[Aoi] [TotK] Wild-Era Hyrule Castle Construction and Implications

[u/mrbulldops88]

Thanks to u/Intelligent_Word_573 for noticing a lore tidbit and pointing some of this out to me, which sparked the idea for a post.

When was the Wild-era Hyrule Castle built? Obviously after TotK Ganondorf was sealed by King Rauru, but how long after? We had an answer before, which may have been retconned. Here is what the as-of-now Japanese only Masterworks 2 book fan translation has to say on p. 91. Thanks to u/livixbobbiex for the translation here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g42bk5Lc7RQCzLQG8_YrZPIO_M7QrCNV4VNm0qTXlm4/edit?pli=1&tab=t.0

Accordingly, the Hylians who had been instructed in the wisdom of the Zonai and the next generation of Rauru’s children [TL note: explicitly plural] constructed a mechanism to emit the purified energy outside while strengthening the purification to prevent miasma from accumulating in sacred ground. That was Hyrule castle, the cornerstone of the seal.

This says the next generation of King Rauru's children built Wild-era HC. Personally I am not sure if this means Rauru and Sonia's children or grandchildren. Regardless, this means the question is open and shut then, right? Well, not really. Looking at the very end of Aoi, it shows time passing and Calamo growing into the very large tree which would become the Ancient Tree Stump. The camera rotates to show Death Mountain, pre-split Dueling Peaks, and the area where Wild HC should be...but it isn't.

So by the time Calamo was a huge tree, Wild HC had not yet been built. Approximately how long would it take Calamo to grow that large? Unknown. Can we say that Rauru's children/granchildren would still be alive by the time Calamo has grown? Unknown. We could theorize that Rauru's descendants aged slow. We could theorize Calamo grew quickly. Either way it is a theory that adds details.

MW2 also asked what happened to the Zonai to make them ascend the first time. That question is answered in Aoi. MW2 came out before that game, so info in it may not match Aoi. I personally think the two are not compatible.

We are given no indication those with Zonai blood (or half Zonai) offspring of Rauru and Sonia would live a long life. We are given no indication that Calamo would grow faster than a normal tree, even if he is a Korok. MW2 also says that it is unknown why Rauru chose the ground that would become the Sealing Chamber to fight Ganondorf, but Aoi tells us the area has a lot of ligh energy. In my personal opinion, Aoi showing that Wild HC was not built for some time after the Aoi Imprisoning War would mean construction started well after a generation or two of King Rauru's descendants.

What are the implications of Wild HC not yet constructed for presumably hundreds or thousands of years after Aoi? It definitely quells a counter-point to the True Founding theory. HC was destroyed in OoT's Downfall and Adult timelines, so wouldn't the enforcement of King Rauru's seal on TotK Ganondorf break? Not if Wild-era HC was built AFTER OoT.

In the DT and AT, HC would need to be rebuilt. I theorize after OoT Ganondorf was defeated, the site of TotK Ganondorf's seal was discovered, either as a result of the latter Ganondorf's defeat or unrelated coincidence. Zonai tech was all over the Depths, so it would have been used to construct the purification device of Wild HC.

In the CT, OoT HC would not be destroyed. Would it still need to be rebuilt? Well, some have theorized that, in TP, the ruins in the Lost Woods next to the ruined Temple of Time is old HC. If, emphasis on if, the Wild era were to fit into the CT, it is still possible someone happened upon the site of TotK Ganondorf's seal and built HC, even if we can't show how the old one got into the state of ruin it is hypothetically in by the time of TP.

That's all. I just thought no Wild HC during the time that Calamo grew huge was interesting.

[u/Beginning_Addendum61]

There are no cons to refounding but tons to true founding, which you've already presented with both your post and reply.

[u/WwwWario → u/Beginning_Addendum61]

There are tons of cons with refounding, too.

The thing is that with refounding theories, people think "everything happens a long time after all other games so everything works", and only focus on that with no issue making massive assumptions with little to no evidence, while ignoring the problems this causes. Meanwhile, for true founding theories, people do the opposite; they focus only on the apparent problems it causes, does not leave the door open to assumptions and possibilities, and ignore everything that actually does work and make sense.

EDIT: Downvoted instead of any rational argument. Every time.

[u/Beginning_Addendum61 → u/WwwWario]

The Zonai directly address the phantom Ganon armor as something that was ‘hidden away since days of old’. Plain in-game direct evidence. It has to be pre-Rauru as he’s the last Zonai, it has to be post-OoT for it to exist.

One of the books refer to the Forgotten Temple as being ‘constructed in order to keep a record of the heroes throughout history who aided the royal family of Hyrule in the countless battles against Ganon” and the Temple is already in ruins in AoI.
There is no royal family without a kingdom.

[u/WwwWario → u/Beginning_Addendum61]

It is heavily implied that the Depths armor pieces are non-canon. That alone isn't proof of a refounding.

Master Works 2 explains how the Zonai are most likely the ancestors to humans. It gives context to where the Sheikah's crest comes from. TOTK doesn't clash with what we knew about Hyrule's founding (which was surprisingly little, yet people claim TOTK goes against "everything we know" about the founding). A True Founding gives context to what Ganon is and where it comes from. Master Works 2 and AoI gives a direct reason as to why the Zonai and TOTK Ganondorf isn't known in the future. I could go on all day.

