FANDOM


  • Something I have been wondering. How did the author go through with explaining how Jamie can see Claire outside of her window in 1945 and the purpose of Frank seeing Jamie's ghost? I just finished reading written in my Own Heart's Blood and I am still a little confused

      Loading editor
    • Diana has not explained this in the books, but has stated it will be explained in the final book, whichever that might end up being. She has given spoiler-y details about the "ghost" in interviews, though.

        Loading editor
    • La Dame Blanche
      La Dame Blanche removed this reply because:
      duplicate
      20:12, March 2, 2016
      This reply has been removed
    • Loved that moment in the pilot for the show...Frank & Claire are in Inverness and as they check-into their hotel, the inn-keeper (Mrs. Baird) tells them that they have arrived in time for the "Samhain festival" (their Halloween). She warns them of ghosts wandering about town that night...

      But I haven't read Own Heart's Blood yet so I hope that there is more to why it's Frank that sees Jamie.

        Loading editor
    • It's not in the existing books about how Frank is able to see Jamie. But Jamie frequently has dreams about his family that are more like visions - and he does tell her about seeing her in the window in one such dream so that's how he can see Claire.

        Loading editor
    • If Jamie sees Claire in the window in 1945, this is prior to Claire traveling through the stones for the first time. Does Jamie travel forward in time to a point before Claire travels back in time? He must then travel back in time to point after the war, where he eventually meets up with Claire again. Seems like he would wait her to return to 1948 and start up their lives again. Instead, he goes back in time, marries someone else has 2 kids, then has the marriage annulled when Claire does eventually return.

        Loading editor
    • 70.121.2.178 wrote: If Jamie sees Claire in the window in 1945, this is prior to Claire traveling through the stones for the first time. Does Jamie travel forward in time to a point before Claire travels back in time? He must then travel back in time to point after the war, where he eventually meets up with Claire again. Seems like he would wait her to return to 1948 and start up their lives again. Instead, he goes back in time, marries someone else has 2 kids, then has the marriage annulled when Claire does eventually return.

      Jamie does NOT time travel. It's his "ghost" that sees her in 1945. Also, it sounds like you need to read Voyager again to understand what actually happens...

        Loading editor
    • It could have been Jamie astral-travelling in his dreams at some point soon after Culloden. Doesn't Jamie tell Claire that he dreamed of her once when she was in the future, and that she was sitting at a table and holding something in her hand?      

        Loading editor
    • I believe in a podcast, it was stated that the ghost was a 25 year old Jamie. Did anyone else read or hear that? Its on another topic thread. Any thoughts on why that age? Please share any spoiler-y info in the interviews as well. I am so happy I came across this site.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, that's why I thought that the 'ghost' of Jamie could've been Jamie astral-travelling into the future in his dreams not long after Culloden. It would make sense, I think, since he would've been lonely and longing for Claire, and we've already seen in Voyager that he dreamed of her while in the cave, in prison and also in Helwater. It would also explain why he looked so upset and frustrated when Frank saw him in Outlander. In his own time he would have just lost Claire so of course he would be deep in despair and frustrated.  

      We already know that he's psychically connected to Bree, Jem and Mandy and can see them through his dreams. It could be that being separated from Claire (and longing for her) is what 'turned on' his psychic ability, so to speak, since there doesn't seem to be any evidence that he had this ability before he was separated from Claire.

        Loading editor
    • For him it would be kind of like 'astral-travelling' as to him he's seeing these things that are happening in the future. But for someone in the future that sees him, ie Frank seeing him staring up in the window at Claire brushing her hand he is considered a ghost because well he's dead by that time. And that's the only time he seems to physically appear. The times he'd seen like Jem and Mandy at Lallybroch no one else saw him there.

      In regards to that exact age of 25, the signifigance is that is means it was after Culloden which took place on April 16,1746. On May 1,1746 Jamie turned 25. Which secondarly signfigance is that in the books it is Beltane (May 1st) that Claire goes through the stones for the first time.

        Loading editor
    • Frank did tell Rev Wakefield that he strongly sensed Jamie's presence a lot during the 18 years he was married to Claire.

      And what a birthday for Jamie! :D He got to meet and fall in love with Claire.  

        Loading editor
    • Helped that Claire never stopped loving Jamie. Jamie and Clarie both kind of have a thing in regards to appearing as 'ghosts'. Jenny saw her 'fetch' during Jamie's wedding to Laogahire.

        Loading editor
    • so, is it confirmed that there will be a 9th book to explain the "ghost" fully?

        Loading editor
    • I don't know that Book Nine will cover anything about the 'ghost'. Diana has said the final book would, but who knows what will be the final book.

