In the artworks for the port of A Link to the Past on GBA (2002), Link's character design was changed to match with the Oracle games (2001). The same happened for the remake of Link's Awakening on Switch (2019).

Although encyclopedia makes more sense, I heard hystoria is a first level canon above encyclopedia

I've got four copies of Hyrule Historia. Two regular copies, one sealed, one not, the digital version on WiiU, and the collectors edition (1 of 4000), sealed. You basically had to have been there. Now we have all sorts of Zelda lore books but back in the day, Hyrule Historia was something special.

I always felt it made more sense to have the Oracles happen (in either order, so Seasons 1st & Ages 2nd or Ages 1st & Seasons 2nd) before Link's Awakening & yes, the boat thing is my strongest piece of evidence. When you start Link's Awakening, Link confuses Marin for Princess Zelda which makes perfect sense because Princess Zelda in the Oracles bares a striking resemblance to Marin in Link's Awakening. I'm only going by the Game Boy & Game Boy Color versions right now since there are no modernizations of them on the Switch to help support this. Then we have bosses like Facade & even Blaino who've appeared in 1 Oracle game & Link's Awakening (except Blaino wasn't a boss in the Oracles, but was a mini boss in Level 8 in Link's Awakening), so it is possible that they appear in Link's Awakening as nightmares after Link faced them in the Oracles. I actually did theorize that Link from A Link to the Past was 1 incarnation of the hero while the 1 in the Oracles & Link's Awakening was the next incarnation & that Zelda & Impa introducing themselves didn't really mean anything in game, but was just to introduce themselves to the player (the person controlling Link), so really means nothing story wise. Of course, those are just my theories/guesses (whatever term you prefer).

Crazy idea: What if Twinrova had been sent to do their evil plot from the Oracle Games during the buildup to ALTTP, as a contingency plan? Maybe Zelda found out that the Oracles were in danger and sent Impa to protect them before Hyrule Castle fell, meaning that Impa was out of the country when ALTTP happened, which is why she doesn't recognize Link. As for why Zelda didn't, maybe because the dungeon was dark? Grasping at straws, I know.

To me, there are too many clues pointing in favor of the Historia placement. Many of them have been mentioned either in the video or by other comments. One, that I have not seen mentioned, is the game's use of seagulls in the ending. We see 3 seagulls accompany Link's boat at the end. The game initially puts focus on them as the triforce pieces transition in to these. Seagulls are thematically important to the story of LA. The big issue then is why Zelda nor Impa seem to know Link. There's a potential in-universe explanation for this. In Alttp we see people die such as the king, the ocarina boy and Link's uncle. Once Link makes a wish on the triforce, all of these are returned to life. We don't know the exact phrasing of Link's wish but clearly it was to undo everything Ganon had caused. I see this as a monkey's paw situation. Ganon's actions are what made Link and Zelda interact, it's what made Link a hero. If these are undone, then so too would their meeting and Link's journey be. Hyrule is set to an earlier state, except Ganon is actually dead this time. Link, being the one who made the wish, is the only one who retains any memory of what happened.

It makes sense, but I just really prefer the Hyrule Historia's version. It's more cohesive and simple keeping the same Link between games. And the boat at the end of Oracles was a nice touch the first time I completed those games. It put a smile on my face... now it doesn't represent anything :c

Reminder that the Encyclopedia states that anyone can come up with a headcanon timeline and that more details will be added when new games come out. So it is expected that Nintendo will change the timeline.

Nice video. I think historia is correct. Addressing a few of your points: “They couldn’t have planned the oracle games 8 years prior” - They didn’t need to imo. They would just need to remember their lore and say “hey, let’s make the new game about Link’s journey for enlightenment”. It was lore that they created after all, so it’s not much of a stretch to think that they wanted to use it later to make a prequel. About Zelda not knowing Link. It could just be that it’s dark in that dungeon and she’s having a hard time seeing. Introducing herself because she’s not sure who it is at first, then confirming, “You’re Link, right? [Link silently confirms] I knew it at first glance.” About The Impa stuff. Zelda just instructed Impa to escort Din to Hyrule, she wouldn’t necessarily need to send Link to do something like that. Plus, wasn’t Link already away from Hyrule at the time? Or it’s possible that Impa was instructed to meet up with Link on this mission. Impa not knowing Link makes sense, we never saw them meeting. But from the initial dialogue, it seems like she could possibly know who he is. I haven’t read all her dialogue in that game though. About Link choosing to journey vs. being called by the triforce. The manual said it was a journey for enlightenment, so it seems like being called by the gods lines up with that kind of thing. When it comes to spiritual things, the line between “god’s intention” and “my intention” gets blurred. Maybe some representative from the Zelda community should just try to get in touch with someone from Capcom who worked on the Oracle games. They might be able to confirm either way.