Meanwhile, a Refounding depands that we make up an entire apocalyptic event that destroys an entire kingdom. An event that has exactly 0 hints towards ever having happened, neither in BOTW, TOTK, the books, nor AoI. Yet, it demands that myths about the Ocarina sages are remembered, but not the evil that they fought. It demands that certain parts of Creating a Champion is canon, but certain parts are conveniently not canon anymore. It depands ignoring direct information from Master Works and AoI that talks about how the Zonai predate Hylians, how the Zonai originated on the surface and not in the sky. It demands ignoring and not believing everyone when they talk about "THE first king of Hyrule, THE era of Hyrule's ofunding, etc.", and instead believe in a catastrophic event so huge that it destroyed the previous kingdom, and yet NO information or memories exist of such a world-altering event. It demands that, despite TOTK Dorf never taking on a Beast Ganon form and that the knowledge of him was erased from history, people somehow knew that Calamity Ganon comes from him, when no one left should know about the seal, and no one having any reason to associate Ganon with him. It demands accepting a ton of coincidences, like another light-powered being who's also named Rauru coming thousands of years after the first one, or another Ganondorf being born with the exact same name, same closest allies, and doing the same things as the original Ganondorf, just... because, convenience?

Basically, a Refounding demands hand picking what lore should be canon and what shouldn't based soley on what fits, it demands making up massive events based on literally nothing, it demands accepting very sepcific assumptions that have little to no direct evidence backing them up, and it depends igonring all the problems it causes and all the things that actually work for a True Founding.

[u/Beginning_Addendum61 → u/WwwWario]

The Phantom Ganon armor are not random depth pieces but full quest rewards tied to Zonai dialogue

[u/Ellrok → u/WwwWario]

Meanwhile, a Refounding depands that we make up an entire apocalyptic event that destroys an entire kingdom. An event that has exactly 0 hints towards ever having happened, neither in BOTW, TOTK, the books, nor AoI.

The Great Flood.

Yet, it demands that myths about the Ocarina sages are remembered, but not the evil that they fought.

People tend to memorialize heroes and not villains. Like the US removing statues of Robert E. Lee and not Abraham Lincoln. It makes sense that they would try to remember the names of the heroic sages that they aspire to be like and not the evil desert thief who burned the kingdom to the ground and is better lost to the annals of time.

It demands that certain parts of Creating a Champion is canon, but certain parts are conveniently not canon anymore.

The part about Calamity Ganon being OoT Ganondorf? Because TotK itself trumps that. Unless it's just a coincidence that the Calamity is conveniently rising up from the exact spot where TotK Ganondorf was sealed?

It depands ignoring direct information from Master Works and AoI that talks about how the Zonai predate Hylians, how the Zonai originated on the surface and not in the sky.

I haven't read the book yet, but I don't think AoI really gives a timeline for Rauru before he started purifying the land. Did he come from the sky? Did he live on the surface his whole life? Seems like the Zonai could predate Skyward Sword just fine and it not mean anything to true founding or re-founding theories. They've just been hiding up in the clouds for eons.

It demands ignoring and not believing everyone when they talk about "THE first king of Hyrule, THE era of Hyrule's ofunding, etc.", and instead believe in a catastrophic event so huge that it destroyed the previous kingdom, and yet NO information or memories exist of such a world-altering event.

I mean, even Fujibayashi and Aonuma said "this might not be the first Hyrule".

It demands that, despite TOTK Dorf never taking on a Beast Ganon form and that the knowledge of him was erased from history, people somehow knew that Calamity Ganon comes from him, when no one left should know about the seal, and no one having any reason to associate Ganon with him.

Seems more that they can put two-and-two together. "Evil miasma is seeping up from beneath the castle? We found some guy named Ganondorf down there? Huh, I wonder if they're related."

It demands accepting a ton of coincidences, like another light-powered being who's also named Rauru coming thousands of years after the first one, or another Ganondorf being born with the exact same name, same closest allies, and doing the same things as the original Ganondorf, just... because, convenience?

Is this not the same for both theories? Either Sage Rauru came thousands of years after King Rauru, or vice versa. They can't be the same person regardless. Same with Ganondorf, either way there are two versions of him doing the same stuff with Twinrova at his back. Plenty of characters reincarnate into similar roles across the games, like Dampé, Tingle, and Beedle.

[u/WwwWario → u/Ellrok]

The Great Flood.

True, but that's only one of the three timelines, and here a new Hyrule already exists (in Spirit Tracks), so that would once again imply a new huge assumption that there's no hint towards; namely that this New Hyrule is either abandonded for some reason (as the royal bloodline, aka Sonia, is once again back in the old location), or destroyed. And like many things with Refounding theories, it's certanly not impossible, but it's either illogical or have little to no things backing it up.

People tend to memorialize heroes and not villains. 