        Loading editor
    • I just love the complexity of this series, yet the simplicity that time can not stop true love.

        Loading editor
    • DG has said that the last book will be book 10.

        Loading editor
    • I can't wait to see how Diana explains this in the final book!

        Loading editor
    • I heard that Diana told Ron Moore and Sam Hueghan the secret behind Jamie's ghost. 

        Loading editor
    • How about that scene with Frank in the car returning to the stones and is passed by a man on a motorcycle--foreshadowing? Was it Jamie?

        Loading editor
    • I doubt the motorcyclist in the show was foreshadowing of anything let alone was it Jamie. After all in the books we don't see what's happening in 1946 while Claire is gone.

        Loading editor
    • I always though that Jamie's "ghost" or his dreams would end up being very significant because he sees things that weren't invented and can explain them in detail (like a telephone); like when he has a dream about Bree, Roger, and Jem at Fionas house in Breathe in Snow and Ashes. It has been shown that he can't travel because he touched the stones in Outlander but nothing happened BUT he travels in his dreams??? That has to mean something I am anxious to know how Diana answers that.

        Loading editor
    • From what I saw only one of his hands touch the stone.  And he heard no ringing/buzzing.  I haven't read any of the books yet,but I'm obsessed with this show.

        Loading editor
    • I love the shows as well. I've have a clanking to read the Series. True love story.

        Loading editor
    • I theorize that it's something on the Fraser side. Jamie is able to see into the future in his dreams. Jenny saw Claire at Jamie's wedding to Laoghaire, Jem and mostly Mandy have some extra gift of perception connecting them beyond just being travelers. Even William Ransom has something like when he was little and he remembers hearing his dead mother and trying to follow the voice and hearing stones, he's not a traveler but I think there's just something on the Fraser's line that allows things like that. But again that's just my thought on it. Maybe that's why in the novels there is that prophecy about the Fraser line ruling Scotland, there's just something unique about them.

        Loading editor
    • In the first book Frank tells Claire about a workman who was killed and buried in the cellar of a big house called Mountgerald. Hisghost haunted the cellar except on the anniversary of his death and the ancient feast of New Year's Eve, Midsummer Day, Beltane and All Hallow's.

      In one of the deleted scenes from the first series of Outlander the B&B owner recounts this story to Claire and Frank.

      I wonder if Jamie is the workman and this is one of the days when his ghost can wander.

        Loading editor
    • 92.22.50.23 wrote: In the first book Frank tells Claire about a workman who was killed and buried in the cellar of a big house called Mountgerald. Hisghost haunted the cellar except on the anniversary of his death and the ancient feast of New Year's Eve, Midsummer Day, Beltane and All Hallow's.

      In one of the deleted scenes from the first series of Outlander the B&B owner recounts this story to Claire and Frank.

      I wonder if Jamie is the workman and this is one of the days when his ghost can wander.

      In a later book it's revealed who the workman was, and it wasn't Jamie.

        Loading editor
    • I'm new to the series. Just started reading the books and watching the show.... just wondering your thoughts on: Did Jamie know Clair when his "ghost" was watching her? As this is prior to her traveling back in time.... I'm confused as to how he knew her, if she hadn't already time travelled......

        Loading editor
    • 173.34.122.76 wrote: I'm new to the series. Just started reading the books and watching the show.... just wondering your thoughts on: Did Jamie know Clair when his "ghost" was watching her? As this is prior to her traveling back in time.... I'm confused as to how he knew her, if she hadn't already time travelled......

      I rather think ghosts aren't limited by such trivial conventions as linear time...

        Loading editor
    • La Dame Blanche wrote:

      92.22.50.23 wrote: In the first book Frank tells Claire about a workman who was killed and buried in the cellar of a big house called Mountgerald. Hisghost haunted the cellar except on the anniversary of his death and the ancient feast of New Year's Eve, Midsummer Day, Beltane and All Hallow's.

      In one of the deleted scenes from the first series of Outlander the B&B owner recounts this story to Claire and Frank.

      I wonder if Jamie is the workman and this is one of the days when his ghost can wander.

      In a later book it's revealed who the workman was, and it wasn't Jamie.

      Who was it?

        Loading editor
    • 2601:741:8000:D6B0:A455:EFA7:2C9:ED7C wrote:

      La Dame Blanche wrote:

      In a later book it's revealed who the workman was, and it wasn't Jamie.

      Who was it?

      Someone named "Daft Joey" – i.e., no one that is really important to the story ;) The full story of Mountgerald is told in chapter 39 of Drums of Autumn.

