The Hero's Clothes

[Majora's Cat]

Excuse me if there is already a thread such as this - in that case a Mod can close it.

The Hero's Clothes are Link's iconic tunic - the first real explanation for Link's clothes came from Ocarina of Time in 1998. He was a born and raised in Kokiri Village, thus requiring him to wear the Kokiri Tunic. These clothes forever defined Link as the great hero garbed in green. This was perhaps the earliest mentioning of Link's clothing even having a backstory.

Other examples of Link's Hero's Clothes didn't really have much of an explanation with the exception of Wind Waker. So let's re-enter the world of WW for a second - Link received the Hero's Clothes on his 12th birthday, as that was a tradition on Outset Island. This was, of course, to celebrate the original Hero of Time's great accomplishments and hope that the fledgling children of the island would one day become heroes such as the Link in OoT was. That and the flooded Hyrule story in WW is why we know that WW was a follow-up to OoT and therefore exceeded it in the timeline.

Majora's Mask is OoT's sequel and therefore shows Link garbed in green. The same goes for Twilight Princess, but Link did not sport the Hero's Clothes at the beginning of the game. He instead wore regular Ordon clothing like the rest of the village's children. Only when he proved himself courageous and outgoing was it revealed to him that he was the Hero Chosen by the Gods and was given the Hero's Clothes. This proves that TP followed only a short time after Ocarina of Time. Those were indeed the same clothes as the one in OoT, easily connecting the timeline.

The "early" version of Link's clothes were only displayed in the early 2D games. The early version evolved from the original in Legend of Zelda all the way to the OoX series. After that, the so-called "early" or original version of the Hero's Clothes design had vanished. The rest of the Zelda games like Minish Cap, Four Swords, and FSA never really had much of an explanation for where the Hero's Clothes came from. Phantom Hourglass, of course, continued to have Link clothed in the Hero's Clothes from Wind Waker. As for other Zelda games, the Hero's Clothes were either thrown into the game like it was in TP... that or you already wore the clothing from the start. Although the Minish Cap was a bit of a different case because of Ezlo becoming Link's hat... it still doesn't really explain why Link had the Hero's Clothes in the first place.

So... you must be wondering to yourself - what's the point of what I just said? A simple factor like the Hero's Clothes can contribute to the decoding of the timeline. As we see Link either a) has the Hero's Clothes at the beginning of the game or b) receives it later in the game with little explanation, I can safely say that Ocarina of Time was the first in the timeline. The Kokiri Tunic was the first instance in a Zelda game where the Hero's Clothes wasn't actually called the Hero's Clothes. Therefore the Kokiri Tunic must have been the original Hero's Clothes - and that means it was the first Zelda game as well. There are only a few other Zeldas that actually give you a reason why Link has the Hero's Clothes.

Furthermore, aside from the Hero's Clothes, there are other explanations for OoT being the first in the timeline and MC not being the first one. Based on my deductions, here is my timeline:



...........................Majora's Mask --> Twilight Princess --> ALttP --> Link's Awakening --> LoZ --> AoL --> OoX
Ocarina of Time --<
...........................The Wind Waker --> Phantom Hourglass --> Spirit Tracks --> Minish Cap --> FS --> FSA



Let me tell you this timeline is correct in my opinion (also based off of the Hero's Clothes theory). We all know of the child and adult timelines that branch off of OoT. Majora's Mask follows OoT, then TP. We can all agree on that, correct? ALttP most likely follows Twilight Princess since many of the same villages and destinations exist. After that LA follows... and here's where I got a little lost. The original Zelda doesn't have much of an explanation to it... but I can assume that it follows LA solely because it wouldn't belong anywhere else (same with AoL).

And finally comes OoX. What? Many may be scratching their heads at this point. But I assure you, I am all but insane - Twinrova exists in OoX while Ganon is dead - and that fact in itself might mean that Twinrova lives for much longer while Ganon is still deceased after being defeated by Link in LoZ.

Next I must explain the adult timeline - we can all agree that WW follows OoT, then PH and ST. That really needs no explanation. But Minish Cap after Spirit Tracks? Many believe that MC is supposed to be the first game in the timeline, but it can also be one of the last. Ganon is most likely dead... so Vaati wreaks havoc on the land. Since Wind Waker was probably the last appearance of Ganon chronologically, PH, ST, MC, FS and FSA all focused on a different overall antagonist.

And there we have it - my Hero's Clothes and Zelda Timeline theory. You don't have to agree with me... but I do want to know your thoughts.

 

[XTC]

I don't know if this effects your theory at all but, in Spirit Tracks you get the green tunic so that you can be disguised as Royal Guards so that they're neither hero's clothes or Kokiri garbs.

 

[Ghosi]

Hmmm... This is all crazy now, because this timeline tells me that Ganondorf was the first boss, therefore it can dissaprove the " Ganondorf Puppet " theory.

 

[Majora's Cat]

Yes... but I always recognized Ganon as the Zelda series' first villain. It's hard to believe that a character like Vaati came before Ganon...

