So here is how I read it, and I'm by no means right, I'm just trying to interpret the information we have onto a sound science fiction foundation. We know that the Traveller is ancient. It was at Fundament when the Syzygy was orchestrated to wipe out the Krill and their potential interaction with the Worms. We know it made it's way from Fundament to Earth over thousands of years, with an unknown number of pauses during which it raised various civilisations to various levels of advancement before retreating as they were wiped from the Universe. We don't know WHAT the Traveller is. Ship? Entity? Projection from another dimension? Creature? Colony? Gateway? We know that it is huge and maintains a geostationary position at low altitude without visible means of propulsion - not that that means that there is no propulsion, just that we can't see it - implying that at least some part of the Traveller is still active, if only a sub system. The Speaker tells us that the Traveller created the Ghosts "in it's dying breath" (implying that it IS dead.) The Speaker tells us that the Traveller sacrificed itself in order to protect the last city. (implying that it is dead, but still protects) The Speaker tells us that he speaks for the Traveller until it can speak for itself again (implying that rebirth is considered possible) We discover a Hive coven with a Shard of the Traveller - siphoning it's Light, which we stop. (implying that even an isolated Shard of the Traveller still contains something that we are told powers our Guardians and is vital to the future of the Traveller). We discover in the Black Garden that the Black Heart was drawing Light away from the Traveller and keeping it weakened. When we shut down the Black Heart we save the protection of the last City by stopping this drain on the Traveller, with an additional suggestion that now the Traveller will have enough Light to heal itself. My interpretation of this is that "dead" is a relative term when applied to the Traveller. It is dead in the sense that: it can no longer move, it can no longer communicate, it can no longer perform any active defense. It is not dead in the sense that: it maintains it's position, it still protects the last City, it has the potential to heal. No matter what the Traveller actually turns out to be, we can assume that [b]at the very least[/b] it is a highly advanced alien spaceship with some sort of guiding intelligence. If it is non biological we would be perfectly happy with the concept that "dead" is just a matter of mends and application of power. If it is biological, we are perfectly happy with the concept of a coma so deep that the subject is essentially dead - unresponsive, but still capable of healing. (though [i]we[/i] would rarely be so impolite as to say that someone in a coma is "dead" - for a civilisation used to the concept of a group of people who can LITERALLY die and be reborn, this may change the perception of "dead") Fundamentally I believe that the way that the term "dead" is used in relation to the Traveller is not the way that we understand for biological entities who have no Ghost. It is not a final state by any means. More of a temporary off state, a hibernation mode. Not very useful, but not completely done yet. It is my hope that with future content the Traveller begins to heal and to come back into communication with the Ghosts and it's Guardians and that we are able to interact with it more directly.