        Loading editor
    • Historical Interest:

      I am very interested in European History, but, didn't realize this until I was finished secondary schooling, at which time I could have studied European history.

      I became interested during the series of Mary,Queen of Scots, who was a Stuart born 75 to 100 years before Culloden. I have 2 ?'s. Did, the real Jamie Fraser fight in Culloden? Also, when someone asks when was the real J.F. born and how old is he? It is said he was born in 1721 and he is 58. The "58" doesn't make sense or I am confused?

        Loading editor
    • 108.24.82.61 wrote: Historical Interest:

      I am very interested in European History, but, didn't realize this until I was finished secondary schooling, at which time I could have studied European history.

      I became interested during the series of Mary,Queen of Scots, who was a Stuart born 75 to 100 years before Culloden. I have 2 ?'s. Did, the real Jamie Fraser fight in Culloden? Also, when someone asks when was the real J.F. born and how old is he? It is said he was born in 1721 and he is 58. The "58" doesn't make sense or I am confused?

      1. There was no real Jamie Fraser, at least not that this character was based on. 2. The character Jamie Fraser from the books was born 1721. The age shown in his character bio, 58, is his age at the end of Written In My Hearts Owen Blood which ended in the year 1779.

        Loading editor
    • 98.240.118.130 wrote:
      I believe in a podcast, it was stated that the ghost was a 25 year old Jamie. Did anyone else read or hear that? Its on another topic thread. Any thoughts on why that age? Please share any spoiler-y info in the interviews as well. I am so happy I came across this site.

      It seemed like the ghost of Jamie was dressed like the Dun Bonnett so it might have been taking place around that time. 

        Loading editor
    • Jamie declared in dragonfly in amber when taking claire back into her time that he would endure purgatory for the chance to see claire again, 200 years ahead. I think that vow in the stone circle made him able to visit claire again as a "ghost" or self fulfilling prophecy to see her again upon her arrival in scotland before she went through the first time...

        Loading editor
    • Perfectjourney730 wrote:

      108.24.82.61 wrote: Historical Interest:

      I am very interested in European History, but, didn't realize this until I was finished secondary schooling, at which time I could have studied European history.

      I became interested during the series of Mary,Queen of Scots, who was a Stuart born 75 to 100 years before Culloden. I have 2 ?'s. Did, the real Jamie Fraser fight in Culloden? Also, when someone asks when was the real J.F. born and how old is he? It is said he was born in 1721 and he is 58. The "58" doesn't make sense or I am confused?

      1. There was no real Jamie Fraser, at least not that this character was based on.

      2. The character Jamie Fraser from the books was born 1721. The age shown in his character bio, 58, is his age at the end of Written In My Hearts Owen Blood which ended in the year 1779.

      there was actually a real jamie fraser. he was the real dun bonnet in the cave. that part is true

        Loading editor
    • Funny - when I read the book - I thought the ghost that Frank saw was Murtah - who I thought died at culloden and he was checking up that claire made it back to modern times safely.   

        Loading editor
    • Anybody know where the square/ monument is where this scene was filmed???

        Loading editor
    • 124.149.136.176 wrote: Anybody know where the square/ monument is where this scene was filmed???

      Falkland – see this post.

        Loading editor
    • 2602:306:375A:2F50:75AB:A4DD:C302:69B8 wrote:
      98.240.118.130 wrote:
      I believe in a podcast, it was stated that the ghost was a 25 year old Jamie. Did anyone else read or hear that? Its on another topic thread. Any thoughts on why that age? Please share any spoiler-y info in the interviews as well. I am so happy I came across this site.

      It seemed like the ghost of Jamie was dressed like the Dun Bonnett so it might have been taking place around that time. 


        Loading editor
    • Could it be that Jamie did travel through time to somehow ensure Claire touched the stones in the first place .. some time in the future (future books) they realise he needs to kick off the sequence of events that led to her travelling back in the first place? Almost like a perfect loop? Would be interesting if, later on, he’s the one who has to go trough the stones and leave her

        Loading editor
    • I agree with you about the perfect loop.  There's a time when Claire speculates with Geilie Duncan about why they can travel through portals and others can't. I paraphrase, but Claire suggests that they are called through by the power or longing of someone on the other side. Perhaps Jamie's "ghost" appears to find her before that power of love draws her back in time by means of the stones. Maybe, because of the love, it's a loop that can cycle through time again and again.

        Loading editor
    • Perfectjourney730 wrote:

      108.24.82.61 wrote: Historical Interest:

      I am very interested in European History, but, didn't realize this until I was finished secondary schooling, at which time I could have studied European history.

