The Boltons and their fear of Jon Snow/Stark - Connection to the Pink Letter

[the conquoring bastard25]

I do not write what I write without some thought and pretext.

The first letter that we see written by Ramsay was written to Cat or Robb, at the Twins. Cat thinks that the ink is strange that it's brown and flaking.

Asha he sends her a letter stating that he wrote it in the blood of 63 ironborn from the Moat and that she should leave the north or suffer the same.

The wedding invite to Jon at the wall, Jon notes queer brown flaking ink again, it was written in someone's blood.

Then we have the letter from Ramsay to Jon, declaring war on the Watch because jon has been playing the game of thrones in the North. He's declared that he skinned 6 women and gave that skin to warm the King beyond the Wall and that he's in a cage for all the north to see. Next he claims that if Jon doesn't met his demands that he would cut out his black heart, those are fighting words. The entire letter was one giant threat and provocation. This letter reeks of malice, hatred and out and out rage, yet it's not written in blood?

Given what we know about the Mad Man of Bolton, he's not known for his restrain nor his intelligence. Cunning and being able to jump on an opportunity doesn't take great intelligence just common sense. This man that hunt women and names them after his dogs and his own father can barely stomach the man, but still he shows restraint and doesn't use his usual cruelty and writes this letter in maester ink. I don't think so, it's not in Ramsay's nature to do something like that, he's all about showing the world that he's something to be feared. How better to inspire fear, write a threating letter in black ink or in the blood of your supposed enemies?

[TheCrannogDweller]

I do not write what I write without some thought and pretext.

The first letter that we see written by Ramsay was written to Cat or Robb, at the Twins. Cat thinks that the ink is strange that it's brown and flaking.

Asha he sends her a letter stating that he wrote it in the blood of 63 ironborn from the Moat and that she should leave the north or suffer the same.

The wedding invite to Jon at the wall, Jon notes queer brown flaking ink again, it was written in someone's blood.

Then we have the letter from Ramsay to Jon, declaring war on the Watch because jon has been playing the game of thrones in the North. He's declared that he skinned 6 women and gave that skin to warm the King beyond the Wall and that he's in a cage for all the north to see. Next he claims that if Jon doesn't met his demands that he would cut out his black heart, those are fighting words. The entire letter was one giant threat and provocation. This letter reeks of malice, hatred and out and out rage, yet it's not written in blood?

Given what we know about the Mad Man of Bolton, he's not known for his restrain nor his intelligence. Cunning and being able to jump on an opportunity doesn't take great intelligence just common sense. This man that hunt women and names them after his dogs and his own father can barely stomach the man, but still he shows restraint and doesn't use his usual cruelty and writes this letter in maester ink. I don't think so, it's not in Ramsay's nature to do something like that, he's all about showing the world that he's something to be feared. How better to inspire fear, write a threating letter in black ink or in the blood of your supposed enemies?

Show me where it says that the Pink Letter was written in maester's ink:

Bastard, was the only word written outside the scroll. No Lord Snow or Jon Snow or Lord Commander. Simply Bastard. And the letter was sealed with a smear of hard pink wax. “You were right to come at once,” Jon said. You were right to be afraid. He cracked the seal, flattened the parchment, and read.

In fact, Jon never thinks about the type of ink or the handwriting - which to me suggests that he recognizes it (Ramsay has a distinctive penmanship, remember). Further down, Jon thinks this:

“No. I ride south.” Then Jon read them the letter Ramsay Snow had written.

So he's seen Ramsay's distinctive handwriting before and he is convinced that this letter was written by him.

[BorhPT]

One thing we do know. If they had really killed Stannis and his bannermen, the letter would surely say: I write this with the blood of your false king and his friend... or even: I send you a piece of King.

If it was in fact Ramsay writing the letter, i don't think his father and the other lords knew about it. If they did, they would surely sign the letter too, showing Jon that the North was with the Boltons and not the Starks...

But still i don't think Ramsay did it. I've been reading more about these chapters and I do think it was Mance. He was left with 4 spearwives in WF. Maester Rhodry was at his table when this happened (maester + pink wax), one spearwife climbed down Jeyne's window to the Godswood (where Maester Luwin's ravens were) and went to Mance. His motives, i'm not sure about.. there's a lot we don't know about Mance, but this could be the 'trick' that he talked about. For all we know he could have written more letters and sent them to the kingdom, with diferent stories. I guess we'll only know when tWoW come out.

[TheCrannogDweller]

One thing we do know. If they had really killed Stannis and his bannermen, the letter would surely say: I write this with the blood of your false king and his friend... or even: I send you a piece of King.

If it was in fact Ramsay writing the letter, i don't think his father and the other lords knew about it. If they did, they would surely sign the letter too, showing Jon that the North was with the Boltons and not the Starks...

But still i don't think Ramsay did it. I've been reading more about these chapters and I do think it was Mance. He was left with 4 spearwives in WF. Maester Rhodry was at his table when this happened (maester + pink wax), one spearwife climbed down Jeyne's window to the Godswood (where Maester Luwin's ravens were) and went to Mance. His motives, i'm not sure about.. there's a lot we don't know about Mance, but this could be the 'trick' that he talked about. For all we know he could have written more letters and sent them to the kingdom, with diferent stories. I guess we'll only know when tWoW come out.

