Timeline: Difference between revisions

The Zelda timeline is the theoretical ordering and connection between the various games in {{Zelda| Series}}. While various Nintendo employees have stated in interviews that there is an official timeline for the series,<ref>[e.g. http://www.zeldadungeon.net/Interviews-2010-07-21-Official-Nintendo-Magazine-Eiji-Aonuma.php]</ref> it remains a closely guarded secret. However, devising timelines and debating the relative merits of various proposals has become a cottage industry among Zelda enthusiasts with forums, articles, discussion groups, and online videos devoted to developing and debating timeline theories.

A thorough review and assessment of the myriad of timeline proposals would be both impossible and outside the scope of the present article; however, the debate can usefully be broken down for the uninitiated.

==Timeline Theories==

Since {{Zelda| AoL}} was a direct sequel to {{Zelda| LoZ}}, timeline theorizing could only begin after the release of {{Zelda| ALttP}}. Given that the internet access was not prevalent until later in the 90's and that {{Zelda| ALttP}} was uncontroversially placed as a prequel to previous games in the promotional material, it is likely that timeline theorizing did not rise to popularity until after the release of {{Zelda| OoT}}.

Whatever the origin of the debate, there was originally a division between those fans who argued that there was an official timeline to be discovered and those fans who claimed that the project was rather one of creation because there was no "official" timeline. Much of the early debate thus centered on whether the games in {{Zelda| series}} were connected in a unified timeline at all.

In more recent years, due mostly to several statements by Nintendo employees claiming the existence of a timeline, the working assumption in the debate has been that there is an official timeline to be discovered. However, some might argue that since the "official" timeline is a closely guarded secret there may be reason to be skeptical about its existence. Alternatively, one might concede that an official timeline exists but deny that the goal of timeline theorizing should be to discover the true timeline. Rather, the argument continues, fans should attempt to create the most satisfying timeline without worrying about the official timeline. Such a move could be defended on the grounds that the official timeline may never be revealed or on the grounds that the official timeline may actually be disappointing relative to many created by fans.

The meta-debate over the goal of timeline theories is important since the type of evidence available depends on an answer. If the goal is to discover the true timeline, quotes from Nintendo employees involved in the creations of the games are valuable, if rare, evidence for one theory over another. If, on the other hand, the goal is to simply create the most satisfying timeline without regard for the "official" timeline, such evidence is less important. These issues will be discussed further in the evidence section below.

Much of the timeline debate has consisted in a fan presenting a possible timeline along with arguments for the specific placements of the game chosen by the fan followed by criticisms and discussion by other fans. Another approach is to divide the issue into several smaller questions which can be debated individually. Any position on the more focused questions is in the service of achieving an overall timeline, and any overall timeline must take a stand on many of the more focused questions.

Fans are divided on the question of how many timelines there are and on which games should be included. Most timeline theorists do not include the Philips CD-i games in the Zelda timeline at all since these games were not produced by Nintendo and are considered non-canon. Some fans also argue that other titles should be left out of the timeline such as {{Zelda| FS}}.

Some have also suggested that certain games in the series should be placed in separate timelines claiming that some of the games occur in different universes. The Four Sword series ({{Zelda| MC}}, {{Zelda| FS}}, and {{Zelda| FSA}}), the Oracles games ({{Zelda| OoS}} and {{ Zelda| OoA}}), and the original NES titles ({{Zelda| LoZ}} and {{Zelda| AoL}}) are especially popular sub-series to claim lie outside of the main timeline.

Fans might argue that some games are part of smaller timelines which are not part of the main timeline or argue to exclude a game from the timeline altogether (i.e. place it in its own timeline alone) based on several considerations. The most popular reason is that in game events in or alluded to in one game may conflict with events in or alluded to in other games. Some games may be excluded because they were developed by a third party developer or, in the case of the NES titles, because they were developed before Nintento began to actively develop games within a timeline structure (of course this argument supposes that there is an official timeline and that the goal of theorizing is to discover it, so the meta-question covered above is again an important decider of evidence).