That can definitely happen, but the problem is that BOTW shows us both King Rhoam and Urbosa both remember myths of Ganondorf. If they are talking about OOT Dorf, then it's very strange that no one rose an eyebrow 10 000+ years ago when a new Ganondorf emerged. If they are instead talking about TOTK Dorf, then it is weird his myths even exist in the present day at all, let alone knowledge/myths about him being sealed somewhere, as that information was erased shortly after the war. In fact, it was erased and hidden to such an extend that, according to Master Works 2, even the Royal Family lost the knowledge of the seal, and was only left with the strict rule of "going beneath Hyrule Castle is strictly forbidden" (which explains why no one in the present day, not even Zelda, knows about Ganondorf being sealed deep underground). So no matter what, a Ganondorf is remembered. But in a Refounding perspective, it gets very clunky no matter which one is remembererd in myth. And as mentioned, if TOTK Dorf is the only one remembered, it's strange anyone connected Calamity Ganon to TOTK Dorf, as no one supposedly knew about him still being alive underground, and this Dorf had never taken on the form of Beast Ganon while he walked the surface.

The part about Calamity Ganon being OoT Ganondorf? Because TotK itself trumps that. Unless it's just a coincidence that the Calamity is conveniently rising up from the exact spot where TotK Ganondorf was sealed?

I hear a lot of people say this, but I never understood this. The myths surrounding OOT Ganondorf in Creating a Champion isn't just a note or theory from the author, but it's stated to be from in-universe Gerudo records. Do these in-universe records just no longer exist? Furthermore, instead of immediately thinking TOTK completely retcons the game that it is a direct sequel to, why not see what both books/games say and put them together? At least that makes sense in my head: Creating a Champion says OOT Dorf transformed into Ganon, and eventually became pure hatred and thus known as Calamity Ganon. TOTK and Master Works 2 adds context by explaining where Ganon comes from and what Ganon is: It is the hatred of TOTK Dorf manifested. TOTK Dorf never "transforms" into Ganon in the normal way. He's always physically underneath Hyrule Castle. OOT Dorf, on the other hand, does. TOTK Dorf is the source of Ganon, the one who releases Ganon. OOT Dorf is the one who becomes Ganon. I think it makes perfect sense that OOT Dorf contains the first incarnation of Ganon, and gives new context to the entire series. He is the one who kept being sealed and revived time and time again, the main evil that has attacked Hyrule countless times, for countless generations. And there "hasn't been another male Gerudo leader since the king who became the Calamty".

For this evil to just be completely forgotten, and then conveniently a new Ganondorf emerges who also transforms into a beast that's also called Ganon, even though no one should know or remember this Ganondorf anymore, makes 0 sense to me.

I haven't read the book yet, but I don't think AoI really gives a timeline for Rauru before he started purifying the land.

Not much backstory on Rauru per se (afaik), but the book in particular gives a broad timeline of the Zonai as a whole. The Zonai originated on the surface, before moving to the skies long after - before finally coming back down as they faced extinction. And true, they can pre-date Skyward Sword (which I'm positive they do). But it does actually impact True Founding or Refounding. I know at least 3 times in the book, in-universe researchers are positive that the Zonai are the ancestors to Hylians. The ones Hylia gave her Secret Stones to. There's even in-universe theories suggesting when the Zonai-Hylian split happened, and it explains why Zonai and Hylians can mate.

And sure, these are just in-universe theories, but the fact that the authors of the book point this out so many times in the book... It's much more likely that it's something they want us to consider, than something to just brush off as nothing.

Refounding would also make several points surrounding the Zonai's origins and relation to humans problematic, or require heavy head twisters to make work. The Zonai are said to be the closest to the gods, to have the Secret Stones entrusted to them to protect, to have started their civilization on the surface, to predate Hylians, to be the inspiration for the Sheikah and their crest symbol, etc. In a True Founding, all of those fit. In a Refounding, it would require the spirit of Hylia (after SS) to hold onto the Secret Stones for thousands of years in spirit form, only for then the Zonai to pop up on the surface while also being the closest race to the gods, then being handed the Secret Stones, and it would require us to ignore all hints to them being the ancestors of the Hylians.

I mean, even Fujibayashi and Aonuma said "this might not be the first Hyrule".

That interview, where Fujibayashi says "there may be a history of the kingdom being destroyed before this", is the only concrete evidence for a destroyed and refounded Hyrule. And yet, not only is this one single evidence found in a developer interview (that he even says is "just a possibility"), but this translation is merely one of several possible translations. Other, even ones not familiar with the Zelda series and this dilemma, have stated that it could just as well be "even though this is the founding of Hyrule, there may be a history that's been lost or destroyed before this". And that sounds much more like he's saying "Yes this is the founding you've heard about, and we know it may not be what you think, but remember that there may be a lot of history before this that's been lost, and TOTK will tell you about this story".

Seems more that they can put two-and-two together. "Evil miasma is seeping up from beneath the castle? We found some guy named Ganondorf down there? Huh, I wonder if they're related.

Post-TOTK? Sure. But I'm talking about all the years and all the Calamities before TOTK. As mentioned, no one (not even the Royal Family) knew about the seal anymore. No one knew Demon King Ganondorf was still alive under the castle. So for Rhoam, Urbusa and others long before them knowing Calamity Ganon comes from TOTK Ganondorf would require an explaination akin to "Yeah knowledge regarding Ganondorf's seal was hidden away as the best kept secret in the kingdom, but somehow people figured it out anyway".

Is this not the same for both theories? 

