Spoiler AoL Takes Place Between OoT and WW

[TheGermanLegend]

Many people think it is very difficult to place the first two Zelda games, LoZ and AoL. When first playing you might think the only thing that connects them to an other game are the names of the villages in AoL, who are named after the sages from OoT(and Mido) but there is more: The Sleeping Zelda.

The Sleeping Zelda is the backstory of AoL that tells us why every Princess in every Zelda-game is named Zelda. This might suggest that this backstory must take place before OoT. But wait! Zelda isn't the only charakter that has the same name as an other Charakter. For example we have 4 Malons(MC, OoS, OoT, FSA) and no Sleeping Malon story. It seems very common in Hyrule to name somebody after their ancestors. So let's think about it. Which Zeldas are affected by this story and which may be only named after the Zelda befor them. The only Zelda that came to my mind was Tetra.

Remember when King Daphnes Nohansen Hyrule said: "You are the true heir of the royal family of Hyrule...the last link in the bloodline. You are Princess Zelda." Why did he add the "You are Princess Zelda"-Part? Because at this moment the Spleeping Zelda story already took place.

So there are two places were we can place the SZ: Before OoT or between WW and OoT. Let's look at the whole story again. It also talks about the father of the Sleeping Zelda sealing the ToP in the Great Palace. It remaind there until Link found it in AoL. This mean it can't take place before OoT because in this game it was outside the Great Palace. So this story must take place between OoT and WW.

Now the next question is: When does AoL take place. Let's again look at WW and what Daphnes said. In WW there was no Royal Family. It was completle forgotten that there ever was somethink like that. If AoL takes place after WW than the people of Hyrule would have taken care for Zelda the whole period from the SZ-story until some time after ST. It seams very unlikely they would forget the royal family if they take care for it's most famouse member. And Daphnes also said: "the LAST link in the bloodline." So there couldn't be any royal family member at this time except Tetra. This means the Timeline must look like this:

OoT-SZ-LoZ/AoL-WW/PH-ST

Do you disagree??? Did I miss somethink??? Pleas tell me!

 

[startimer]

You read my mind... I have thought about this a lot recently, and the Tetra/Zelda point was what I focused on th most. It does mean that the "Sleeping Zelda" story happened before WW, but otherwise it's hard to tell. I don't believe any games go between OoT and WW, but placing AoL anywhere else screws up the Sleeping Zelda story.

In short, I don't know.

 

[JuicieJ]

Remember when King Daphnes Nohansen Hyrule said: "You are the true heir of the royal family of Hyrule...the last link in the bloodline. You are Princess Zelda." Why didn't he add the "You are Princess Zelda"-Part?

You just confused the crap out of me. You said, "Why didn't he add the 'You are Princess Zelda'-Part?", but right before that, you quoted Daphnes Nohansen Hyrule saying. "...You are Princess Zelda." ??????? That's a complete contradiction in statements. Please explain this, becuase it makes everything else make no sense.

Other than that, very-well written, although I wouldn't say that I agree with it. There's obviously no set place for the original games, as all of the stuff that's been written now wasn't in those games, and they haven't tried to connect the more recent games to them in any way. It's good theorizing, though. Just doesn't go by any hard facts. (Not trying to down on you. As I said, this is well-written. But nothing can be proven by sheer opinion.)

Oh, we do know that the original Zelda came before Ocarina of Time (read the backstory, I'm not explaining it, it's waaaaay too long), however, as it's obvious the Zelda in that game wasn't the original one mentioned in Zelda II. Maybe we'll see it in Skyward Sword, maybe we won't. Maybe we'll never see it.

 

[Locke]

Nintendo Power: We see many familiar characters in this game (even the kid with the dripping nose from The Wind Waker!). Did you refer to any particular Zelda game for development of this game?

Hidemaro Fujibayashi: In a kind of reverse way. We created the world of the Minish Cap first, then chose characters to fit this world.

I think Malon falls into this category of characters that were just thrown in because they fit the world of the game.


Placing the SZS and AoL between OoT and WW interrupts the progression of the ToX. Ganondorf owned the ToP from when he was sealed in OoT until just before he was killed in WW. There's no way Link can obtain it in LoZ. The ToC was scattered around Hyrule between OoT and WW, not locked in North Castle.

I think it's safe to assume that the "first Zelda" part of the SZS was retconned as early as LttP. That game has Zelda in it and says it's the first time the ToX has ever left the SR, and was also a prequel to LoZ/AoL. The SZS must have happened after LttP, and so can't explain the the Zelda tradition, unless the two Zeldas are the same. And even then, OoT introduces another Zelda that lived even before that.