Plus, if you disagree with my timeline, you disagree with it. I never said you had to. Most people actually tend to put OoT on their timelines as the first Zelda in chronologial order. I actually used to believe in the "Minish Cap being first" theory... but some evidence proves that that may be wrong.

 

[David]

Well, honestly, I still think the Minish Cap is still one of the first on the time line. First, it never calls Link's clothing "Hero's Clothes". It was just a tunic that he wore. He started wearing it before he even knew that he'd have to save Hyrule. And since they never even mention the clothing in the game, you can't automatically assume that it is the actual clothing that was worn by other Links. My explanation for his clothes was for the fans. I imagine that they made Link wear the green tunic to keep fans happy and so that they can recognize the fact that he is Link. Oh and you can't forget that Capcom made Minish Cap.

And seeing as how we don't have any evidence from nintendo to go against your claim with OoT being the very first with Minish Cap on the Adult timeline, I won't say that I've proved you wrong. Its just that the way that I see it, there had to have been more evil in Hyrule before Gannon, and Vaati fits the description. The Links in Four Swords Adventures kill him. So his influence must have been done with before OoT if you choose to put it before OoT.

I really like the evidence and thought that you put into this, but until Nintendo says where Minish Cap falls, i'm not going to focus on putting it in one place or another.

 

[Majora's Cat]

You've got something good going, HoM (BTW I gave you rep for that :cat.

You're right - there's really no proof that the Minish Cap does not take place before Ocarina of Time. I was merely stating that MC could easily take place at the beginning or the end... but its spot in the timeline might finally be cleared up with the release of Skyward Sword.

Vaati could have very well been killed before Ganon even existed, but keep this in mind: Ganon was intended to be the main villain of the series. I doubt that Nintendo wanted fans to think that Vaati existed before Ganon. We can never really say for sure if Vaati existed before Ganon and was forgotten over time... or if he existed after Ganon was defeated in the adult or child timelines. I prefer to lean towards the adult timeline simply because in my child timeline, the original Ganon from LoZ was the last time he was killed. It only made sense to me that instead of placing MC, FS and FSA in the child timeline, they would fit better in the adult timeline.

Why, though? The Minish Cap has absolutely no connection to Spirit Tracks. That may be so... but I'd like to think of it this way: things like this are really just open to speculation. The use of trains and such could have been completely wiped out and Hyrule could've become a completely different place. Remember, some Zelda games that come early on the timeline actually have some technological advancements over Zelda games come afterwards. Assuming that's the case, the Minish Cap could have easily existed after Spirit Tracks. Besides, placing MC in the child timeline would be a bit strange as Ganon doesn't exist.

But who's to say that Ganon was killed already before the events of MC, FS and FSA? Who's to say that these three games took place before OoT? I guess other Zelda games will give us hints on how the timeline goes. Either that... or they will just make fans more confused.

 

[Locke]

Vaati could have very well been killed before Ganon even existed, but keep this in mind: Ganon was intended to be the main villain of the series. I doubt that Nintendo wanted fans to think that Vaati existed before Ganon. We can never really say for sure if Vaati existed before Ganon and was forgotten over time... or if he existed after Ganon was defeated in the adult or child timelines. I prefer to lean towards the adult timeline simply because in my child timeline, the original Ganon from LoZ was the last time he was killed. It only made sense to me that instead of placing MC, FS and FSA in the child timeline, they would fit better in the adult timeline.

FSA has both Ganon and Vaati alive at the same time.
Maul existed before Vader, yet we consider the latter to be the main villain (besides Sideous). (bad example...basically order doesn't matter.)

 

[Mr.Verto]

I don't know if this effects your theory at all but, in Spirit Tracks you get the green tunic so that you can be disguised as Royal Guards so that they're neither hero's clothes or Kokiri garbs.

Thats true but since ST is a sequel of WW maybe all the guards used green cloth to represent a legendary hero, that would be Link from WW (not PH since nobody saw what Link did, only Tetra & Linebeck)

As for the timeline I agree with you (in the Hero's Cloth timeline). As my personal theory for the OoX clothing i have this idea:nerd::

In MM Link left Termina in Epona (with his cloth obviously) and in the OoX into we see Link arrive in a brown horse *cough* Epona *cough* so it had to be MM Link, cause a random Link wont be traveling for pleasure, find a castle and go into a journey (as a matter of the fact he was made to do it since the Triforce sucked him to the other worlds). I dont know if this help in anything to your thread, but consider it, many people leave that fact aside.

Good thread you deserve rep!:clap:

 

[benjibibbles]

You've got something good going, HoM (BTW I gave you rep for that :cat.

You're right - there's really no proof that the Minish Cap does not take place before Ocarina of Time. I was merely stating that MC could easily take place at the beginning or the end... but its spot in the timeline might finally be cleared up with the release of Skyward Sword.