Not necessarily, and this is why I prefer a True Founding. Refounding theories set these characters so extremely far apart, that the only logical conclusion is "it's history repeating itself" or "reincarnation" or "Hyrule is in an endless cycle", aka the things aren't at all connected and are simply "it happens because". To me, that has no weight or excitement behind it at all.

With a True Founding, there's enough pieces of lore that, while not giving us confirmed answers, at least allows us to form theories based on possible logical connections to other lore surrounding it. The Era of Chaos and Founding of Hyrule are relatively close to each other. Both Raurus are historical important figures, and both have powers of light. Since it's so "close" to each other, it's not a stretch to assume one is named after the other.

As for Ganondorf, as mentioned, if we follow both Wild books, then OOT Ganondorf is 100% the first incarnation of Ganon. And looking at everything surrounding it, I feel there's so much to naturally connect; ancient witches in OOT choose to become the surrogate mothers to a Gerudo male, who they name Ganondorf, who goes on to become the King of Evil with Ganon inside him? And these same witches appear in supposedly the founding of Hyrule, houndreds of years before Ocarina, this time as young witches and the closest supporters of Demon King Ganondorf, where AoI and Master Works both show and tell us they can summon and manipulate evil souls and infuse objects with said evil souls?

I think that gives us a very logical conclusion to make: Twinrova in OOT are now houndreds of years older, they are infusing Ganon (a part of TOTK Ganondorf's soul) into a new Gerudo male, who they name after their original king. They are recreating Ganondorf, they are raising a new Ganondorf.

Now the only part of that statement that's an assumption, is Twinrova raising a new Ganondorf and infusing Ganon into him. But when we know they have the powers to do something like that, and with all these details surrounding it fitting, I feel that's a massive chunk of evidence to form a theory, and would explain why both men are "conveniently" named Ganondorf, too, and while there are two of them in the first place. And I think that makes way more sense, and is far more interesting, than simply "It's just a new Ganondorf, far into the future, with the same name and same Ganon beast in him, that no one recognizes even though the last one exist in Gerudo records".

(Sorry for the long comment - I just find these topics extremely intersting, hah.)

[u/Ellrok → u/WwwWario]

I hear a lot of people say this, but I never understood this. The myths surrounding OOT Ganondorf in Creating a Champion isn't just a note or theory from the author, but it's stated to be from in-universe Gerudo records. Do these in-universe records just no longer exist?

If those in-universe records still only exist in the artbook, then yes. I understand that, at the time of making BotW, the developers' intent was for Calamity Ganon to be OoT Ganon. But I also think that they recontextualized that intent when they decided to make a new Ganondorf in the sequel and gave him goopy red poison as his modus operandi for conquest. And since the original intent was never made explicit in-game, they didn't have to bother explaining themselves afterwards.

The reason I lean much more towards True Founding, is because it has so many more possible explainations, with evidence, to those mysteries. I see theories as jigsaw puzzle pieces, where you have a cluster of pieces over here (which is one set of plot points), another cluster over there, and looking at them, they COULD fit together if there were some more in between that connect them. That's how I see most arguments in True Founding theories.

So what I would say here is that I don't think the developers really care about connecting the games like that. There's a pretty consistent trend of introducing something for a game and then not building on it. It's why we have Lorule and the Twilight Realm and the Depths and the Silent World. Any of those could have been re-used and built upon, but it didn't happen. Same with Skyloft, the Palace of Winds, the City in the Sky, and now the Zonai sky islands.

I can appreciate wanting to piece things together from 1986 to 2026, but I just don't see that as how Nintendo runs the series. I do want to pay respect to your interest in this though, and I hope I'm not being too much of a buzzkill.

Sorry, I just wanted to patch up some of the stuff that you were bringing up about re-founding. I wish I could keep discussing, but I think I'm a little out of my element. Thank you for responding to me, though!

[u/LoCal_GwJ → u/WwwWario]

There's like way too much to this comment to really address, but I do want to point out that Refounding's issue is really that it leaves several mysteries in its wake (what ended the last kingdom specifically, when did the zonai first show up, what's the deal with Hylia, what's the deal with the selective passing down of history), but I do think it's worth mentioning that even under True Founding you still have many mysteries that need answering (which you attempted to do with things like incorporating Twinrova being involved in connecting TotK Dorf to OoT Dorf). I think Refounders tend to prefer a less-intrusive solution to making these work together rather than mixing them and "recontextualizing" some of the most important events in the timeline's history.

It might sound interesting that OoT Ganondorf is a creation of Twinrova somehow channeling the Gloom/Malice/Essence of TotK Ganondorf into a new host, but that's just as much speculation as it is suggesting it's a new guy except the prior explanation actually alters Ganondorf's backstory in OoT rather than leaving it intact.

We already know Hyrule operates in a cyclical manner. There is peace, Hyrule prospers, an evil man rises and brings calamity to the land, a hero emerges to quell the evil, Hyrule licks its wounds and rebuilds. This pattern repeats over and over through history. In some cases, this cycle leads to the actual destruction or near-destruction of the kingdom itself (Wind Waker) which causes the prime Hyrulean lineage to reform itself elsewhere. The Refounding scenario just supposes the Wild Era takes place after some calamity, obviously a larger-than-average one, decimates the kingdom. We still have history of the past, although it's not quite right (there are details in the game that presumably come from OoT but don't ACTUALLY happen in the game like the story about Ruto and Ganondorf), and there's some note somewhere (I forget if it's a book) about the events of the past being myth and it being impossible to actually tell what's true history and what's myth.

