Howling:River Song is a....... MAJOR SPOLIERS!!!

The Howling → River Song is a....... MAJOR SPOLIERS!!!

There be spoilers about un-released stories here.
Run back to the forums if you're scared.

This content has been found on (see below) and is a major spoiler and is an official statement into what happens in the Time of Angels and to who River Song is. The Statement is as follows:

[River has] been in prison for a long time for murdering somebody… She [has] killed ‘the best man she ever knew’. River is allowed to leave prison because her archaeological expertise is needed to confirm that a piece of art in a collector’s hands is a Weeping Angel. She thinks it’s a Weeping Angel rather than just a sculpture, but she needs the Doctor to confirm it. There’s a party in a spaceship where the statue is being held and everybody seems to be in 1940’s outfits. The Doctor, Amy and River [get] stuck in a forest, with Weeping Angels peeping out from behind trees. These Angels are much more frightening than before. It’s terrifying. River has a book that contains images of all the Doctors and their adventures, past and future. It’s also the map of their relationship, but he’s not allowed to see it! At the end of the two episodes, the Doctor asks if he can trust her. River Song says, “Yes, you can, but what would be the fun in that?”

The content was found on here http://doctorwhotv.co.uk/time-of-angels-spoilers-4575.htm

So what do you think??? There is many speculation on the blog of the website indicating that she meets the 12th Doctor and kills him and then meets the previous incarnations. So could she be the person who finishes it for the last regernation of the doctor??? -- Michael Downey 14:02, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

When I read the last bit a part of me died. HOW RIVER. HOW?! But i would hate that to happen. Well maybe she didnt kill him. It wont be the way I think she will kill him. BUT I dont want that to happen. Ahh I trusted and loved River Song from the start, but after reading that I just font trust her now. lol Im getting into this too much now.80.65.246.197 19:16, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

Does 'the best man she ever knew' necessarily have to be the Doctor? And with a tendancy for the Doctor to remain unknown for the good deeds he has done to the general public, would 'killing him' actually result in imprisonment --Samoth 20:30, April 22, 2010 (UTC)?

Seems unlikely now we know the best man taught her to fly the TARDIS and not the Doctor 86.26.137.154 10:01, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

No, we know that she "learned from the best", and that it wasn't the Doctor. But that just means that her flying instructor was the best TARDIS pilot/instructor, not that he was the best man she ever knew. The two _could_ refer to the same thing, but there's absolutely no reason they have to.

Also, there's not "many speculation" about River killing the 12th Doctor; there's just one guy throwing it out there and then following up with a bit more explanation after two other people criticized the idea.

Anyway, the question as to whether she killed the Doctor or someone else is still as wide open as it was before the episode. But my suspicion is that it's someone else. My crazy Jack Harkness theory from another thread is starting to grow on me... but actually, I think it's more likely it'll be someone we don't know yet, and that someone will have nothing to do with her learning to fly the TARDIS (or to write Old High Gallifreyan). --Falcotron 11:22, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

• Of course, then again, she could very well come from a point in time from which Gallifrey and the Time Lords were still alive, because, if you think about it... Nobody knows about what "exact" point in time the Time War started. And in The Sound of Drums, Jack (who's also from the 51st century) knew enough about Gallifrey to think about why the Master was insane. And also, Jack recognized that the Doctor regenerated during Utopia, (and even if the Doctor told him that he regenerated, he didn't need to explain it) giving the thought that Time Lords were around, out and about in the 51st century.... River "could've" learned to fly the TARDIS from another Time Lord, cuz lets face it... It may be a testimate to the Doctor's flying abilities that he can pilot a TARDIS made for 6 single handedly... But even in Journey's End, he made a reference that he wasn't "the best"..... TheTARDIScontroller 05:16, January 6, 2011 (UTC)

What i got from the episode dialogue when she was flying the TARDIS is when she told him 'you were busy that day' meant that she was refering to the 12th Doctor teaching her, and just didnt want to mention it to freak 11 out. 86.152.188.14 13:50, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Possibly. The last time they met (for him, and for us), she gave him all kinds of hints related to future Doctors--"have we done the crash of the Byzantium?", the sonic screwdriver, the diary, the secret she whispered in his ear--those are all things that happened with (at the very least) the 11th Doctor. However, since these are happening for her out of order (maybe in reverse order, but with only two examples, it could only be forward or backward, not shuffled...), maybe in the Library she knows that she doesn't have to be so careful about freaking him out, while in the Maze she isn't yet sure of that. --Falcotron 14:24, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Another thought--this doesn't seem too likely, but it's not impossible.