Whatever the relative merits of separating various games into separate timelines, it is usually agreed that if a unified timeline can be satisfactory it would be preferable to separate timelines. Theorists differ on how optimistic one should be about developing a unified timeline which actually is satisfactory.

====Is the timeline split?====

The question of whether the timeline is split must be separated from the question of how many timelines there are. Given that some Zelda games, especially {{Zelda| OoT}} include a time travel element, many have suggested that the timeline in {{Zelda| Series}} is unified but splits into a fork.

While debate once raged between split timeline theorists and those advocating a linear timeline, the debate has all but ended due to confirmation by Eiji Aonuma that the timeline does indeed split at the conclusion of {{Zelda| OoT}}. For sometime after Nintendo confirmed the split timeline theory, "linearists" continued to argue for non-split timelines; however, linear timelines have become very uncommon more recently. Again, the meta-question raised above concerning the goal of timeline theorists comes into play. Fans believing either that there is no official timeline or that discovering it is not the goal of theorizing might consistently defend a linear theory. However, even among fans who have taken such an approach, the split timeline is usually assumed since it allows for games with seemingly conflicting events to be placed in separate timelines. For this reason, some fans have proposed even more splits in the timeline.

Fans new to timeline theorizing are often overwhelmed by split timeline theories. (Spoiler Alert! )The usual theory states that at the end of {{Zelda| OoT}} after Link defeats Ganon as an adult and Zelda sends him back to his childhood, the timeline splits between the "adult timeline" with events unfolding after Link defeats Ganon, and an alternate "child timeline" with events unfolding after a young Link stops Ganon from ever taking over Hyrule in the first place.

Though the present article does not purport to offer an definitive position on the timeline, the usual arrangement has {{Zelda| WW}} and its sequels occurring on the adult timeline. The child timeline, on the other hand, is usually said to lead to {{Zelda| MM}} and {{Zelda| TP}} (though some have deviated on this claim).

====How are the games ordered?====

The question of the order of the games in the series is the central question in timeline debates. The question can be broken down into smaller ones. Which game is first? In a split timeline, which games occur on the "child side" and which on the "adult side" (see the section above "Is the timeline split?")?

Many games in the series are direct sequels/prequels, and other have relatively uncontroversial placements (e.g. Wind Waker after Ocarina of Time). Given that one can consider some timeline placements "locked," theorists are then faced with putting together the smaller pieces of the timeline into a larger whole. For example given that {{Zelda| WW}} must be followed by its two direct sequels, {{Zelda| PH}} and {{Zelda| ST}}, how should this larger whole be placed relative to {{Zelda| LoZ}} and its sequel {{Zelda| AoL}}.

Much of the debate centers on how to connect relatively uncontroversial grouping of games. However, the groupings themselves can be debated. For instance, fans are divided on whether other games fall between {{Zelda| MC}} and the other games in the "Four Sword" series.

====How many Ganons, Zeldas, and Links?====

In addition to its importance to timeline theory, the question of how many Links/Zeldas/Ganons there are is interesting in its own right. For example, while it is uncontroversial that the Link from {{Zelda| OoT}} is the same as the Link from {{Zelda| MM}}, many fans debate over whether the Link in {{Zelda| LA}} is the same as the Link in {{Zelda| ALttP}}. Likewise, fans debate over the repetition of other characters such as Zelda, Ganon, and Impa as well as enemies such as Volvagia and Twinrova.

=====Ganon=====

Though it is uncontroversial that there must be more than one Link and more than one Zelda in {{Zelda| Series}}, matters are not so clear in the case of [[Ganon]]. Fans divide on whether there are multiple incarnations or one Villain who has been sealed, released, killed, and revived multiple times. The issue is further complicated by the split timeline theory and the possibility that the beast form [[Ganon]] might not be entirely destroyed when the human form [[Ganondorf]] is. (Spoiler Alert!) While Ganon's human/Gerudo form, [[Ganondorf]], was killed by the Master Sword in both {{Zelda| WW}} and {{Zelda| TP}}, the possibility that these events occur on different sides of a split timeline (see above) do not preclude these two iterations of Ganondorf from being the same entity. Furthermore, if {{Zelda| LoZ}} and {{Zelda| ALttP}} Occur on opposite sides of the split timeline, since only the beast form Ganon appears, some fans have conjectured that only the human form was destroyed in earlier games.