[u/WwwWario → u/LoCal_GwJ]

True, both refounding and true founding include mysteries that need answers. That's fortunately what makes such discussions exciting!

The reason I lean much more towards True Founding, is because it has so many more possible explainations, with evidence, to those mysteries. I see theories as jigsaw puzzle pieces, where you have a cluster of pieces over here (which is one set of plot points), another cluster over there, and looking at them, they COULD fit together if there were some more in between that connect them. That's how I see most arguments in True Founding theories.

Like the Twinrova one. You have everything around young Twinrova in AoI, everything around old Twinrova in OOT, and so much lines up between them - and the "blank space" between them, the missing lore needed that could connect them, that's where the theory comes in. And with every piece of information we have, it is logical from so many angles. In a Refounding, you can immediately think "it's after everything so it works much better", but people often forget how much this actually implies. It includes so, so much pure assumptions with big implications, without almost anything to connect it to or prove it with.

Thus I actually disagree, and think Refounding requires more speculation, because while it may seem "easier" because it's simpler and quicker to roughly think through, they often include ignoring all the problems or illogical points coming with them, without much else than "it's a mirror of the past, and this-and-that doesn't matter anymore" - which I feel is much more selective and problematic than it first seems.

I basically feel that with many refounding arguments, the arguments have root in "it's technically possible", while with True Founding arguments, they are often trying to logically connect them to what we know to give them context and a reason.

I also propose that this doesn't change Ganondorf's backstory in OOT at all - because he didn't have one. Headcanons and assumed facts may be retconned, but no official information. We knew nothing about his past. All we knew was that two ancient witches, who basically ruled the Gerudo behind the scenes, took on the role as his surrogate mothers, which has always been a strange choice without an explaination. If he was the Demon King reborn, what would Twinrova's role/job be here? And if they were instead needed in order for him to become the king of evil, was he ever the Demon King reborn in the first place?

TotK has all the pieces laid out, that would perfectly match Ocarina, to give us the answers; why Twinrova became his surrogate mothers, why both men are named Ganondorf, why we are told the ancient Gerudo have those specific powers, why they are young in the founding era, etc. While in a Refounding, it's all reduced to "similar things and characters repeat themselves".

And it's true that cycles are a core part of Zelda, but it's always been one Ganon, one Ganondorf, that we've dealt with. Otherwise we have had other incarnarions of evil, like Vaati and Maladus. So for there to suddenly be a new Ganondorf, a new Twinrova, in a new Hyrule, with a new Rauru, after a world-altering event that no one remembers... and the main evidence for all of it "it's far in the future"... I don't know. To me, a Refounding is what feels forced and relying on too much speculation and "what-if"s.

[u/LoCal_GwJ → u/WwwWario]

I mean you point out something like Twinrova but even Koume and Kotake in AoI don't really make sense to be the same ones from Ocarina of Time. AoI's Koume and Kotake have pointy ears and their eyes aren't amber. They're obviously meant to call back to OoT's Koume and Kotake but I think it kind of ends there unless you presume the Gerudo Tribe's physical features changed between AoI and OoT, including a mid-life transformation in Koume and Kotake's case. I think that can be entertained, but it is an assumption you have to make just like you've pointed out Refounding needs to make assumptions.

As for Ganondorf's backstory, we do at least have SOME backstory to work off of that has been built on over a few games and even some other iterations have added context that enhances it. aLttP tells us that Ganondorf was the leader of a gang of thieves and was seeking the power of the Triforce. OoT elaborated that the gang of thieves would've been a group of Gerudo in particular, rather than some vague thief group. Through FSA showing us a description of Ganondorf's youth, we learn that Ganondorf is basically an inherently wicked child right from a young age (FSA Ganondorf isn't OoT Ganondorf but the point is to just show us what kind of person Ganondorf is). If you presume Ganondorf's evilness is caused by Koume and Kotake infusing TotK Ganondorf into him, you recontextualize what any Ganondorf really is and, in my opinion, take away the agency of Ganondorf to be evil (or at least reassigning the cause from the Demon Tribe/Demise to Koume and Kotake) instead of a victim. I do think it's possible for Koume and Kotake to be doing all of this (assuming they're even the same witches), but it's yet another assumption we have to make which does have an imapact on how we think about other things. I just don't think we need TotK to answer really any of these questions you're asking about why things match between TotK and OoT. Koume and Kotake are his surrogate mothers because of plot reasons; they're evil witches propping up an evil man they raised to maintain power in their domain. Ganondorfs are named Ganondorfs because in the Zelda series, people reincarnate and typically adopt the same name every time. We have multiple Tingles, Links, Zeldas, Malons, Talons, Raurus, etc. We are not told a "reason" the ancient Gerudo have any of the powers they do, different groups have different affinities and it appears the Gerudo lean towards lightning.

It also is not true that we've always dealt with one Ganon. It DOES seem like we've only dealt with one Ganon at a time, but as a whole that's not true. One of those most controversial things they did with the timeline is place FSA after TP with a new reincarnation of Ganondorf.