The manual for Link's Awakening clearly states link was on his way home from that journey. So there's a time period missing there. The oracle games could easily fit between lttp and LA

You deserve more subscribers

I would like to point out that while Impa wasn't in A Link To The Past, she WAS in "BS The Legend Of Zelda, Ancient Stone Tablets" which, while not mentioned in the timeline, does actually have a canonical location in the timeline as it coincides with Link's Awakening, which is 6 years after A Link To The Past.

If it's not the same link... Why was he even allowed into the Triforce room?

I personally believe the real order of events is more of a mix than we expect. I take it that the link from A Link to the Past is one original link, but the link from the oracles and awakening are a different one from ALttP but are the same link. This would explain a lot of potential issues mentioned and resolve them. A new link who visits the triforce, goes about the events in the Oracles, meets Zelda for the first time and ends up setting out to sea until the events of Link's Awakening happen. I believe the specific character info of Encyclopedia is right, but the timeline placement of oracles before awakening from Historia is also right. It makes sense both narratively as well as geography since he started off in Hyrule with the triforce, got whisked away to both Holodrum and Labrynna through magical means, and once the events of the oracles are over he sets out to sea to go back to Hyrule. He has the means to leave by boat since both games do feature a fairly expansive beach/ocean in the maps of both lands. However looking at it the other way with Awakening before Oracles it brings up a lot of questions which do not have easy answers which make sense. The first one being, why was Link out in the ocean to begin with in Awakening? Should he not be in Hyrule and not risking himself out in the ocean with such dangerous waters? How does he manage to get back to Hyrule after waking up and his ship is in pieces from the storm? If they are the same link between awakening and oracles but not ALttP, why does he confuse Marin for Zelda when he should not even know who she is yet since they have yet to meet, but yet then not know her in the Oracles despite knowing her in Awakening? I feel this is one where they got it right the first time, but dropped the ball the 2nd time.

Wow, I got cited! Regarding the oracles opening, I’ve always been interested in the location of the Triforce in that castle.. I always felt like Link is traveling to a remote temple where the Triforce resides rather than just in the middle of Hyrule castle.. but maybe the castle town is just out of view or something, and Link was returning from some other quest of good deeds.

This seems like a dilemma that will remain unresolved until Nintendo remakes the Oracle games. Personally I'm still going for the Historia timeline, and one point I'm not seeing much if at all in the comments is the overarching plot to resurrect Ganon between both games. Logically speaking, it makes sense that Ganon's followers would get straight to business resurrecting their dark lord after his death in Link to the Past. In fact, that's exactly what Ganon's forces were trying to do in Adventure of Link, which features the same Link from the original Legend of Zelda. The revival also suggests that not enough time has passed since Ganon's defeat that he is allowed to naturally reincarnate. Encyclopedia's claim that this is a different Link would conflict with that plot point. Even if we're generous and at minimum we assume that this "new" Link is only one lifetime removed from LttP Link, that's still an entire lifetime of Ganon's followers sitting around doing a whole lot of nothing in trying to revive their leader. This is especially jarring given that it's Kotake and Koume of all characters who would be responsible for leaving Ganon dead for so long.

How do we know that the Oracle Zelda is even the same Zelda from A Link to the Past? We know for a fact that the downfall timeline does have a second Zelda in Zelda 2 what if the Oracle Zelda is actually that Zelda just before she becomes a Sleeping Beauty knock off?

Perfectly agree! I find the Zelda timeline's fallen timeline is the most confusing out of the three.