      I became interested during the series of Mary,Queen of Scots, who was a Stuart born 75 to 100 years before Culloden. I have 2 ?'s. Did, the real Jamie Fraser fight in Culloden? Also, when someone asks when was the real J.F. born and how old is he? It is said he was born in 1721 and he is 58. The "58" doesn't make sense or I am confused?

      1. There was no real Jamie Fraser, at least not that this character was based on. 2. The character Jamie Fraser from the books was born 1721. The age shown in his character bio, 58, is his age at the end of Written In My Hearts Owen Blood which ended in the year 1779.

      His real name was James Fraser, the IX of Foyers and having fought at Culloden, he reportedly spent about seven years in this cave. His hideout was well known to the locals and they called him Bonaid Odhair, Dun Bonnet, so that they could talk freely about him. "James Fraser, 9th of Foyers, was on very friendly terms with Simon, 13th Lord Lovat, later to be executed for his part in the 1745 Rising, and on that account, Foyers joined Lovat in supporting Prince Charles during his short reign in Edinburgh as King James VIII. After the disastrous battle of Culloden in 1746 the ill-fated Prince Charles fled westwards and took refuge in Gorthleck farmhouse on the Foyers estate but was soon alarmed by a party of Red Coats and effected his escape by jumping out of a window. Foyers also escaped from the battlefield and his efforts to elude capture were every bit as romantic as those of Prince Charles.

      Foyers was excluded from the Act of Parliament pardoning treasonable offences committed in the rebellion, and was forced to live in hiding for seven years after the rebellion. One of his favourite haunts was a cave, a mile to the west of the Falls of Foyers. One day, on looking out of the cave, the laird saw a Red Coat secretly following a girl bringing food for him and, as to avoid capture was a matter of life and death to him, the laird shot the soldier who was buried where he fell. So Foyers's whereabouts could be kept secret, the inhabitants used to speak of him by the nickname "Bonaid Odhair" (Dun Coloured Bonnet)." http://www.caithness.org/caithnessfieldclub/bulletins/2004/historyoffoyers.htm

        Loading editor
    • After the Battle of Culloden, the Duke of Cumberland's troops brought much misery and brutality to the district... . Another outrage was committed on a boy taking a cask of beer to Foyers in his hiding place - when the boy refused to tell of his master's hiding place, the soldiers cut off his hands. http://www.caithness.org/caithnessfieldclub/bulletins/2004/historyoffoyers.htm

        Loading editor
    • There is a lot of writing wondering about the ghost JF looking up at Claire. I have always been curious if when she and Frank are talking about Frank seeing someone, "the ghost", and Frank asks her if there were any soldiers that she nursed during the war that might be looking for her. She answered yes, there was a particular Scotsman who was very fearful of needles...wondered if that is going to show up again. But, I know it would probably have to be in book 9 or 10.

        Loading editor
    • I also wondered if the Scotsman afraid of needles was actually Jamie. I trust all will be explained eventually!

        Loading editor
    • 50.92.133.154 wrote:
      Funny - when I read the book - I thought the ghost that Frank saw was Murtah - who I thought died at culloden and he was checking up that claire made it back to modern times safely.   

      No. Claire hadn't time traveled prior to Frank seeing the ghost. 

        Loading editor
    • Chericola you are absolutely right and the author even states jamie sees her through a dream in her time not he is outside looking in her window. She states this after the episode! I have starz and the author and the directors have a thing where they take an inside look at the show this is where she states it was a dream jamie had told claire about

        Loading editor
    • I think that was Jamie’s Fetch. The same way Jenny saw Claire in Jamie’s and Loaghaire’s wedding.

        Loading editor
    • I think it means that jamie dies in the past and his ghost ends up in the future watching claire.Also, it means,Jamie can’t travel time to the future. He will die in the eighteenth century and claire willget back to her time. whatever... that only explains the ghost to me.

        Loading editor
    • 174.110.173.204 wrote:
      There is a lot of writing wondering about the ghost JF looking up at Claire. I have always been curious if when she and Frank are talking about Frank seeing someone, "the ghost", and Frank asks her if there were any soldiers that she nursed during the war that might be looking for her. She answered yes, there was a particular Scotsman who was very fearful of needles...wondered if that is going to show up again. But, I know it would probably have to be in book 9 or 10.

      I have read a lot on this topic but this is the best theory so far !

        Loading editor
    • Has anyone thought about the possibility that Jamie travels to Claire's time (not as a ghost), just before she goes through the stones, with the express purpose to do something to stop her from traveling back in time in the first place? Claire at that point has no idea he even exists at that point. So, if he stops her from meeting him in the 17th century in the first place, she never falls in love with him (and out of love with Frank) and gets to live a "safe" life oblivious of Jaime and the insanely passionate love they shared. It would be the ultimate "sacrifice" (and the ultimate act of true love perhaps?).. cause he would know what they shared.. but she wouldn't..and thus there would only be one of them who suffers and feels lonely and living half a life. Perfect book 10. Or is it?