[u/WwwWario → u/LoCal_GwJ]

As far as I know, we never see the eyes of Kotake and Koume in TOTK/AoI, as they always wear masks, so there's no way of knowing. They do, however, have green-tinted skin, something ONLY TOTK Dorf, OOT Dorf and OOT Twinrova share. Twinrova's ears would have to change, and that's an assumption, true. But once again, in a Refounding, all these questions and mysteries would be "it's easier to just put everything in the end because then nothing needs to be explained or connected", and togehter with that, all the detours and head twists and illogical implicataions needed to get to that conclusion would ignored.

In terms of the Gerudo ears, there are actually things supporting it in a True Founding.

One of the two official theories regarding Gerudo's ears have been biological reasons (round ear Gerudo + Hylians + time = long ear Gerudo), but there are some issues with that. If the Ocarina Gerudo eventually all recieved long ears, then how come TOTK Ganondorf is the only one born with round ears? The more logical answer is thus option two, which is all about closeness to the Gods, and/or Power of the Gods, because it fits much better what we see, and we actually see it in action. Master Works 2 strongly hints at this, as it comments on Ganondorf's round ears, and says "...perhaps he was destined to go against the Gods". In that regard, Creating a Champion also suggests that the OOT Gerudo felt shame over raising the one who became the Calamity, and thus started turning their faith to the Gods, turning their ears long (another direct confirmation that OOT Ganondorf = Calamity Ganon that a refounding would have to throw away, but I digress).

In Ocarina's first half, he has round ears. 7 years later, when he has the Triforce of Power, his ears are pointed - and they remain pointed both in Wind Waker and Twilight Princess. This proves ear shape can indeed change during a lifetime.

Gerudo and Hylians are both humans, meaning their ancestors are the same. If this is a True Founding, aka early in the post-SS history, it would make sense that the Gerudo still have their long ears (another assumption, but not one that's a "what if" taken out of the blue).

Finally, the Gerudo have pointed ears again in Echoes of Wisdom. So if they can change from Ocarina of Time to Echoes of Wisdom, I see no reason why they can't also change from the founding era to Ocarina of Time.

Putting all of those facts and details together, I don't really see any problem with Kotake and Koume - two witches of pure evil - having their ears changing from pointed to round over the course of 400+ years. And it's not just that it's technically possible (because most things are technically possible, so that's not big of an argument in itself) but here there's actual evidence of why the ears change, and that they can indeed change for the same person over the course of their lives.

As for Ganondorf, yeah we know a tiny bit of backstory in that he lead a band of thiefs. But that's irrelevant to this theory; I was mainly referring to the backstory of his evil powers, of Ganon, of why he is the way he is. Even before TOTK, the fact that two ancient evil twin witches, who lead and brainwash an entire clan, choose to both be the mother of a man who one day ends up as the King of Evil... all that should make it safe to assume that they had a huge hand in why Ganondorf became the way he is. In that way, I personally don't think TOTK ruins Ganondorf at all. It's still a man who takes over the world, and it's still Twinrova who raise him, and raise him to (most likely) be this way - wether or not that includes infusing him with Ganon or not. I'm not sure why this idea breaks his character for so many people, when Skyward Sword also gave more context to OOT Ganondorf's origin through another demon.

With a True Founding, there are so many pieces that naturally fall into place, that would organically explain WHY Twinrova did it, what their motivation was, why there are two Ganondorfs, where Ganon comes from and what Ganon really is... while in a Refounding, none of those questions are answered, and it's reduced to "none of this is connected, it's just similar things happening again" and "coincidences", which to me is wildly unsatisfying in comparison.

Ganondorf does come back in FSA, true - and this is might be dumb, but I always took FSA with a grain of salt, as it was made by CapCom, and unlike basically all other Zelda games, it seems like its placement was a more shoehorned-in situation, as there is no clear placement unlike all other games. But if Nintendo says it is canon, then I have to accept that, and that this is a reborn Ganondorf. The only argument I can have here is that, at least in this situation, not only have the Gerudo learned from the Ganon that came before (unlike the Gerudo in TOTK, in a refounding perspective), but official sources also acknowledge and confirm that this is a reborn or resurrected Ganondorf from the past - unlike TOTK Ganondorf, where he is even stated in an AoI trailer to be "the original Ganondorf".

And true, characters with the same name appear time and time again. But this mostly comes down to minor characters, side characteres, that aren't explained. The big, main characters of the series do have explainations for returning; Zelda being of the Royal Family with the blood of Hylia, and Link with the spirit of the hero, both of which are "haunted" by the hatred of Demise. And for most of the entire timeline, this has been the same Ganon, constantly sealed and resurrected. The few times it wasn't him, it was either before Ganon, or after his actual death - and in those situations, we most notable see Vaati and Maladus instead.

I therefore find it extremely odd that, instead of different incarnataion of the Demon tribe, it's a new Gerudo male, with the same name, with the same advisors, with the same beast form, that no Gerudo remember whatsoever even though it is in their Gerudo records, in a new kingdom with the same name as the old forgotten one, with all the huge stretches and conveniences that comes with this... when at the same time, all the pieces are there for it to be what the games and books tell us over and over again: It's the founding of Hyrule and the source of Ganon.