 

[TheGermanLegend]

You just confused the crap out of me. You said, "Why didn't he add the 'You are Princess Zelda'-Part?", but right before that, you quoted Daphnes Nohansen Hyrule saying. "...You are Princess Zelda." ??????? That's a complete contradiction in statements. Please explain this, becuase it makes everything else make no sense.

Yeah thank you for ponting this out. I made a mistake. It should have been did and not didn't. I corrected it.

 

[JuicieJ]

Yeah thank you for ponting this out. I made a mistake. It should have been did and not didn't. I corrected it.

Thank you. That makes a lot more sense.

I think Malon falls into this category of characters that were just thrown in because they fit the world of the game.


Placing the SZS and AoL between OoT and WW interrupts the progression of the ToX. Ganondorf owned the ToP from when he was sealed in OoT until just before he was killed in WW. There's no way Link can obtain it in LoZ. The ToC was scattered around Hyrule between OoT and WW, not locked in North Castle.

I think it's safe to assume that the "first Zelda" part of the SZS was retconned as early as LttP. That game has Zelda in it and says it's the first time the ToX has ever left the SR, and was also a prequel to LoZ/AoL. The SZS must have happened after LttP, and so can't explain the the Zelda tradition, unless the two Zeldas are the same. And even then, OoT introduces another Zelda that lived even before that.

Yet another thing you know that I don't.

Wait, what's "SZS?"

 

[TheGermanLegend]

Placing the SZS and AoL between OoT and WW interrupts the progression of the ToX. Ganondorf owned the ToP from when he was sealed in OoT until just before he was killed in WW. There's no way Link can obtain it in LoZ. The ToC was scattered around Hyrule between OoT and WW, not locked in North Castle.

I only include the games important for this theory. I still belive the Adult Timeline looks like this:

OoT-ALttP-LoZ/AoL-FS/FSA-WW

End of OoT: ToP in Sacred Realm with Ganon. Link timetravels and leaves ToC in this timeline. It travels in SR. Zelda sends her ToW to the SR to close the gate between times, as she said in the end of OoT
ALttP: ToX never left the SR
Between ALttP and LoZ: King finds ToX, SZS(=Sleeping-Zelda-Story) takes place, Ganon steals ToP
LoZ/AoL: Link collects ToX
Between AoL and WW Link gives ToP and ToC back to Zelda, Link dies, ToC is scattered around Hyrule

I know this is a lot of theorizing, but it works XD

 

[startimer]

Wait, what's "SZS?"

I believe it's the "Sleeping Zelda Story"

Anyway, I think the story is still valid- like mentioned before, despite being born and raised as "Tetra", when it's revealed she's actually part of the royal family Tetra magically becomes "Zelda". The SZS is the only way to explain this.

 

[Oni Cucco]

I should disagree, is very hard to place a game between OoT and WW, because the legend before WW is the Oot story

But I should agree with the fact, the sleeping zelda should take place before WW and I think before OoT (hmm, maybe SS zelda wil b... nah, right?)

But you make me wonder about something, if the sleeping zelda may take place before WW, then AoL should not take place in the adult time line, I mean, all the land where we travel in AoL should be there, because they needed the palaces to awake the princess (correct me if I am wrong please), because they needed to put the crystals in the statues at the end of the palace. If not, did they moved the sleeping zelda between OoT and WW? to where? some random island (or mountain before the flood) then WW link take it to the new hyrule?

ok so, I would say that

-I agree, SZ should be before WW (and OoT)
-I disagree, there is no games between OoT and WW
-If both sentences are right AoL cant take place at the Adul Timeline

 

[Pinecove]

OoT-LoZ/AoL-TWW does not work in the slightest for the Triforce, nor for Ganon.

Triforce: You asume that the Triforce of courage is split into 8 parts after OoT, but somehow hidden in one piece, in time for AoL, only to split up again after AoL, with no basis? Hell, the ToP is in possesion of the royal family at the end of AoL, and it's in possesion of Ganondorf at the begining of TWW. How does that work?

Ganon: You're assuming he escapes the seal on the sacred realm for LoZ (not implied) and that he dies in time to escape the same sacred realm seal again for TWW. Real great logic.

OoT-LoZ/AoL-TWW does not work. Period.

 

[JuicieJ]

Been a while since I've come to this one, but I have, and I have something new to say. The original two games are intended by Nintendo to be sequels to A Link to the Past, which comes after Ocarina of Time (OoT was a prequel to ALttP), placing it after Twilight Princess. Stating this goes directly against Nintendo's statements.