Remember when there were rumors from the press about Alex Kingston being the 11th Doctor? At the time, a bunch of fans speculated about how that would explain (almost?) everything about River Song from the Library--why she has a sonic screwdriver, knows his future, knows his name, etc. That would mean she's deliberately keeping things from her earlier self, but that could be with good reason. The flirting with her earlier self is weird, but not impossible (and the bit about two heads in this episode fits in pretty well). The fact that there's an information paradox (e.g., she tells her former self he can open the TARDIS doors by snapping, but the only reason she knows that is that her future self told her, back when she was him.

None of those are unanswerable objections. But there's one that does seem to be: If River Song were the 11th Doctor, and she died and lived on only in a virtual reality, that's a serious problem for the existence of the 12th and 13th Doctors.

But if she's the 13th Doctor, rather than the 11th, that problem goes away.

Unfortunately (I may have to watch it yet again...), unlike the Library episodes, I'm pretty sure there's stuff in this one that can't be explained by River being a future Doctor not telling us the whole story....

And, as I said, it doesn't seem to likely anyway. But worth bringing up, at least. --Falcotron 14:42, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

does anybody else think that River could be a timelord? Maybe one of the well known female timelords from the old series?

Her relationship with the Doctor, at least in regards to her being able to fly the Tardis better than he can but gets frustrated at his ability to stick his head out the door just about anywhere and know where he is, is rather similar to that of the Doctor and Romana, although that might well be a deliberate reference to the old series of Moffat's part and not actually mean anything(or at least I wouldn't put that past him).Doorofnight 21:59, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I started a nice little thread on that very topic under "Is River Song Human?" here on the Howling. The consensus is that there is too little information to make a call on yet, although the idea is pretty tantilizing. I like the Capt. Jack prospect as "the best man she ever knew" Especially if she had to kill him as a cover for some situation and is willing to serve time for his murder. As she already knows the Doctor isn't human, can that conclusively eliminate him as a "man"? Although with all the flirting she does with him, that isn't a firm answer in and of himself.ReTardis 17:26, April 28, 2010 (UTC)ReTardis

I actually have a theory about River that I've never seen before. Have you ever found it weird that River had had all these experiences with the Doctor, knew his real name, and so on ... yet she was unaware that the 10th Doctor was a prior incarnation entirely, vs the one who she did the Byzantium adventure with? I mean... different face, for starters, that's a facepalm right there. But uh, his wife (?) doesn't know which order the incarnations lived in? Sure, it's possible this is just a detail they're conveniently ignoring because Tennant left the show and they had to cope... but I think this and her appetite for grilling the Doctor about little details she can write in her notebook, might indicate her supposed relationship with the Doctor is 100% a con. The Rani? Yeah, I like that theory as much as anyone, but the Rani would have lost her patience and just started shooting people by now. She doesn't have Romana's mannerisms. I do think she's 'her own character' but I also think she's full of s____. Agonaga 06:35, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

no offence Agonaga, but in my opinion, River Song being the Rani or Romana is full of s***. its what every would LIKE to believe, but that doesnt make it true. plus, she actually said at one point in either 2 parter (i cant remember which), she actually said she has a picture of all his faces. im not really surprised by this because the relationship with the Doctor makes it quite inevitable Ooiue 07:27, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

For ReTardis, the Doctor considers himself a man. When he's talking to the mirror thing in "Vincent and the Doctor" he says something like "a man can be wrong." As for the theory she's a Time Lord. Nah, the Doctor would know. The Thirteenth Doctor 08:43, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Ooiue, Agonaga is arguing _against_ River being the Rani or Romana, not for it, so you don't have to attack him over it. Meanwhile, to be specific, about 16:40 into The Time of Angels, the Doctor says, "How do you know who I am? I don't always look the same." River responds, "I've got pictures of all your faces. You never show up in the right order though. I need the spotter's guide."