Great informative video as always. Enjoy me some Zelda timeline stuff since I know nothing aside from your videos about it lol.

I think the Oracle games take place after A Link to the Past but I don't think the Link from ALttP is the same Link from the Oracle games and Link's Awakening. I do think the Oracle Link is the same Link from LA.

Ben watching you since 200 subs you’ve come a long way # road to 1k

Thank you for this video. I was pretty confused by the blue book. But you made it make sense.

Idk it feels like everything except two small lines of dialogue points to the oracle games being before A Link to the Past. How would Link even access the triforce without meeting Zelda if it was kept in Hyrule Castle. Feels like a mistake from Capcom

I don't care. I say they're the same Link. Hyrule Encyclopedia is riddled with errors anyway.

What is the music that plays from 3:42 to 8:33 in the video? I checked the links for the music citations in the description and I cannot find it.

ALttP Link is the same as the OoX/LA Link. ALttP Zelda is not the same as OoX Zelda. It’s her sister, also named Zelda. Impa was taking care of one Zelda (possibly in Holodrum) while the other was being imprisoned.

I think I'll look at it from game developer view I think the only reason impa and Zelda don't recognize Link is just in case players who haven't played the previous Zelda games don't know who they are

This topic is so hard but also fun to discuss. I remember when Hylure Historia came out, I disagreed with this timeline placement. I think Capcom at the time intended their games to tie in with Link's Awakening (hence the clear direct reference in the ending with the ⛵), but Nintendo later on reconsidered and decided it's better to separate the Capcom games entirely, and keep the original intention of LA always being a direct sequel to ALttP. (Random PS but while I love the Oracle games and Minish Cap, and Capcom staff from those games is now at Nintendo's Zelda team; notice how hard the timeline placements always become when talking about any of the Capcom games, and I'm including FSA in the mix since the story takes elements from Four Swords)

I agree with the Hyrule Historia timeline over the Zelda Encyclopedia timeline, for the simple reason that, if the Oracle games are a different hero, then they are outliers that have nothing to do with the rest of the story. A future official Zelda book could just flat-out call the Oracle games non-canon and it would make little difference. At least with the Hyrule Historia timeline it still has some connection by being the same character we've already seen. The "Zelda meeting Link for the first time" thing is a non-issue, because, although this is the same Link from Link to the Past, it's not the same Zelda. It's the younger sister of the Zelda from Link to the Past (remember that Zelda is implied to be a title rather than a proper name, meaning that both siblings could be called Zelda). She was raised in hiding due to the turmoil Hyrule was facing prior to A Link to the Past. Notice that Marin is intended to resemble Zelda. She doesn't resemble the Zelda from ALTTP, she resembles the Zelda from the Oracle games. This implies that the Oracle games happen prior to LA and with the same Link. Why wasn't Zelda's sister mentioned in ALTTP? Because she was in hiding. Simple as that. There are no inconsistencies. Same Link, two different girls with the title of Zelda.

i just like imagining that awakeking is the final triforce trial game that they were unable to made, seasons the trial of power, ages the trial of wisdom and awakening the trial of courage as you fight nightmares and so...and i mean, just because oracles could be after a link to the past, doesnt mean the link from those 2 games are the same...

I always rejected that oracles link was the same as lttp link. Just never made sense that zelda wouldn't recognize him. Also, awakening link could really be either/or. His dream adventure doesn't affect anything in the grand scheme of the timeline no matter where it is placed. Hell, Miyamoto used to say the game took place entirely within zelda 2. Like within that transition on the raft trip to the eastern continent

Not only that in link's awakening you're in a dream beating monsters they get truthly beaten in oracle of seasons and ages

While OOX taking place in a generation after ALTTP makes sense , it also means the Noble Sword =/= Master Sword, since it stayed in the Lost Woods until ALBW… Also part of ZE re: MM is rubbish.

The fact that oracle link tried to obtain the triforce even after link to the past link already made a wish is a strong way to compare them separately.

What about the hearts over the heads between Zelda and Link? I thought this implied they were in a relationship or at the very least they were familiar with each other. Also ganon in the oracle games is clearly the same 1 that was destroyed from ALTTP, he has the trident.

