Timeline

The Zelda timeline is the theoretical ordering and connection between the various games in The Legend of Zelda series. While various Nintendo employees have stated in interviews that there is an official timeline for the series,^{[citation needed]} 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 The Adventure of Link was a direct sequel to The Legend of Zelda, timeline theorizing could only begin after the release of A Link to the Past. Given that the internet access was not prevalent until later in the 90's and that A Link to the Past 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 Ocarina of Time.

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 The Legend of 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.

Questions

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.

How Many timelines?

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 Four Swords.

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 (The Minish Cap, Four Swords, and Four Swords Adventures), the Oracles games (Oracle of Seasons and Oracle of Ages), and the original NES titles (The Legend of Zelda and The Adventure of Link) 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 Ocarina of Time include a time travel element, many have suggested that the timeline in The Legend of 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 Ocarina of Time. 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 Ocarina of Time 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 The Wind Waker and its sequels occurring on the adult timeline. The child timeline, on the other hand, is usually said to lead to Majora's Mask and Twilight Princess (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 The Wind Waker must be followed by its two direct sequels, Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks, how should this larger whole be placed relative to The Legend of Zelda and its sequel The Adventure of Link.

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 The Minish Cap 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 Ocarina of Time is the same as the Link from Majora's Mask, many fans debate over whether the Link in Link's Awakening is the same as the Link in A Link to the Past. 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 The Legend of Zelda series, matters are not so clear in the case of Ganon. Fans divide on whether there are multiple incarnations of one Villain who has been sealed, released, killed, and revived multiple times. The issue is further complicated by the possibility of treating Ganon as a somewhat independent entity from Ganondorf. (Spoiler Alert!) While Ganon's human/Gerudo form, Ganondorf, was killed by the Master Sword in both The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess, 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 A Link to the Past and A Link to the Past 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 remains over how many.

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 The Adventure of Link backstory. The The Adventure of Link 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 The Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass. There are other cases where the Link in one game is clearly different from the Link in another as in the case of Skyward Sword and Ocarina of Time. However, in several cases such as Link's Awakening, Oracle of Seasons, and Oracle of Ages, 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.