Agonaga, she knew that the 10th wasn't the same as the 11th, she just didn't know if he was before or after the 11th. (See the quote.) Also, what would the point of the con be? We already know how her last (in her timeline) meeting with him ends. If she already got what she wanted, why keep meeting up with him anyway? And if she spent years of her life planning something and it got cut short by her death before she could pull it off--well, that's perfectly realistic, but it doesn't seem like much of an interesting story. Or is there some other possibility that I'm missing? --Falcotron 09:43, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Well, there's as many possibilities as stars in the sky. Churchill came right out and said he wanted the Tardis, while River ... River just keeps cooing about getting the Doctor into handcuffs. She's constantly getting her own companions killed, she knows way too much, and she positively flaunts keeping secrets from the Doctor. So, I'm often led to think she's shady. Agonaga 12:29, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I think the handcuffs thing is just that kinky bondage = handcuffs to everyone except people who are actually into bondage.

And we _know_ she's shady--she's been in prison for murder, she's been a museum thief, she's inflated her credentials as an archaeologist. But that doesn't mean she's necessarily pulling a con on the Doctor. Benny wasn't, and neither was Christina de Sousa. Jack, of course, _was_ pulling a con on the Doctor, but he soon turned out to be a valuable companion anyway.

Actually, if you're going to turn River's story into a plot about a 51st-century con-woman trying to work over the Doctor, you pretty much have to bring Jack into it. And we know that the Moff has left Jack open as the only RTD-era companion (unless you count Jenny as a companion) that he might bring on the show. Interesting possibilities there. (And I still like the idea of Jack as the one who taught her how to fly the TARDIS, and also the person she "killed".)

The bit about getting her own companions killed is also an interesting point. In a way, she's like a really incompetent echo of the Doctor. (I'll bet Iris Wildthyme would have a field day analyzing her story.) --Falcotron 23:39, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Something that appears to have been overlooked is the difference between the 11th Doctor's Tardis and the Tardis that catches River when she escapes from The Byzantium. The one she flies towards doesn't have the St John logo on the door which makes me think that perhaps she was really rescued by a different Doctor. Perhaps she was in space too long and went into a coma after being saved by this alternate Doctor thus allowing Prisoner Zero to adopt her shape and impersonate her in TTOA & FaS.

Prisoner Zero could then have been propelled into the 11th Doctor's Tardis from somewhere and made to appear as if it was River all along. This would account for Octavian's statement that The Doctor doesn't know who, or what, she is and would certainly explain her being labelled a prisoner!91.108.36.72 12:03, June 9, 2010 (UTC)ChrisL

It has been stated by Original BBC Doctor Who staff that The Doctor is actually The Other & can never die as The Doctor. He gives his life as The other then emerges as The Doctor.

I'll save Falcotron the typing by asking you to sign your post with four tildes. Also, if Cartmel's plans for the Doctor's looping last days remains intact, I'd love to see it. It would be so cool for the 13th Doctor's episodes to have him traveling through the Time Lock and the Induction Barrier, probably fending off a Gallifreyan military who knows what he's up to better than he does, and landing in post-Pythian Gallifrey to try and make the next iteration better than he remembers it. While I'm daydreaming: The final finale could be the Hand just beginning to stalk him while some strange girl calls him Grandfather, only this time he actually remembers her... Agonaga 23:00, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

It wasn't "stated by Original BBC Doctor Who staff". The last head writer of the classic show was planning out these ideas when the show was canceled, and he and his friends managed to get about half of it into the Virgin novels before they too were canceled, mostly in one novel, NA: Lungbarrow.

Meanwhile, Lungbarrow has notoriously been ignored and flatly contradicted by the EDAs/PDAs and the new series. The later novels and TV episodes establish that the Doctor was born to a mother and a father, who he lived with, as did other Gallifreyans; he later married at least once and had at least two children, which was perfectly normal. (For that matter, even before Cartmel, the Fourth Doctor mentioned "Time Tots".) But Lungbarrow said that Gallifreyans are birthed fully-formed from Looms into a House of Cousins, and are sterile. So, when Lungbarrow says that the Other threw himself into the Looms and was later reconstituted as the First Doctor, how does that fit in?

Most importantly, what does any of this have to do with any of the possibilities discussed in this thread? --Falcotron 03:36, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

Logbarrow must be the most intetionally contradictied thing in the history of Doctor Who, contradicited by the classic series, the new series, and everything else. It's so damn contradicted, whic the writers do on purpose. They're well aware of what it said, but continually throw in that the Doctor has family and has had sex. Also , this has nothing to do witb the subject.