If Linked Game ending happens, shouldn't it makes more sense that the Link in Link's Awakening to be not the one from ALttP and be the one from Oracles? Linked Oracles ending has Link returning back to Hyrule in a boat and Link in Awakening has a boat in the intro. If Nintendo wanted to, they could easily recton LA Link to not be the same from ALttP and be the same from Oracles with just a finger snap.

actually it make sense that its different hero cause zelda act as if its the first time they meet in the oracle games

I go with the updated placement but I wish they didn't change Links from LA to Oracles. - ALttP: first grand adventure; - LA: the fake adventure, enlightment and preparation for the next bigger threat; - Oracles: a sharper Link dealing with two consecutives grand issues. LA being the last adventure, in both scenarios, leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. "That's it?" To fight hordes of monsters inside a dream just to be left to supposedly die in the middle of the ocean?

Remeber the Zelda comics all tho the arnt rlly cannon the make it out that it’s a new link in oracle of ages and seasons

looks to me links awaking originally took place after alttp, but they decided to change that and turn the oracle games into prequels to awakening...in the beginning of awakening link calls marin zelda so he already knew her

They made the end of Oracle of Ages and Seasons because it was the same Link from Link’s Awakening. It was so fantastic when I first finished this games and saw it with my own eyes. So for me Historia is the most correct book. One thing fans can do if they think about that with Zelda is to say Link from Oracle of Ages, Seasons and Link’s Awakening is a new Link. But for me the Zelda and Impa thing doesn’t matter, I’ll follow the timeline from Historia because it is the most correct for me.

Who did link marry to have all of his heirs...or is "Hero of time" a title that random hero can gain. I think they Just created the games without any story structure or link between them.. then after decided to create a timeline. Unsure where the oracles stand..again i felt that they where made to fit together but without the timeline in mind..as for gut feeling i feel a link to the past was before the oracles and before many of the games.

OR.... there is a third option: The Oracle games do take place after Link's Awakening, but with it still being the same Link and Zelda as from A Link to the Past, leaning _into_ the Zelda Encyclopedia's mistranslation. The Oracle games do feel like they were created to be tied to Link's Awakening, what with the recycled assets they share (the boat's outline, OoX Zelda having Marin's game sprite to explain why Link initially mistakes Marin for Zelda, etc.), but also feel like they were made without knowing that Link's Awakening was a sequel to A Link to the Past, thus creating the discrepancies between ALTTP and OoX. A simple fix for all of this is to simply place the Oracle games after LA, but still featuring the same Link. With this setup, we have Link saving Zelda and all of Hyrule from Ganon in ALTTP, and then leaving to go on his journey of enlightenment and training mentioned in LA's manual. On his way back to Hyrule, he gets shipwrecked on Koholint Island in LA, where he battles the Nightmares (the final of which takes on the ALTTP forms of Agahnim and Ganon, which only makes sense if Link had just fought and defeated those two in the game immediately prior to LA, as they would be shadows of Link's past from his most recent adventure prior to LA) and awakens the Wind Fish. Over time, he eventually makes it back to Hyrule, whereupon his return the Triforce calls him to Labrynna and Holodrum for the events of the Oracle games (as those games open with what very much looks like Link returning home to Hyrule from a long journey, not simply coming to visit Hyrule as he has easy access to the Triforce's chamber inside Hyrule Castle, something a visiting stranger wouldn't have. Plus, while the Triforce only calls him "hero" in the games, the manual for Oracle of Seasons has the Triforce say "Link... Link... Accept the quest of the Triforce!" before he is whisked away to Holodrum, referring to him explicitly by name as if they were familiars and as if Link was already known of). He then saves Labrynna and Holodrum and is re-introduced to Zelda after she hadn't seen him in a long time (explaining why Zelda acts so formal with him, some years would have passed since ALTTP, but she does say "You're Link, right? I knew it at first glance," suggesting that she did vaguely remember him and only introduces herself as a formality and in case _he_ didn't remember _her_). Ganon is then partially resurrected and Link defeats him one last time, making this a much more fitting final battle for the ALTTP Link than the ending of LA. After this battle, Link is given another boat very similar to his old one (it might even be the same one simply _rebuilt_ , explaining away any differences between it and the original) and sails off for a new adventure. We may not get to see it (and it would no longer connect to LA's beginning), but now it serves as a sort of "The battle is over but life goes on" type of ending. As for Impa not knowing Link, and Zelda sending her to Labrynna instead of Link, that's a simple fix. Link was gone from Hyrule for a long time between ALTTP and OoX, with LA coming in between. With Link gone and with no way of knowing if and when he'd be back, Zelda would send Impa to Labrynna without ever knowing that Link was on his way back, as Impa was already in Labrynna before Link got there. Plus, as you said, Impa wasn't in ALTTP, so she wasn't present at the time to witness Link's saving Hyrule at that point. She and Link could have simply never crossed paths in the brief time between ALTTP and Link's departure from Hyrule prior to LA. Their meeting in Oracle of Ages would be their first proper meeting due to the circumstances of ALTTP preventing them from ever meeting beforehand.