        Loading editor
    • 2604:3D08:6780:19A0:7F:8A85:F8F8:498C wrote: Has anyone thought about the possibility that Jamie travels to Claire's time (not as a ghost), just before she goes through the stones, with the express purpose to do something to stop her from traveling back in time in the first place? Claire at that point has no idea he even exists at that point. So, if he stops her from meeting him in the 17th century in the first place, she never falls in love with him (and out of love with Frank) and gets to live a "safe" life oblivious of Jaime and the insanely passionate love they shared. It would be the ultimate "sacrifice" (and the ultimate act of true love perhaps?).. cause he would know what they shared.. but she wouldn't..and thus there would only be one of them who suffers and feels lonely and living half a life. Perfect book 10. Or is it?

      Interesting theory!

        Loading editor
    • In season 1, episode 1 there is mention of Saint Odran - he consented to being buried alive (under the chapel) to ensure a chapel being built would remain standing. It was a sacrifice for what he believed in (furthering the work of Christianity). Could it be possible that Jaime makes a similar sacrifice for what he believes in.. true love, a soul mate?

        Loading editor
    • La Dame Blanche wrote:

      2601:741:8000:D6B0:A455:EFA7:2C9:ED7C wrote:

      La Dame Blanche wrote:

      In a later book it's revealed who the workman was, and it wasn't Jamie.

      Who was it?

      Someone named "Daft Joey" – i.e., no one that is really important to the story ;) The full story of Mountgerald is told in chapter 39 of Drums of Autumn.

      In the TV episode that just aired Bonnet tells Rodger about a house they were building and they needed a sacrifice so the foundation would stand strong. They flipped the coin he was lucky and Daft Joey was killed instead
        Loading editor
    • What if when she traveled back through the stones after Culloden he went back with her but they ended up in different years: jamie before Claire traveled and Claire a few years after she disappeared(as we see in the show). He realizes that she does not know who he is yet and decides to go back

        Loading editor
    • I am new to Outlander, both the series and the books. But I have my own theory at this point. I don’t believe Claire’s first travel through the stones was in 1945. I think it is possible that she was actually born in the 1700s and maybe travelled to the future with a parent as a baby, similar to Brianna. She may not have remembered it, but was drawn to go back as we saw in episode 101. I believe in “fate”. And her connection to Jamie could not be denied in history,,,as we are often told throughout the story. You cannot change history!

        Loading editor
    • Love this theory.

        Loading editor
    • I just find it odd that both Claire and Roger were “orphaned” as small children.  Maybe Roger is also from the 1700s!  And this theory blows my mind,,,,trying to figure out lineage and ancestors for them both!  Can’t wait to find out who Claire’s family was!

        Loading editor
    • I'm wondering how Claire was able to time travel.  Everything I've heard about the show indicates that you can do it, but there has to be a deceased relative that has already done it i.e. Roger, because he is a decendant of Gaelis Duncan and Brianna because she is the daughter of Claire.  Can anyone explain how Claire can do this?

        Loading editor
    • 47.50.219.38 wrote: I'm wondering how Claire was able to time travel.  Everything I've heard about the show indicates that you can do it, but there has to be a deceased relative that has already done it i.e. Roger, because he is a decendant of Gaelis Duncan and Brianna because she is the daughter of Claire.  Can anyone explain how Claire can do this?

      Where do you get the idea that "a deceased relative" has to have already done it? The only hypothesis that the show has really touched on (and very vaguely, at this point) is that the ability to time travel may be an inherited trait, not that one's forebears must be dead...

        Loading editor
    • I read on another thread that clair is an ancestor of Raymond, who himself is an ancient time traveler. 

        Loading editor
    • Also the Native American with silver fillings that Claire saw that led her to the stream

        Loading editor
    • For the last season I would love to see Jamie travel to the 20th century along with Claire, in order to be together. I'd like to see him take his first plane ride, to see skyscrapers and, ultimately to visit the site of his childhood home, the places where he fought his battles.

        Loading editor
    • In the first episode the inn keeper stated it’s halloween, and ghost walk the earth. I think the ghost of Jamie came across Claire in the window and as he states fell in love with her from the first moment he layed eyes on her , Which in turn created the draw to Claire that pulled her back threw time to Jamie.

