Active Users:799 Time:30/01/2026 09:08:25 PM
Yes, the original post was dumb, but... Lord Haart Send a noteboard - 20/11/2009 08:09:27 AM
I actually also think that Mesaana is Silviana, but unlike our speculative friend, I've laid out my reasons for said belief in the other thread.

In short:

1) Keeper and Mistress of Novices are positions of power, which the FS like.

2) Silviana was the only Tower AS seemingly unaffected by the tower split.

3) Mesaana figured that after Egwene was captured, she needed to give Egwene some power in the tower otherwise the rebellion would crumble.

4) She also promised that the tower would fight for the Shadow - she probably thinks that Egwene can be manipulated.

5) By swearing first on the Oath Rod, she put herself in the best position to word the Oaths in a way that allowed her to escape them. eg "I am not Black Ajah" rather than "I do not and have not served the Dark One".

6) My main reason: The Epilogue of tGS reads:
"... Was Mesaana still in the Tower?
If so, she somehow knew how to defeat the Oath Rod.
A soft knock came at her door. It cracked a moment later. "Mother?" Silviana asked."


I know literary foreshadowing when I see it.
Reply to message
Mesaana == Silviana ... - 19/11/2009 10:34:45 PM 1172 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:36:16 PM 304 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:38:19 PM 276 Views
Sure why the hell not... *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:56:12 PM 293 Views
I like the way you think *NM* - 20/11/2009 12:17:01 AM 261 Views
Thank you *NM* - 26/11/2009 08:41:04 PM 278 Views
Meh. Yeah, why not? *NM* - 20/11/2009 04:17:46 PM 300 Views
because it's not true *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:59:38 PM 278 Views
Re: Mesaana == Silviana ... - 19/11/2009 11:07:56 PM 829 Views
That's not how speculation works. - 19/11/2009 11:41:55 PM 789 Views
Well, it's how speculation works. Plus, it has charisma! *NM* - 20/11/2009 01:18:48 AM 292 Views
Yes. It is. - 20/11/2009 03:06:04 AM 620 Views
Because I declared it to be so. That is sufficient reason. - 20/11/2009 03:33:54 AM 564 Views
This severely limits any discussion. - 20/11/2009 09:36:17 PM 619 Views
My point exactly . *NM* - 20/11/2009 10:12:06 PM 255 Views
Let me guess - 20/11/2009 12:07:46 AM 721 Views
Yes, the original post was dumb, but... - 20/11/2009 08:09:27 AM 767 Views
Perhaps - 20/11/2009 11:18:56 AM 612 Views
Fails the Sanderson confusion test - 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM 596 Views
Oh, I see your reasoning. - 20/11/2009 03:14:11 AM 681 Views

Reply to Message