Vaati could have very well been killed before Ganon even existed, but keep this in mind: Ganon was intended to be the main villain of the series. I doubt that Nintendo wanted fans to think that Vaati existed before Ganon. We can never really say for sure if Vaati existed before Ganon and was forgotten over time... or if he existed after Ganon was defeated in the adult or child timelines. I prefer to lean towards the adult timeline simply because in my child timeline, the original Ganon from LoZ was the last time he was killed. It only made sense to me that instead of placing MC, FS and FSA in the child timeline, they would fit better in the adult timeline.

Why, though? The Minish Cap has absolutely no connection to Spirit Tracks. That may be so... but I'd like to think of it this way: things like this are really just open to speculation. The use of trains and such could have been completely wiped out and Hyrule could've become a completely different place. Remember, some Zelda games that come early on the timeline actually have some technological advancements over Zelda games come afterwards. Assuming that's the case, the Minish Cap could have easily existed after Spirit Tracks. Besides, placing MC in the child timeline would be a bit strange as Ganon doesn't exist.

But who's to say that Ganon was killed already before the events of MC, FS and FSA? Who's to say that these three games took place before OoT? I guess other Zelda games will give us hints on how the timeline goes. Either that... or they will just make fans more confused.

A large amount of this is based on opinion which, as you know, should not be brought in as evidence. There is just as much (if not more) reason for MC to be pre-split as there is for it to be AT.
Also

FSA has both Ganon and Vaati alive at the same time.
Maul existed before Vader, yet we consider the latter to be the main villain (besides Sideous). (bad example...basically order doesn't matter.)

That.

 

[Majora's Cat]

A large amount of this is based on opinion which, as you know, should not be brought in as evidence. There is just as much (if not more) reason for MC to be pre-split as there is for it to be AT.

Let me just say this... is there a timeline theory that doesn't have holes in it? Is there a timeline theory that isn't somewhat based off of opinion?

 

[benjibibbles]

Let me just say this... is there a timeline theory that doesn't have holes in it? Is there a timeline theory that isn't somewhat based off of opinion?

True, which is why no one knows if they've got it yet. I'm just saying that you have a higher probability of getting it right if you stick with the facts. Take note of how I have never made an attempt to post a hypothesised timeline. Assumptions and opinions can be misleading.

 

[VembersWind]

nice timeline MC! i'm no theorist, to be sure. but this timeline looks really solid with no glaring flaws. i think i'm going to accept this as the timeline unless SS tells us differently.

 

[DuckNoises]

So... you must be wondering to yourself - what's the point of what I just said? A simple factor like the Hero's Clothes can contribute to the decoding of the timeline. As we see Link either a) has the Hero's Clothes at the beginning of the game or b) receives it later in the game with little explanation, I can safely say that Ocarina of Time was the first in the timeline. The Kokiri Tunic was the first instance in a Zelda game where the Hero's Clothes wasn't actually called the Hero's Clothes. Therefore the Kokiri Tunic must have been the original Hero's Clothes - and that means it was the first Zelda game as well. There are only a few other Zeldas that actually give you a reason why Link has the Hero's Clothes.

I don't think this has anywhere near enough relevance to end up being a primary argument in timeline theory. You also have to take into consideration original intent; at the time of OoT's release, no earlier Hero had been planned, so that may have been a reason why there was no explanation. Keep in mind, though, that no other Zelda game to that date had an explanation for the tunic, nor were they called the Hero's clothes, despite the fact that they take place after OoT. Also keep in mind that all the Kokiri wore those clothes, not just the Hero of Time. As far as the game suggests, that's the entire extent of the meaning of "Kokiri Tunic," that it's indicative of where Link lives. TWW and TP would still be shortly after the adventures of the Hero of Time regardless of whether or not the game makes reference to the Hero of Time's clothes, because of all the references to OoT in more important areas. All the Links have had similar clothing for the majority of their respective games. It's just a matter of consistency in character design, really.

However, it does hold some (note, some) weight in an argument over whether or not certain Links are the same, unless there has been a large shift in art design between the two proposed connections. However, there are contradictions to this, especially as of late. TP Link and Skyward Sword Link both have the same clothes, yet they are not the same Link, nor are they adjacent on the timeline. Really, these sorts of aesthetic arguments don't hold nearly as much weight in timeline discussions as something like primary characters, the state of the Triforce, the state of Hyrule, etc.
The clothes have little to no effect on OoT's placement, at least compared to the other evidence that shows it as immediately before the split, alone except for Skyward Sword (provided Aonuma's claim holds true). The only games that have even a possibility of being ahead of OoT is TMC (some like to add FS/FSA, but I disagree with that, personally), but I'm still skeptical of that. To be honest, I don't see the relevance of the clothes.

 

[thelastsheikah]

Great work MC. Your timeline's got my vote. Maybe whomever became the kokiri saw link in SS and in honor of him decided to dress in all green as well cause who hasn't dressed up as their hero when they were young and the kokiri are young forever so they never grew out of it.

 

[MiniMouseofPyru]

This is a bit confusing now.