Active Users:633 Time:25/03/2026 08:30:48 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 1207 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:36:16 PM 318 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:38:19 PM 289 Views
Sure why the hell not... *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:56:12 PM 303 Views
I like the way you think *NM* - 20/11/2009 12:17:01 AM 276 Views
Thank you *NM* - 26/11/2009 08:41:04 PM 289 Views
Meh. Yeah, why not? *NM* - 20/11/2009 04:17:46 PM 313 Views
because it's not true *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:59:38 PM 289 Views
Re: Mesaana == Silviana ... - 19/11/2009 11:07:56 PM 861 Views
That's not how speculation works. - 19/11/2009 11:41:55 PM 826 Views
Well, it's how speculation works. Plus, it has charisma! *NM* - 20/11/2009 01:18:48 AM 305 Views
Yes. It is. - 20/11/2009 03:06:04 AM 647 Views
Because I declared it to be so. That is sufficient reason. - 20/11/2009 03:33:54 AM 587 Views
This severely limits any discussion. - 20/11/2009 09:36:17 PM 646 Views
My point exactly . *NM* - 20/11/2009 10:12:06 PM 262 Views
Let me guess - 20/11/2009 12:07:46 AM 745 Views
Yes, the original post was dumb, but... - 20/11/2009 08:09:27 AM 795 Views
Perhaps - 20/11/2009 11:18:56 AM 641 Views
Fails the Sanderson confusion test - 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM 630 Views
Oh, I see your reasoning. - 20/11/2009 03:14:11 AM 710 Views

Reply to Message