It is the same link let me explain in 2001 nintendo made a magzine called 64 dream it says that the orcale games are a prequel to a link to the past and zelda not knowing link i not know

Zelda Ocarina Of Time Medo didn't recognize link right?

Zelda Encyclopedia even says the timeline is still subjective, and basically a guideline in their book. I still maintain that all games can’t be tied together, and are instead just multiple canons.

I'm friggin' Link!!! All of them! Except the Link from the cartoon. He was just a bad reenactor in a shitty documentary. (Edit CDI game don't ever count)

I think Impa's inclusion is actually in support of it being the same Link. The way she references Zelda implies that Link is familiar with Zelda.

If she knew it was like at first glance (aka, when you are familiar) then how did she not know link at all? Cmon did you even read the dialogue?

They should remake the oracle games just to remove that zelda line.

My opinion on it is a bit different than most I think. I actually think that Link's Awakening's developers intended it as a direct sequel to ALttP, but OoX's developers meant their game to be a prequel to LA with no connection to ALttP. This would explain the obvious and potentially intentional connections between OoX and LA despite it's obvious contridictions with ALttP. My main reasoning is that the most recent official timeline given by Nintendo at the time that OoX was developed was OoT > ALttP > TLoZ > TAoL, with LA going "anywhere after ALttP", stated by Miyamoto in an interview that I can grab the source for if anyone cares. I find it interesting that he didn't just say LA was a direct sequel to ALttP if that was the intention. Actually, the Japanese version of LA's manual isn't as explicit about it featuring the same Link as ALttP, with no mention of the Hyrulean prophecy (although it still mentions killing Ganon in Hyrule specifically iirc). So the possible explanations for this are: 1) LA wasn't developed with a concrete timeline placement in mind. 2) Miyamoto wasn't aware or didn't care that other parts of the Zelda team made LA with it specifically being a direct sequel to ALttP, because the timeline wasn't as big of a priority to him at the time. After all, developer interviews indicate that he didn't care much about if OoT connected to past titles while that game was in development. 3) ALttP > LA was the intended placement and known by Miyamoto, but he wanted to leave it vague so that players who hadn't played ALttP but may have played other Zelda games would still want to pick up LA, or just because the placement wasn't explicit enough to have to be made concrete and he wanted to leave it up to the imagination of the fans. I personally believe it was a mixture of options 2 and 3. Regardless, I think that OoX's developers took this timeline literally and intentionally connected OoX to LA narratively, retroactively giving LA a solid place and giving their own game a neat little tie-in to the other gameboy Zelda. I understand that a lot of the reused characters are likely just a case of reused assets, but they straight up didn't have to end the game with practically the same scene LA started with. That had to have been intentional lol. And at the same time, they can't have just forgotten that Zelda should know Link if they're the same characters from ALttP, and if they had to reintroduce her for the players, they could have done it in a more vague way. I have more to say on the topic but I'll leave it at that. Anyway, I also think developer intention is a very important factor, which is why I don't have a solid stance on this in my own headcanon, since it seems like different developers had different things in mind. I find the whole topic both interesting and frustrating as a timeline nerd and as someone who's favorite Zeldas are the Oracle games lol. Thus is life.