Unlike Zelda and Link, one can reasonably theorize that there has thus far been only one Ganon; however, even if there are multiple Ganons, the question of how many there are remains. The assumption that there is only one Ganon would place a serious constraint on the placement of games in the timeline since any placement would have to make sense of Ganon's subsequent deaths, revivals, etc. Such a constraint may be welcome since it would rule out many timeline possibilities; however, the constraint also limits the ability of theorists to move games around in light of other evidence. Theorists are divided on how these considerations should be weighed. (see item/character tracking below)

=====Zelda=====

There are arguably no two games in the series feature the same Zelda. However, both {Zelda| LA} and the Oracles games mention Zelda though she is never (or only briefly) shown. In these cases one can question which Zelda incarnation is being mentioned. The more popular and more puzzling question is that of the Zelda mentioned in {{Zelda| AoL}} backstory. The {{Zelda| AoL}} backstory features a curses Zelda purported to be the first Zelda. Fans debate over whether this Zelda appears in any game, and if so which one, as well as whether this backstory has been "retconned."

=====Link=====

In many cases, it is clear that the Link in one game is the same as the Link in another game as in the case of {{Zelda| WW}} and {{Zelda| PH}}. There are other cases where the Link in one game is clearly different from the Link in another as in the case of {{Zelda| SS}} and {{Zelda| OoT}}. However, in several cases such as {{Zelda| LA}}, {{Zelda| OoS}}, and {{Zelda|OoA}}, the game suggests that Link has already saved Hyrule thus leaving open the question of which incarnation of Link these games depict. While one might consistently maintain that these Links have saved Hyrule in events which have not been depicted in any game, most theorists assume that the Link in the gameboy (color) titles is the same Link which appears in one of the other games.

Some theorists also debate over the possibility that the [[Hero's Shade]] in {{Zelda| TP}} may be Link from {{Zelda| OoT}} and {{Zelda| MM}}.

Whatever the number of Links, another interesting question arises concerning the relationships between the various Links. Are the various Links part of a bloodline, reincarnations of the same entity, or simply separate individuals all chosen for a similar purpose? This and other questions of Zelda lore are intimately tied with timeline theorizing. (See section below on relation to other Zelda theory)

=====Hyrule=====

(Spoiler Warning!) At the end of {{Zelda| WW}} [[Hyrule]] has been flooded. [[Link]] and [[Tetra]] sail off to find a new land to call [[Hyrule]]. This [[New Hyrule]] is depicted in {{Zelda| ST}}. Thus it is fairly uncontroversial that there are at least two Hyrules. However, some timeline theorists believe that there may be more than two. If the timeline is divided, for example, there would be alternate Hyrules existing in the separate timelines. Alternatively, some fans speculate that more than one kingdom of [[Hyrule]] arises over the ages thereby explaining differences in the physical and political geography of Hyrule in various games in the series. (see "Relation to Other Zelda Theory" below)

====Retcons?====

"Retcon" is short for "retroactive continuity" and refers to any alteration in the canonical facts in a fictional world.<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroactive_continuity</ref>] The possibility of retconing elements of the Zelda universe makes timeline theorizing especially difficult since any apparent contradiction between games in the series might be interpreted as a change in the canon story. When a timeline theorist argues for a specific placement based on a story conflict which would arise if the games were placed differently or criticizes another timeline theory based on story conflict, the possiblity of retcon reduces the effectiveness of such arguments.