        Loading editor
    • Mind me because I haven't read the books yet and I will in the next weeks when I have to do so. This was bugging me lately because through Season 1-4 it wasn't explain how Jamie see Claire in Inverness before she traveled though the stones. Maybe Claire dies at the end of the series/book and the only way for Jamie to see her is to travel through the stones himself. It was shown that he cant travel through the stones the first time and maybe it was the absence of a gemstone. And throughout he learned that it needed a gemstone to travel. If I remember correctly you cant know what year you going to end up on the other side but you are drawn to people. Maybe this time when Jamie traveled he ends up on the year where Claire has not yet gone through the stones.

        Loading editor
    • In an interview with Diana Gabaldon, she says there is a REASON Jamies ghost visits Claire in 1945.  and on DG website she confirms it is Jamie's ghost (and not a time traveling Jamie).  DG has also stated that Jamie does not have the time travel gene.  And that he cannot time travel.  I keep wracking my brain as to a REASON Jamie's ghost would visit 1945. Reason means, a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event.  DG also said her readers have guessed all kinds of theories and says fans will never guess.  This makes me want to figure out the reason all the more.  Wjhat reason could Jamie (either as a ghost or an astral (dream) traveler) have for being in 1945?  Does it have something to do with Claire?  Or maybe something to do with Frank?

        Loading editor
    • My theory about the ghost is that when Jamie kills Black Jack Randall on Culloden Moor he almost died himself too. This near death experience enables him to have an astral dream and appear as a 25 year old ghost in 1945, the age he was at Culloden.

      Jamie knows that Frank is a direct descendent of BJR so this could explain why Frank was able to see Jamie’s ghost as Jamie had just killed his ancestor. Some sort of inexplicable parallel time overlap?

      Jamie’s ghost may be there checking Claire is safe or trying to ensure she leaves Frank to travel to him. Just before they parted at the stones before the Battle of Culloden he promises that he would find her. Maybe he is there keeping his promise. His ‘ghost’ appears on this date in 1945 as it is the last day before Claire will go through the stones and effectively be with him.

      He could also be checking that Frank is actually alive in 1945 as he had previously promised not to kill BJR otherwise it would prevent the Randall lineage from continuing and Frank would not have been born.

        Loading editor
    • I don't see Frank as a good enough reason for Jamie to ghost haunt.. It must be about Claire! Always about Claire! I'd like to think that the reason is to connect in some way with her, maybe to begin the stone travel circle. 

        Loading editor
    • Having the time-traveling gene is not a necessity. If you look at how Geillis Duncan came through the stones. Geillis used gemstones, fire and the blood of her alcoholic husband. Geillis had researched the stones for some time in a journal that included all those who disappeared or died near a circle of stones. 

      This indicates that it is possible for Jamie to travel through the stones. If Jamie were to do his research and copy Geillis "spell"... Jamie would also have to renounce his devout Catholicism by embracing witchcraft. On the other hand, he could also die, like a lot of the other would-be-time-travelers. 

      To add, when Claire and Jamie were in the West Indies during a voodoo ceremony, Bree spoke to Jamie through the fire. This indicates that it is possible to breach time and warn or observe others. 

      Granted I am only up to An Echo in the Bone so I may not have encountered contrary information yet :)  

        Loading editor
    • KlB89 wrote: Having the time-traveling gene is not a necessity. If you look at how Geillis Duncan came through the stones. Geillis used gemstones, fire and the blood of her alcoholic husband. Geillis had researched the stones for some time in a journal that included all those who disappeared or died near a circle of stones. 

      This indicates that it is possible for Jamie to travel through the stones.

      Geillis using gemstones, fire and blood does not prove that she doesn't have a time-travel gene, only that she did her research and believed all those elements were necessary. And I hardly think all the characters' conversations (as well as the author's, both online and in The Outlandish Companion, "The Gabaldon Theory of Time Travel" (some of which can be read online)) should be dismissed out of hand because of one character's actions and beliefs.

      As for Jamie... Diana has said for years, in various ways but always in no uncertain terms, that Jamie will never time travel. People can debate whether or not she's telling the truth, but I don't really see the point.

        Loading editor
    • I agree, DG would not say that Jamie cannot time travel and then at the final book say “just kidding” 🙃 so many places in the books Claire, Jamie and frank are like a 3 legged stool. Frank is a part of the equation whether Jamie (or we ) like it or not (IMO) so maybe it’s like the two males meeting in 1945 and at a higher conscious level Jamie is saying to Frank “ I’ll take it from here” (just a thought). Also DG has told Jamie’s actor, Sam Heughan and Ron Moore EP the reason Jamie’s ghost is there. I’m guessing the reason DG tells them this info is because it helps them play the character in a certain and specific way ( similar to JK Rawlings telling Alan Snapes secret in Harry Potter books) Jamie says to Claire at the end of DOA that he took her away from Frank but he will not take Frank away from her. So again this makes me think the 3 are strongly connected on a higher plain. Thoughts ?