I know this is old, but I mean, if they really wanted to separate the OoS/A era from ALttP, they just separated LA also! It just doesn't make sense for the beginning of LA to take place after LA! It's clearly the same Link on the same boat! And this can even be proven by the fact that there more dream counterparts to people from OoS/A than there are from ALttP or even Zelda 2. For example, Richard is based on Ralph, who by this logic, ALttP Link shouldn't even know. You could argue that Tarin is based on Link's Uncle, but it's clear that he's supposed to represent Talon, as he has a daughter. Marin is complicated, the resembles a mix between Malon and Zelda. Both Malon and Talon weren't featured in ALttP. So, in that case, LA is more tied with OoS/A than ALttP. And OoS/A, I feel was made solely to tie ALttP and LA together. But things of course got complicated given the portrayal of the characters. However, that doesn't change how LA is more tied to OoS/A than ALttP. The remake even makes this obvious as Link looks more like his OoS/A self, with a few slight differences. I've seen some people try to place the OoS/A and/or LA games after ALBW, which in LA's case, might actually a bit more sense, as ALBW did actually feature Talon and a ranch girl. And even Turtle Rock. However, there's still the issue of no Richard like character, unless you count Osfala in terms of personality or the theif in terms of appearance. LA remake Link looks more closer to that of ALBW Link than ALttP Link or even OoS/A Link. So maybe the timeline of those specific games could go like this: ALttP > OoS/A > ALBW|LA However, I still prefer the HH placements personal as that's what was intended initially. I feel like the placements only changed because fans got confused by the whole Zelda not recognizing Link thing and the artwork designs of the characters being so different. At the end of the day, we just don't really know why Zelda and Impa don't recognize Link in-game of OoS/A.

OoX taking place after LA with a new Link makes much more sense. Perhaps a close descendant of Alttp Link. I agreed with the original placement in the Historia, but then felt it odd that Zelda and everyone doesn’t know who Link is. The new official retcon solves that.

Ugh... the boat is clearly the same as in Link's Awakening, I'm not gonna let this small detail ruin the timeline I had in my mind. It's not a mistranslation but just clumsy writing. Whoever wrote Zelda's dialogue didn't think this through. It just makes too much sense to have OA/OS between Alttp and LA.

Did the encyclopedia explain why LA takes place before the oracle games?

Eating kettle corn.

I know the zelda manga aren't canon & therefore not the ~best~ source of evidence, but I do think it's at the very least interesting to know that the Oracles manga features a different Link than the one in LttP as well

Nah I think the order is ALttP > OoX > LA and the developers of OoX just didn't think things through entirely. There's inconsistencies within the Oracle games themselves. For example, characters that you met from the previous game like Impa or the Skeleton Pirates don't seem to remember you. Also remember that the story was made by Capcom.

The newer timeline change is something that has really bugged me. Now, honestly, I can see your point and wouldn’t argue against the change. However, since Nintendo has said that the lore of Zelda is up to the player, I’m still going to go with the original order in my head because gosh dang it the matching boat thing seems so cool to me

I still believe Link's Awakening is after the Oracles games no matter what anyone says. LttP Link could be different from the Gameboy Link but Link's Awakening will always be after the Oracles games in my mind. But I still think the old timeline is valid. Oracles games start with the Triforce giving Link a quest. Link finds the Trifroce at the end of LttP, so that's why I thought it was the same. Why Zelda and Impa don't know he is because it's the Zelda of this land like in Zelda 1&2. The Mindless Ganon, was from being recently defeated by Link and a botch resurrection. End of the Oracles game has the raft. I played Link's awakening after so when I saw the raft I was so happy to know it was the same Link. Thank you for inform me of the change though, I had no idea they made a new book in 2017. I've have to go buy and read it.