Fans debate the extent to which the series has been retconned; however, most agree that a timeline theory which necessitates fewer posited retcons is superior to a theory which posits a larger number of retcons. (see "Weighing the Evidence" below) The most common story elements suggested to be retconned are the [[backstory]] elements which appear in instruction manuals and other sources but not within the games themselves. (See "Instruction Manuals/Official Literature) below)

====Backstories?====

A prominent issue in timeline theorizing is that of how to fit the various backstories into the timeline. Roughly, a game's "backstory" refers to story events related over the course of a game, especially at the beginning, which are not actually a part of story actually "played out" by the character over the course of the game. The backstory may be essential for understanding the historical context of the events related in a game and/or the character's motivations, but it is not part of the narrative which the character/player experiences over the course of the game. It is worth noting that the line between backstory and the rest of the story in a game is often blurry.

A game's backstory may be useful for placing it within the timeline. For example the backstory in [[The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass]] simply relates the events which occured in [[The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker]] thereby confirming in game that Phantom Hourglass is a sequel to The Wind Waker. In other games, the backstory may tie together two games more indirectly. (Spoiler Warning!) For example, fans often take the cutscene in [[The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess]] where [[Ganon]] is shown to be sealed in the [[Mirror of Twilight]] to depict an event which occurs between [[The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time]] and [[The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask]] after Link has warned the [[King of Hyrule]] about [[Ganondorf]]'s evil intents. Of course this theory is not universal, and some of the events are speculative (see "Speculation" below), but it is a good example of the usefulness of backstories for timeline theorizing.

Backstories can present a problem for timeline theorists when a game's backstory seems to conflict with canon events in other games in the series or other backstories. The two most prominent examples are the [[Zelda II: The Adventure of Link]] backstory and the seemingly conflicting accounts of Hyrule's creation story related in [[The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past]],{{Zelda| OoT}}, and [[The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword]].

The Adventure of Link backstory claims both that the Zelda whom Link is to awaken in the game is the first princess Zelda and that the [[Triforce of Courage]] has been hidden since this "first" Zelda fell into her magical slumber. Since The Adventure of Link, several games have been released which purportedly occur before it. Since Zelda appears in these other games, this seems to conflict with the claim that the Zelda in The Adventure of Link]] is the first. This difficulty might be circumvented by claiming that the sleeping Zelda continued to sleep while other Zeldas were born and the events of other games occurred; however, the the appearance of the Triforce of Courage in several of these games blocks such a move. If the Triforce of Courage is supposed to have been hidden since the The Adventure of Link Zelda was cursed, any game which features both Zelda the Triforce of Courage should occur after {{Zelda| AoL}} if the backstory is part of [[Hyrule]]'s history. However, there is a great deal of evidence conflicting with the claim that the original NES titles occurred first in the timeline. Recently, the events in {{Zelda| SS}} depicting the origin of Hyrule provide especially strong conflict with the events in the Adventure of Link backstory.

Theorists have suggested multiple ways of accounting for the Adventure of Link backstory. The story may have been retconned. The retcon may be changes in the details -- for example claiming that the Zelda in The Adventure of Link is not actually the first Zelda -- or the story may have been more or less removed from the Canon. Alternatively, the conflicts arising from the Adventure of Link backstory have led some theorists to claim that the original NES titles are not part of the "main timeline." (See "How Many Timelines?" above)

Another problematic backstory element is the [[Imprisoning War]] alluded to in the backstory for {{Zelda| ALttP}}. Fans are divided over whether the [[imprisoning war]] occurred between games in the timeline or whether it depicts the events which occur in another game in the series, such as {{Zelda| OoT}} or [[The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures]].

{{Zelda| MC}} also presents some interesting questions via its backstory. For example, the relationship between the [[Hero of Men]] depicted in the Minish Cap backstory and the various incarnations of Link is questionable.

The [[Unification War]] mentioned in the Ocarina of Time backstory is also a point of contention.

====In Game Evidence====

=====Direct Reference=====

====Interviews====

====Item/Character Tracking====

=====Master Sword=====

======Ganon's Trident======

====Testing for Consistency====

====Weighing the Evidence====

===Evolution of Timeline Theories===

===Relation to Other Zelda Theory===

==Hyrule Historia==

{{Main|Hyrule Historia}}

With the release of the book [[Hyrule Historia]], fans saw all the history of Hyrule, as well as , for the first time, the ''[[Official Timeline]]''.