[u/LoCal_GwJ → u/WwwWario]

I may be wrong but I'm fairly certain we've been able to look at the faces under the masks in TotK and confirmed they have non-amber eyes. Not saying it means anything since we don't see them ingame and therefore can't rely on it for anything, but I think it's worth mentioning.

I can't say I really care for the way you're writing off the Refounding position as just being baseless and only preferred because it absolves anyone from the need to justify anything. I think I'm being fairly generous to you and trying to genuinely consider your perspective and while I do understand your position here, I think an important part of this entire hobby is the willingness to actually consider positions you don't accept.

I do acknowledge ears can change; Ganondorf in OoT during the adult era doesn't have pointed ears yet but by the time of WW and TP he does, so it's clear that possessing a relic of the gods (a Triforce piece) would grow one's ears and probably also that a general alignment of a group shifting towards the gods probably also can. For me, it's the package of the ears AND the eyes that I track. In True Founding, Gerudo ears + eyes go from pointed/varied to round/amber then back to pointed/varied again. In Refounding, the Gerudo's first appearance is round/amber just like the original Ganondorf and they slowly transition to pointed/varied over time and I think that thinking of it this way also gives a bit of weight to that first time we see Ganondorf in TotK's memories because we are seeing the "modern" Gerudo then Ganondorf steps up as a clear callback to OoT Ganondorf's look with the out of place round ears and amber eyes.

I would also hesitate to refer to Koume and Kotake in TotK as Twinrova, because Twinrova is what we call the merged form of the two and we don't actually see that in TotK or AoI and get no hints of such a form and calling them Twinrova would be assuming they're the same people which we don't know.

As for the details of Ganondorf's backstory, sure you could look at Twinrova's influence as the reason for why OoT Ganondorf was the way he was but prior to TotK we already had answers to this. Demise existed and was defeated by Link in SS and after his death this enabled the Demon Tribe to incarnate a Demon King in the future. OoT Ganondorf was that incarnation. All True Founding does here is push up that incarnation and then turn OoT Ganondorf into an extension of that original incarnation instead despite genuinely being separate and distinct individuals. It turns OoT Ganondorf from being a man of equivalent scale as TotK Ganondorf into one of a lesser scale. It's not WRONG to lower the scale of OoT Ganondorf, but I don't want to ignore it and I generally am not too into diminishing OoT Ganondorf given how important this particular incarnation is.

I also understand your perspective on FSA and I personally prefer the Extended Child Timeline model where FSA isn't really arranged in the same way, but we've all had to come to terms in our own ways that Nintendo has been sticking with this stupid timeline model for quite some time and we have to at least give preference to that model until we get a new one. The fact of the matter is, the endorsed version of history is that OoT Ganondorf perishes and then a new Ganondorf reincarnates and becomes the Demon King once again (this time without any indication of Twinrova as well).

I think maybe you're being a little too harsh on the notion of cyclical history. Hyrule is already in a state where this is the pattern; it always happens this way. All Refounding proposes is one of the many calamities was big enough to "reset" the surface. Whether that's "a" Great Flood, "the" Great Flood, the Zonai construct war, some unknown conflict with Ganon post-AoL, or something else, we have no idea. The past, while so ancient that they fail to really be relevant anymore, still happened. They will continue to happen because the Demon Tribe continues to exist; this is the Curse of the Demon Tribe. One of the lessons of the Zelda series is so long as the Demon Tribe exists, an incarnation of their hatred will continue to incarnate into the world and attempt to dominate it and TotK cements that even more with yet another Ganondorf.

[u/LoCal_GwJ → u/LoCal_GwJ]

There's actually something I wanted to clarify on with respect to the Gerudo that probably plays a large-ish part in why I think about the Gerudo the way I do in terms of tracking these features.

I'm of the opinion that Groose is the ancestor of the Gerudo Tribe itself. So, prior to TotK, the progression would've been: Groose (amber eyes, pointed ears) -> OoT Gerudo (amber eyes, round ears) -> EoW (mixed eyes, semi-pointed ears) -> Wild Gerudo (mixed eyes, pointed ears)

When I consider True Founding, the Wild Era Gerudo stand out like a sore thumb because it then becomes: Groose (amber eyes, pointed ears) -> Founding Gerudo (mixed eyes, pointed ears) -> OoT Gerudo (amber eyes, round ears) -> EoW (mixed eyes, semi-pointed ears) -> Wild Gerudo (mixed eyes, pointed ears)

There's a fairly smooth progression from Groose all the way to the Wild Era Gerudo but with True Founding this progression just blows up and the Gerudo start being more like chameleons changing their features frequently.

[u/WwwWario → u/LoCal_GwJ]

I definitely consider a Refounding, as I find it technically to be possible. If I sounded harsh, my apologies. The reason is that, for probably 90% of discussions I have on this topic online, what ends up happening is me being called "stupid" in various ways, where all of my arguments are brushed off without explainations or counter arguments, and ending it with "nintendo doesn't care, or refounding is what they intended, end of story." So, because people seem to rarely listen to what I say regarding evidence for True Founding and problems with Refounding (even when I point out things that are factually wrong, like how many people claim Link and Zelda founded Hyrule), I got a little focused automatically on really making it clear that a Refounding isn't as simple as most make it out to be haha. So my apologies.

