else since she had met him in the very last scene of the game after he went back.

As I said, there is literally no argument for a linear timeline. The ending of OoT alone canonically shows that there are different timelines in more ways than one.

 

[GZ Zelda]

The simple fact that we not only see both timelines play out in OoTs credits, but also the fact that we never see a 2nd Link during the adult potion of OoT is proof enough that it has to be 2 seperate timelines. The game itself makes a point that Link going back in time for the final time means that he will never be in the adult portion ever again, even when he grows up.

I agree with all of this. Except that I don't think they are "both" timelines, I think they are two events on the same timeline. And the game doesn't make the point that he will never be in the adult portion again, it just makes the point that, by resting the Master Sword, the "road to travel in time" will also close.

Edit: I just read this back, and I guess I don't "agree with all of this."

2.Time travel can either be used to move forward in your current timeline, or to move backwards to an alternate timeline. The idea is that since you are doing something in the timeline that wasn’t happening before, this can’t be the same timeline. This is the version used in OoT, or if you want a more recent example Avengers Endgame.

This Endgame comparison is my problem, because this is not that time travel. In Endgame, when the gang travels back in time, their past counterparts are also in the world with them. This does not seem to be the case in the supposed CT ending of OoT. It seems that Link's entire body either doesn't exist in the time that he traveled back to, or the Ocarina of Time not only has the power to control time travel, but also to take Link's body from Kokiri Forest, place it in the Temple of Time, give it the Triforce of Courage that is still locked in the Sacred Realm, and transfer the soul from Adult Link into the child. I just don't buy it.

Even if that wasn’t the case, if the timeline is linear, where is the other Link? If Young Link jumped forward in time, fought Ganon, then went back in time to relive his childhood, than why didn’t he show up to help fight Ganon after he lived out the next 7 years? Surely Zelda would mention the fact that he’d died or went somewhere else since she had met him in the very last scene of the game after he went back.

Time-travel Link didn't show up after the 7 years because we played the game where he didn't show after the 7 years, and the timeline is linear. In Ocarina of Time, only one Link battles Ganondorf and so, because there is only one timeline, only one Link can battle Ganondorf. Zelda didn't mention that Link was sent to Termina because we played the game where she didn't mention it. I wish I had a whiteboard or something: there are NO OTHER EVENTS besides the ones that we see in game. That is the ONLY thing that can possibly happen within the Zelda universe. And EVERYTHING that happens in those games is part of the same universe using the same Nayru-created laws of physics. Now, canonically, and only because of external sources, we are told that the Zelda universe exists in a world where parallel worlds can exist. In a "many worlds" model.

Me and OP disagree. I disagree because that isn't how time works (I give creative freedom for time to work differently, but, because of the inconsistencies present between SS and OoA time travel vs. presumed OoT-split time travel, I just think that the linear model makes the most sense (and it only adds four points of contention (at least my timeline does (MM to WW, ST to MC, FSA to ALttP, TFH to TP/Z1-Z2)) Which I can explain: In Termina, time moves faster compared to Hyrule; at the end of ST the Deku Tree's plan works and Hyrule is unflooded, FSA to ALttP, Ganondorf is unsealed from the Four Sword (which he keeps in his pyramid), and TFH to TP is a basic malice-reincarnate found within the Twilight Realm, when Zant's hatred "lept across the void."

My problem with OPs timeline, though I think it more correct than the split timeline, is that it requires more explanations (FSA to OoT, TP to WW, ST to OoS/OoA, LA before ALttP) I don't know how we go from FSA to OoT, I don't know how we get from Ganon's death in TP to WW, how does the Triforce return so quickly in OoS and OoA, and how does LA happen before ALttP?

I hope that makes sense. I'm not a flat earther, I promise.

 

[thePlinko]

I agree with all of this. Except that I don't think they are "both" timelines, I think they are two events on the same timeline. And the game doesn't make the point that he will never be in the adult portion again, it just makes the point that, by resting the Master Sword, the "road to travel in time" will also close.

We see the adult versions of characters celebrating, then we see that Link is back in a slightly altered version of his own timeline. We can tell that it’s a different timeline because it’s now before Ganondorf attacked, not after. Not to mention, if it were the same timeline than the Door of Time wouldn’t even be open yet.

This Endgame comparison is my problem, because this is not that time travel. In Endgame, when the gang travels back in time, their past counterparts are also in the world with them. This does not seem to be the case in the supposed CT ending of OoT. It seems that Link's entire body either doesn't exist in the time that he traveled back to, or the Ocarina of Time not only has the power to control time travel, but also to take Link's body from Kokiri Forest, place it in the Temple of Time, give it the Triforce of Courage that is still locked in the Sacred Realm, and transfer the soul from Adult Link into the child. I just don't buy it.

First of all, the Triforce is never canonically transferred to Link at the end of OoT. That was just a theory made to justify Ganons stupid ex machina in TP. Furthermore, how is the rest of that a stretch? The Ocarina of Time is clearly able to rewind time and displace objects regardless of when they appeared. This is proven by simply watching the ending cutscene with a hylian shield equipped as child link, one you got as an adult. It’s not a stretch at all to assume that Zelda was able to alter the timeline to allow link to meet her before Ganon attacked.