        Loading editor
    • Does anyone recall, from season 4 in the show, that Jamie tells Claire that he had a dream about Brianna and her birthmark before Brianna travels back to know him.

        Loading editor
    • i have a theory , but all theories may be wrong and we may not know until book 10 comes out. but since it is clearly known that it is indeed Jamie's ghost that perhaps in one line or plane / version of time that he did infact die in the battle of colloden since it was mentiond that is was specifically a 25 year old version of Jamie and he didn't turn 25 until after the battle of colloden on may the 1st that year but the battle was on the 16th of april of that year. but then i may have his age wrong, im going off memorie here. 
      As we all know the events of colloden happen after claire's initial visit to the 18th century... and perhaps in that timeline where Jamie had passed in the battle he "found " claire again like he promised before claire went back through the stones just before that event happened. Having him do that and frank seeing him not claire somehow affected claire, enabling her to hear the stones to go through them, as was it Isobel i believe her name was, who went to the stones with roger before he went through to find Brianna said that you need to be drawn there by someone for it to work and that is why she couldn't go through the stones or hear them unlike that of any of our travelers who have gone through, and is why Jaime couldn't travel through the stones himself without drawing claire there first as they would have technically never met if this didnt happen somehow although he never actually traveld himself but then he never could or needed to i suppose. and due to clair explaining when/ how she came through the stones ghost jaimie would have conveinently been able to go to inverness when she was first their, and the purpose of Jaime's ghost existing was because there was a story to be told or a reason to exist, which Claire was saying to the mohawks when they where talking about the ghost of otter tooth.. so its all somehow linked it is just that we dont know the specifics and nor will we until we get to read the work from the brilliant mind of our author.

      so to summarise a Jaimie from before Clair traveled this time that we see came to find Clair again to keep his promise wich in turn enabled her to come through in the first place but with frank seeing him not claire for some reason unknown to us at the present, maybe it was because that that Jaimie knew that frank was the man that would raise his unborn child and that connection somehow is the link to Clair that brings her through the stones in the first place while keeping his promise of finding her or perhaps it was just a coincidence that frank saw him and it just happened to work out that way but i dont think so there must have been a reason for Jamie not to go straight to claire. perhaps it was simply that he had one of his dreams but since its been said that it is his actual ghost and considering that it fell on the pagan holiday of which ghosts could "walk the land to do as they please good or bad" my first theory seems to fall in place better, but who really knows than the writer herself. we will find out eventially i hope 

        Loading editor
    • I'm replying to the theory above by JoJo711 who believes Claire was originally born in the 1700s and traveled through time with her parents. I've thought of this as well and think it's a good theory. There are hints of this in the show: Claire describes being in an auto accident and the sense of falling. This "accident" is mysterious. Who are the couple in the car? It's never referenced again. I think this might be a false memory and that what Claire actually experienced but remembers as a car accident was traveling through the stones. Also, when Claire goes back to Jamie the third time, she says she's always been afraid of puddles because as a girl she was afraid she would fall into them and keep falling. I think she's afraid because as a girl, she had "fallen" through the stones. I also think it's her fate to go to Jamie and the time in which she belongs.

      Also, my thought about the theory (above) that Jamie's ghost is there for the purpose of stopping Claire from coming back, thereby making the ultimate sacrifice for her (preventing her from experiencing the dangers and pain in the 1700s). That would be an incredibly sad ending. But the problem with this theory is that Claire says in the voiceover in the first episode, that after she contemplates the vase and wonders if she would have been happy had she bought it, "she knows this" that (paraphrasing) even with all that heartbreak, pain, etc. that follows, she would "make the same choice." That tells me that she will always (and already has at that point?) make the choice to be with Jamie.

        Loading editor
    • Sierraspring, you are right on. I originally realized that Claire was not of the 20th century because of the extensive explanation of how she became an orphan. The same as Roger becoming an orphan. I think he also was born in the 1700s. But I tried to think about all the characters we were made aware of and who Claire could possibly be the child of. I think we will find it is someone who also has healing capabilities.