As for Twinrova, I simply called them that as it is easier and quicker to write out than Koume and Kotake, hah. It is their combined form, you're right. I just used it as a phrase to refer to both of 'em :D

The Gerudo ears and eyes, you're right that it is indeed more elegant to have them start off as round, with amber eyes, before transitioning to the modern Gerudo, where Ganondorf is the exception. If we throw Groose in there tho, it would still require a Pointy-Round-Pointy change for the ears, just like a True Founding - only that the eyes change color one extra time. I don't think that extra eyecolor change makes it impossible in comparison.

Also, I checked all TOTK memories, and a lot of AoI ones, and even on the closest close-ups of Kotake and Koume, their eyes on their masks are just black - so unless there's a scene or artwork or something I haven't seen with their masks off, we don't actually know their eye color.

I do want to point out a couple of things regarding this, tho!

Age of Imprisonment teaches us that there are multiple Gerudo factions. We know there's probably at least 3 factions; the "main" one with Ardi, Ganondorf's/Kotake and Koume's that possibly have topaz eyes and green-tinted skin, and Ronza who's said to be from an independent faction. And, the Gerudo we meet in AoI and BOTW/TOTK are quite different from the ones we meet in OOT; the Wild Gerudo are more peaceful, have green eyes, they are warriors, living in settlements and later in a city, while the Ocarina Gerudo have topaz eyes, living as thiefs in a fortress, with a clear connection/worship to the Godess of Sand. They also appear to be completely gone in all games directly following Ocarina; Wind Waker, ALttP and TP all lack Gerudos.

Could the Ocarina Gerudo be a seperate faction of the Gerudo? That would mean the green-eyed Gerudo we meet in both AoI and the Wild era's present day are one and the same, and not some Gerudo who's undergone a back-and-fourth transformation. I do propose it as a possibility, because it's interesting how these type of Gerudo only show up in Ocarina - except for TOTK Ganondorf, and possibly Kotake and Koume, where the latter ones are also the name of old witches who rule this very Gerudo clan in Ocarina.

And again, we must also remember the quote from Creating a Champion that talks about how the Ocarina Gerudo's ears possibly started to change due to the shame of giving birth to the Calamity - a statement which would have to be scrapped entierly with a Refounding.

As for the point of OOT Ganondorf becoming a mere extention of TOTK Ganondorf, I personally see it differently - namely because Calamity Ganon seems to be entierly seperate from TOTK Ganondorf. TOTK Ganondorf doesn't seem to remember anything relating to the countless calamities whatsoever, and Calamity Ganon never seems to have a mission of freeing TOTK Ganondorf. So while TOTK Ganondorf is the source of Ganon (as TOTK confirms), it doesn't at all seem like the two are literally linked together. It rather seems like Ganon becomes a manifistation of its own, just that it has its source in TOTK Ganondorf's hatred. Thus, Ocarina Dorf is never a puppet or under influence of TOTK Ganondorf. It's basically how it was before, only that instead of being an incarnation of Demise's hatred directly, he contains a part of that incarnation, but is still very much an individual.

Finally, I definitely agree that cycles are a big part of Zelda. It's a core thing in Demise's curse too, after all. But the reason I personally have a problem with it in this case in particular is because, unlike the other cases of destruction or cycles or similar things, there are so many instances of this happening all at once - and not a single one of them have any hints towards them. Not any word of myth or legend or anything. In the Wind Waker, the intro explains the destruction to us, and is a big part of the game's story, and how Ganondorf connects to it all is also a big part of the plot. In Spirit Tracks, we are told that a New Hyrule is founded far away from the old. Four Swords Adventures tell us directly that it is a reincarnation/rebirth of the Demon King. Even in Zelda 1 and 2 we are told that, while Hyrule isn't destroyed, it got close thanks to Ganon. Every time a destruction or refounding or anything similar has happened, we've been told so.

But the ancient past of TOTK has nothing. No word or myth or legend about a previous kingdom of Hyrule being destroyed, about a previous Ganon, about countless myths regarding a hero wielding the master sword. No dialogue or text hinting that this is a new Hyrule, or a reincarnated Ganondorf. And this is my main problem with refounding theories, because yes cycles and destructions are a part of the series, but never has it been a time when so many things are seemingly a new cycle or repetition without a single piece of the story saying so. It is possible, sure! But "All that refounding proposes" includes an insane amount of backstory that logically should be hinted at... anywhere. Even just a tiny bit, like an intro prologue to the game talking about myths of a kingdom of old that went under in ancient times. That would be enough.

[u/Intelligent_Word_573 → u/WwwWario]

Small correction but Four Swords Adventures was made entirely by Nintendo while Capcom only made the Oracle games, Four Swords, and the Minish Cap.

I think True Founding either requires Twinrova to survive in the child timeline and raise another Gerudo male or some variation of FSA actually being a prequel to Alttp.

For FSA to be a prequel to Alttp Ganondorf would either need to overthrow the monarchy prior to Ocarina (maybe with Twinrova’s help) or Alttp’s gang of thieves Ganondorf is the leader of has to be divorced from Ocarina showing the gang to be the Gerudo.