River Song is... SPOILERS! Just that - she is River Song, nothing more, nothing less. She is who she is. Delton Menace 19:35, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I don't believe that River Song kills the Doctor, as that would be too obvious, but I can't think of anyone else for her to kill. But she says "The greatest man I have ever known" could she know someone who she loves more than the doctor? I doubt that, but killing the Doctor would just be TOO obvious.

i agree river song is rivers song and it wont be the doctor who she kills it will be too obvious, so obvious in fact the i get the feeling that it is what Moffat wants us to think she means.

the death will have a big effect on the doctor though, she more or less said this at the end of the big bang and has the death got something to do with the dalek beging for mercy, because to make that happen must mean something 217.23.232.194 07:45, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

I don't knw if anyone has picked up on this but in " The Big Bang" River tells the doctor that he taught her how to fly the Tardis. So when she told the tenth doctor someone else showed her how to fly she must have been referring to the eleventh doctor. 121.208.6.151 13:16, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, I suppose, the doctor is not a man, he is a Time Lord. So River could kill the best man she ever knew and it need not be the doctor. It could be Rory, even.81.141.81.0 14:34, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Nope, can be anyone, but definitely can't be Rory...in the Big Bang, the "best man" has already been murdered, and when River saw the Big Bang's timeline's Auton Rory, she doesn't know who he is and calls him "oh...the Nestene duplicate..."...and she thought he were evil too...so doesn't really make sense to be the "best man"....222.166.181.12 15:24, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Oh yeah. That's true. Well that's a relief anyway. Don't think I could cope with Rory dying again!81.141.81.0 18:00, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

While I agree that Rory probably isn't the 'best man,' your reasoning makes little sense to me. The 'best man' dying, afaik, didn't cause some catastrophic event. So his death then is irrelevant, especially since he is brought back (and could be killed again). And River is hardly the most trustworthy person around, so taking her exclamations or lack thereof as proof of anything is foolish. She's pretty evasive towards most questions. The Doctor didn't seem upset by her killing of the Dalek out of revenge, after it pleaded for mercy. Why? Because she being the only witness probably left out that detail. Vegnas 00:23, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

How did you know there were even a 'good man' then, Bishop and River could have lied? How did you know the Doctor is the Doctor; he is certainly most untrustworthy, he could be some chav boy on the street that stole the TARDIS and modified his biology using a chameleon arch...I think there is a difference between random guessing and speculative...Is Rory still alive a really strong support to make it speculative?

I believe there is a 'best man' because Father Octavian said so and had no apparent motive to lie and River confirmed it. While the Doctor may not be the most trustworthy person he is more so than River. And again, I don't think Rory is the 'best man,' I just thought the reasoning for his exclusion was silly. Vegnas 06:17, July 16, 2010 (UTC)

Well, Father Octavian didn't trust the Doctor neither, so saying that onscreen characters like River deliberately faking a reaction would suggest selectively trusting what the characters say with no reason. Moreover, how many times have River lied and how many times have the Doctor been shown to lie? River just didn't tell the Doctor everything, it's horrible to assume that every natural thing River does or say is a lie.--203.168.176.42 07:48, July 16, 2010 (UTC)

Writers don't write in reactions to mislead...actors act 'actions' they don't act reactions...writing in fake reactions would be extremely bad writing...

Re: Reactions, not what you mean there. I simply meant River lies, so using what she says or does as definitive proof is foolhardy. One minute she implies the Doctor didn't teach her how to fly the TARDIS, the next minute she says he did. She won't answer direct questions and tries to keep secrets from the Doctor. Vegnas 06:17, July 16, 2010 (UTC)

No one knows anything about who taught River fly the TARDIS yet, and as you said, she implied the Doctor didn't teach her...It is you who assumed that the Doctor didn't teach her...she didn't say it explicitly, so you consider that lying? There are countless reasons to account for what she said, Eleventh could have taught some of it or maybe it's the 12th/13th...it's just stupid to say that you assume she meant something when she just wasn't being clear and then you hold her responsible for lying. Not answering direct questions and trying to keep secrets has no relation to how she naturally reacts when she sees Auton Rory...We already know that she did this to avoid interferring with the Doctor's future timeline. If she knew she killed future Rory, do you seriously think it makes sense that she would pretend to shoot at a past Rory and put up an act when the Universe is collapsing?--203.168.176.42 07:48, July 16, 2010 (UTC)

When you are being chased by a Dalek and the world is ending in 20 mins, I don't think anyone would be very good at making up lies about the first thing you see...