        Loading editor
    • OutlanderLassie19
      OutlanderLassie19 removed this reply because:
      decided not to put in my two cents...
      12:27, June 28, 2019
      This reply has been removed
    • Sierraspring, I think Claire is older than that.  In the DG book "Seven Stones to Stand or Fall", there is a story called "The Space Between", involving - among others  - Master Raymond and Paul Rakoczy, the Comte St. Germain (who is NOT dead/who is also a time traveler). Raymond says to him,  "You didn't know ... that you were one of mine.  Everyone has an aura of some kind," Raymond said. "But only my ... people ... have THIS." Meaning the blue aura, that he saw around Claire.  I think Claire may be VERY old, like Raymond and the Comte, and perhaps has powers that she doesn't realize, like when she is operating.  She envisions herself in the body, sees the veins, the muscles, etc.  Just throwing it out there!

        Loading editor
    • 98.240.118.130 wrote: I believe in a podcast, it was stated that the ghost was a 25 year old Jamie. Did anyone else read or hear that? Its on another topic thread. Any thoughts on why that age? Please share any spoiler-y info in the interviews as well. I am so happy I came across this site.

      I remember in an interview Diana Gabaldon said Sam Heughan asked her in season how old Jamie’s ghost was. She said 25. At colladen Jamie is still 24 but would turn 25 in a couple of weeks. So I’m thinking Jamie had a near death experience when he had the high fever at Lallybroch and his ghost traveled to 1943. DG also said there was a reason he did this. And in season 4 (tv not book but still with DG approval) Claire said this about ghosts, “Ghost only exist when there is something to be remembered, a story worth telling, or a message worth relaying”

        Loading editor
    • I like the explanation that the people who are able to travel through the stones can possibly live more than one life.  Otherwise, Claire would not be there in 1945 for Jamie's ghost to see.  That said, I haven't read ANY of the books and I've only recently seen the first 4 seasons but from season 2 I've been wondering how and why Jamie came to Claire FIRST.  There has to be something "cyclic" about the lives that the travellers live.  As I say, I've not read the books so I'm assuming that Claire stayed in the 1700's with Jamie and died there.  Perhaps I'm wrong and he sent her back and THEN he'd be able to see her in 1945.  He'd have to have the ability to show himself as 25 year old though.  And in that case he wouldn't be a ghost would he.  We KNOW he achieves age 25 and older so IF a ghost he must be able to choose what 'visage' to assume.  Why 25 then?  Why not the appearance he had at whatever age he might have sent her back?    Perhaps "Ghost" isn't the right word for the 1945 visitor.    He's definitely Jamie.  You can see his wanted poster on the wall behind the 1945 detective that calls Frank "a FOOL!".  

      Something else that bothers me is Geillis' age.  More specifically she didn't seem to age at all.    And this you can tell me.  Why did Geillis believe you would die going through the stones more than twice?  In the tv series she was surprised that Claire had gone through the stones 3x and was still alive.                    

          • Please don't tell me if he sends her back or if she dies with him in the 1800's.***  
        Loading editor
    • The books are able to dive into the whole concept of time travel a little better. Since you have watched all four seasons of the TV series, I'm going to assume everything below is only supplementary and completely spoiler free.

      Time travel is extremely hard on the body in DG's Outlander Universe. In Voyager (book 3) when Claire goes back to the 1700s to find Jamie, it almost killed her, and she makes it very clear to the reader--and even goes as far as to tell Jamie in Abandawe that if she were to go back through again, she doubts she would survive.

      Geilis is drawing off of TONS of research she did prior to her trip through the stones, and there were a lot of instances where bodies were found at the stones, theoretically from unsucessful passages. Taking it a step further, when Claire and Jamie are speaking in Drums of Autumn (book 4) about Brianna's time travel and sending her back through to her own time, Claire tells Jamie that when you travel through, you can hear the screams of the souls who went through the stones but never made it back out.  

      As to whether Claire goes back to her time, or dies with Jamie in the 1700s, no one could tell you the full story except DG and Sam Heughan (who was given the privilege of reading that chapter in which all is revealed) . According to Diana, there are 10 books in total, and book 9 is due to drop later this year (Go Tell the Bees that I'm Gone). All we know is that some version of Jamie is watching Claire on that fateful night in 1945--we the readers and viewers can only speculate as to how or why (for now anyway).

        Loading editor
    • Because DG's proposed last book was called "King Farewell," I think Jamie dies in the 1700s. I think Claire dies with him. I can't imagine and ending to the TV Outlander that is otherwise with these two soulmates. I don't think she goes back to her time because there's no reason to go back. She said before the Battle of Culloden she would die with him. She would want to be where he is. She made her choice to be with Jamie long ago. I agree with others that believe Claire may be related to Master Raymond and is perhaps a time traveler that dates from his time in prehistory (the reference to the color blue and that he's a healer). I also think Claire and Jamie are intertwined even more deeply than they know.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.