Time-travel Link didn't show up after the 7 years because we played the game where he didn't show after the 7 years, and the timeline is linear. In Ocarina of Time, only one Link battles Ganondorf and so, because there is only one timeline, only one Link can battle Ganondorf. Zelda didn't mention that Link was sent to Termina because we played the game where she didn't mention it. I wish I had a whiteboard or something: there are NO OTHER EVENTS besides the ones that we see in game. That is the ONLY thing that can possibly happen within the Zelda universe. And EVERYTHING that happens in those games is part of the same universe using the same Nayru-created laws of physics. Now, canonically, and only because of external sources, we are told that the Zelda universe exists in a world where parallel worlds can exist. In a "many worlds" model.

So you’re perfectly willing to say “I don’t buy it” to canon material that’s literally spelled out for you in game, but when calling out that your timeline makes no sense due to the fact that Zelda would have no reason to not mention adult link you say “oh we don’t see that he’s here so he’s clearly not.” Well why not? What reasoning do you have to prove that, against all odds, she never told Link about why his future self isn’t around?

You’re also trying to base your argument on the assumption that you’re already correct, and I shouldn’t have to tell you why that doesn’t work. The fact of the matter is that if you wanted to somehow prove that you’re right, the burden of proof lies with you to disprove why the official timeline is wrong, which you simply haven’t yet, because you can’t. It’s the canon timeline for a reason, and that reason is because that’s literally what the game was telling the player by showing 2 time period, neither of which can physically lead to the other.

Me and OP disagree. I disagree because that isn't how time works (I give creative freedom for time to work differently, but, because of the inconsistencies present between SS and OoA time travel vs. presumed OoT-split time travel, I just think that the linear model makes the most sense (and it only adds four points of contention (at least my timeline does (MM to WW, ST to MC, FSA to ALttP, TFH to TP/Z1-Z2)) Which I can explain: In Termina, time moves faster compared to Hyrule; at the end of ST the Deku Tree's plan works and Hyrule is unflooded, FSA to ALttP, Ganondorf is unsealed from the Four Sword (which he keeps in his pyramid), and TFH to TP is a basic malice-reincarnate found within the Twilight Realm, when Zant's hatred "lept across the void."

I really don’t care if you disagree or not. The point is that neither of you can be correct because you’re ignoring a plot point that’s been there for 25 years and trying to justify your reasoning by doing the same things that you question the official timeline for doing.

Namely, jumping through hoops to get a conclusion. You said it yourself, your own proposed timeline has 4 separate things you need to make up an excuse for, with not a single one of them being supported by in game evidence. Compare that to the one even kinda good argument that you had against the split timeline, which is easily explained by examining either OoT or MM.

I hope that makes sense. I'm not a flat earther, I promise.

You’re ignoring factual data in favor of your theories that have been proven wrong without a shadow of a doubt. You’re pretending that you’re looking at in-game evidence for your conclusion when the game specifically shows how you’re wrong. You’re stretching connections between plot points immediately after trying to say that the canon timeline is doing the same thing, only to be wrong about that too.

You might not be a flat-earther, but you sure as hell have the same thought process as one.

 

[Alucard]

YES! YES YES YES! Thank you, yes please thank you yes, I have been fighting the linearist battle for a year alone here for a year, thank you thank you yes thank you.

SS MC FS FSA OoT MM TP WW PH ST OoA OoS LA ALttP Z1 Z2 BotW

Is that order right, if so it's missing ALBW and TFH. But great theory.

You're welcome! Sorry I forgot about ALBW! That game is great!

Did you know there's an official timeline

I did, I'm just not a fan of the official timeline.

Haha, I knew I would make some people mad, but damn. It's just a game, guys. Is it really wrong that this is the way I imagined the timeline since literally before I went to preschool? But, fine, I will explain my thought process behind this being a linear timeline, I guess I should've specified this:

So, Wind Waker's prologue seems to hint at OoT, but TP tells a similar story. Who's to say that these events played out weren't the events of TP? (also I mentioned Link fighting in a war and becoming the Hero's Shade. I kinda thought of it as a tragic hero who died but no one knew his name, and therefore was never directly acknowledged).

My reasoning for the timeline simply reseting back to the child era at the end of OoT is this:

So, Zelda plays the Ocarina, which sends him back. In Majora's Mask, we learn that the Ocarina RESETS time, and doesn't just send one person back in time, therefore there's only one timeline and not a dozen splits for every time you had to stop the moon from falling.

Before time resets completely, we see a brief moment where Link falls through time, since he was the one who played the Ocarina. Everyone else was still going about their buisness until the timeline got reset. The Song of Time sequence ends with a bright flash of light. And there's my evidence right there.

Zelda plays the Ocarina, Link goes back through time, everyone is celebrating for a brief moment before an unexplained white screen preceeding Link's return to the child era. So, basically, that's always been my thought process. That whole timeline gets reset, but Link now knows how to beat Ganon and has the Triforce of Courage since the Triforce transcends time. So, therefore, Link's new actions would alter the timeline and make a new one in place of the adult era of the game.

Also, to address the Holodrum, Labrynna, and New Hyrule all existing at the same time, I always thought of Hyrule as being somewhere in the British Isles; several aspects of the terrain, climate, weather, and some animals, but that's for another theory. As I mentioned Holodrum seemed like a Benelux country to me, and Labrynna I've always thought of as being like France. So, therefore, we have three different countries existing at the same time. Ganon's reach had not yet extended to other countries yet like it would in the Oracle games, so therefore, the problem with Ganon in WW was an internal conflict in Hyrule. This means that Hyrule would've been flooded, but not the entire world. New Hyrule would still exist elsewhere. Also, devaluing ST does seem like a good idea. The only people who would probably be mad about that are official timeline elitists, and people who are in their mid to late 20's and grew up with that game on DS.

P.S. sorry for my teribble spelling lol