Well, she found time to make a joke about the fez in the same scenario. And she make a joke about the handcuffs a minute before she died. Vegnas 06:17, July 16, 2010 (UTC)

The handcuff is related to her death only and has nothing to do with the end of the world, and handcuffs have special sentimental values between the Doctor and her. It makes perfect sense to bring it up when she's dying. The fez was a shock to her when he saved her from the TARDIS, and it shows that she's reacting and not acting and also it means even less time for her to put up an act about Rory.--203.168.176.42 07:48, July 16, 2010 (UTC)

I haven't seen anyone saying that the murdering of the 'good man' didn't cause any catastrophic event...I know nothing about the murder yet...I would be glad if you could point me to the source....

Wat? So you want proof that of an event no one said happened??? Vegnas

Exactly, no one have mentioned anything about the event yet; how do you know that no catastrophic event will happen? You just keep on assuming things that're completely unsubstantiated...--203.168.176.42 07:48, July 16, 2010 (UTC)

I might have missed it, but I actually can't even remember if the Doctor knew that River Song killed the Dalek...the world is ending and the Doctor is about to sacrifice himself, it didn't sound like exactly the best time to share every single detail of you killing a random Dalek203.168.176.42 06:22, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

The Doctor didn't react then, he didn't react later. It's obvious to me she didn't tell him because I think he wouldn't have been so cordial with her if he knew what she did. I believe that scene was meant to give us a one-up on the Doctor. We are aware of River's vicious side while the Doctor is probably not aware. Vegnas 06:17, July 16, 2010 (UTC)

Do you really think it would make sense if River Song stopped the dying Doctor from flying the Pandorica to the TARDIS a minute before the end of the world just to tell him in detail that she killed a Dalek and how the Dalek asked for mercy? We've only seen River meeting the Doctor briefly in another scene after that and it was hardly the right time to bring up the topic of a murder...how awkward it would be to run around in someone's wedding to tell people that you murdered a Dalek when you're only staying for a minute. River only had one brief chance to talk to the Doctor, don't you find it odd to bring back the topic of killing a villain, despite that the problem's already solved, instead of bidding farewell...Moreover, to say that the Doctor is completely ignorant of River's personality is just stupid...She carries around a GUN...she wasn't really the pacificist in the Library neither. The Doctor even knows that she murdered someone...maybe the Doctor doesn't know how far she'll go, but he definitely knows that River is not a Martha Jones --203.168.176.42 07:48, July 16, 2010 (UTC)

Let's hope Moffat don't make this into a running joke and kills Rory whenever there seems to be too little going on...203.168.176.42 05:05, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

How about she could be another Time Lord and she is the person who kills the 12th Doctor to leads to the 13 Doctor (Matt Smith is the 11th doctor but only the 10th regenieration)

Why does everybody think that the ("A very good man. Best man I've ever known") is the Doctor. For I have a funny feeling that the "A very good man. Best man I've ever known" Who she kills will be JFK.

I don't know why but thats the feeling that I have.

She can't be a Timelord, because the Doctor would be able to sense it. She probably didn't kill the Doctor, because if he dies the show is over, and if he regenerate she wouldn't have to go to Stormcage.Icecreamdif 23:30, January 6, 2011 (UTC)

I disagrea. when the 7th doctor died in the hospital, it took him almost 3 hours to regerate. (in the mourge) So what if she killed one of him, and people thought he was acutly dead, she gets locked up and later the body goes missing. HaHaIScareU 19:41, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

She most likely does kill the doctor, however the doctor says peculiarly by the end of the show that time can be rewritten. If he dies or not depends on whether or not the doctor trusts River Song. From now on I think we should think of the doctor in every time period and every moment as the doctor's present, meaning he has no past nor future, unless time locked and even then certain situations can break time locks

Time can be rewritten, but the Doctor still has a past, present, and future in his personal timeline. Otherwise, the Doctor wouldn't mind when Adric or Rory died, because they would still be alive in his past(which is his present) and he would already know who River is, becaause he will find out in his future(which is als his present). Obviously, when you watch old episodes of the show, you can think of the Doctor during that episode as the present, but that even applies to TV shows that don't involve time travel.Icecreamdif 03:43, May 4, 2011 (UTC)