Or, you can believe the whole timeline is a pile and makes zero sense. I do think some games connect pretty strongly, but others don't connect well at all and feel very standalone and have histories that reuse themes and motifs that people try and make fit. For example, Ocarina -> Twilight Princess is not a perfect match. It has some things that make sense, but it has that one major flaw with Ganon having the triforce, which shouldn't be the case. The NES games really don't fit anything of the other games at all. That version of Hyrule looks nothing like any of the other games. There's no mention of the 3 goddesses, there's no hyrule castle, and I'm not even sure if they mention 3 triforces in Zelda 1, which is just weird when you think about it. Skyward Sword could be the prequel to a number of games in the series... but again, it doesn't really fit the NES games at all. Also, doesn't it have contradictions with the Sacred Realm in later games? Breath of the Wild feels extremely standalone, as it's basically impossible to put on the timeline. Again, I just feel the developers add in lots of themes, motifs and callbacks for fan service and don't really think about it. That's kind of how I see a lot of these games. I think the Four Swords games connect well with each other - but don't really fit in with Skyward Sword -> Ocarina like the timeline says it does. As for the gameboy games... I think seasons -> awakening as a separate universe makes the most sense. It has some historical elements similar to the other games, but I don't think they were meant to be a sequel to anything.

The Encyclopedia's placement makes objectively zero sense compared to Hyrule Historia's, and here are only a few examples of why that is. 1) the manual for Link's Awakening says that the storm happened on his way back. Just an important detail that naysayers tend to forget. 2) there is already established lore that ALL primcesses born into Hyrule's Royal family are named Zelda, not just the crown princess. If you expect me to believe that her cousins (let alone the extended family) would know Link, let alone what he looks like, you must not realize that these games specifically take place in an era where books are still written by hand. Another vital drtail that you yourself clearly forgot just ao you can defend Encyclopedia. 3) Impa might not know Link in the Oracle games, but people who point that out are all completely ignoring the fact that Impa wasn't even in the manual for A Link to the Past, let alone the game proper, nor was ahe even once mentioned in Link's Awakening. And before ALttP, she was exclusively portrayed by the manual and mentioned in the title screen text crawl, if at all. In fact, you don't encounter any of the servants of Hyrule Castle, all you meet are soldiers, monsters, Aghanim and Princess Zelda. 4) Nintendo has repeatedly gone on record to state that Zelda games are made with gameplay as the first focus and story as the last. They didn't start out thinking about interquels back then because the subject of the Timeline wasn't even a concern for Nintendo back then. And of course Capcom WOULD commect them to the only other Zelda on gameboy. If you don't think so you are tripping. 5) Ganon's revival isn't brought up in Link's Awakening because of two reasons. The first is that Link is the only one present that would know, and he famously does not talk, and the closest thing to Zelda is Marin, a Koholint local. Spoiler alert, Koholint and its inhabitants were dreamed up by the Wind Fish, not Link himself. 5) Link would not even be granted an audience with the Triforce if it was his first journey. Not only that, but the Triforce referring to Link as an established Hero and the games both ppinting out the symbol on his hand means that calling him the master of the triforce would have been not only unnecessary but completely redundant. 6) Encyclopedia explicitly refers to itself as non-canon and directly contradict the games on a regular basis. The fans were right to respond with the justifiable backlash, since it's abundantly obvious that not only were the Zelda team not involved in writing the Encyclopedia, but it's extremely likely that Aonuma had only glanced at it (at most) before giving the okay to print it. This kind of thing happening is nothing new when it comes to big nane franchises. Just look at Star Wars back when Legends was still called the Expanded Universe. Or the Mario franchise before and after manuals stopped being where developers put the story for their games. All in all, the more one actually looks at the evidence, the more one realizes that the arguments in favor of Encyclopedia's placement hold less water than the arguments against it. The Encyclopedia's defenders have too many holes in their arguments compared to its detractors.

Although it’s non-canon material, it might help to find out how the manga tells the story.

There was two zeldas at least in one other game.

I don't agree with the changes, the biggest part of it being they intentionally added Maple in A link to the past GBA to tie the events together... Also who's to say that isn't another Zelda? Aren't all the females born in the Royal Family named Zelda to honor Hylia who was reborn as Zelda? While she doesn't recognize Link... She does recognize his name immediately after introducing herself.

And subscribe

oracle games are zelda games

So the idea that it’s the same Link is actually a translation error. The Japanese version of the Encyclopedia says it’s a different Link so I am more inclined to believe that version.

The timeline is dumb and the worst thing they ever did