First of all, most ravens only fly to one location. So Mance selecting one at random in the Godswood and hoping that it goes to the Wall is impractical at best.

Do you remember who else was in the Great Hall? The Boltons themselves, along with some of their men-at-arms. I'd say that this is a further clue that Mance did get caught, alongside 3 of his spearwives. The fourth one was probably still in Jeyne's bed when the guards in front of her room burst in and arrested her.

As far as Stannis's defeat goes, I don't buy it. I think Ramsay bought it, but I myself don't buy it. To me it seems like a counter-intelligence maneuver. In Theon's sample chapter from Winds, we see that

Stannis has captured Arnolf Karstark's maester, along with two Winterfell-bound ravens. I think he used them to feed the Boltons false information of his defeat, while sending the "victorious" Manderlys back to Winterfell to open its gates from within later on.

[BorhPT]

First of all, most ravens only fly to one location. So Mance selecting one at random in the Godswood and hoping that it goes to the Wall is impractical at best.

Do you remember who else was in the Great Hall? The Boltons themselves, along with some of their men-at-arms. I'd say that this is a further clue that Mance did get caught, alongside 3 of his spearwives. The fourth one was probably still in Jeyne's bed when the guards in front of her room burst in and arrested her.

As far as Stannis's defeat goes, I don't buy it. I think Ramsay bought it, but I myself don't buy it. To me it seems like a counter-intelligence maneuver. In Theon's sample chapter from Winds, we see that

Stannis has captured Arnolf Karstark's maester, along with two Winterfell-bound ravens. I think he used them to feed the Boltons false information of his defeat, while sending the "victorious" Manderlys back to Winterfell to open its gates from within later on.

Im not so sure about that. That could be Stannis plan all along, but i just dont buy it that Mance got caught and told them who he was. He knows Winterfell and he had a plan since the begining. There were also 2 more maesters in WF that took care of Maester Luwin's ravens. They somehow know to where they fly. In the confusion i can see Abel and the girls taking one of them to send a message and then hiding somewhere, maybe in the crypts.

[the conquoring bastard25]

"Might be a skin of lies," Tormund scratched under his beard. "If I had me a nice good quill and pot of maester ink...." pg 909 DWD hardback edition. There is no description of flaking brown ink.

Your point about him riding south and what not doesn't matter because the dang letter is signed by "Ramsay Bolton trueborn lord of Winterfell" Jon thinks or knows that the letter was written by Ramsay, why would he doubt that the letter is written by anyone else.

Not to mention that the Pink smear of wax, as a northern he would know that the Dreadfort uses pink sealing wax. All signs point to the letter being authentic. But there are little things that just don't make sense.

Reek, for one. Jon does not know a Reek, he's probably never even heard the name. Yet he knows who Theon is. So why not say something about Theon. That he wants Theon back, as that would make more sense to Jon.

Jon didn't tell the world that the King beyond the wall was dead, that was Stannis. Before Mance leaves for the wall, he had no idea that he wasn't dead, nor does the rest of the north.

Things just don't add up for Ramsay to be the author of that letter. It's definitely his style to write such a letter, but its the lack of blood that makes me say no.

[TheCrannogDweller]

"Might be a skin of lies," Tormund scratched under his beard. "If I had me a nice good quill and pot of maester ink...." pg 909 DWD hardback edition. There is no description of flaking brown ink.

That comment has nothing to do with the Pink Letter. As it stands, we don't know if it was written in blood or in black ink - but it doesn't matter. Just because Ramsay used blood on one occasion, doesn't mean that he always writes his letters in it.

The bigger issue to me is the handwriting. When Jon received the first letter by Ramsay, he noted the very distinct penmanship of the Bolton bastard. The fact that he makes no mention of the handwriting of the Pink Letter, to me suggest that he recognizes it as undoubtedly being written by Ramsay.

Your point about Reek is also pretty irrelevant. Whoever wrote the letter, they all know that Reek is Theon - and Ramsay is the only one who would actually use that name.

[Stargaryen81]

That comment has nothing to do with the Pink Letter. As it stands, we don't know if it was written in blood or in black ink - but it doesn't matter. Just because Ramsay used blood on one occasion, doesn't mean that he always writes his letters in it.

The bigger issue to me is the handwriting. When Jon received the first letter by Ramsay, he noted the very distinct penmanship of the Bolton bastard. The fact that he makes no mention of the handwriting of the Pink Letter, to me suggest that he recognizes it as undoubtedly being written by Ramsay.

Your point about Reek is also pretty irrelevant. Whoever wrote the letter, they all know that Reek is Theon - and Ramsay is the only one who would actually use that name.

Missy's Bastard - I completely understand your stance regarding this subject. Here is the thing, after reading 5 of these books you tend to see reoccuring themes by certain characters also consistent writing by George RR Martin helps to make the reader think. Now, it is clear that Ramsay had sent three letters that Martin mentioned prior to the BASTARD letter sent at the end. All three of those letters Martin made a point to mention that blood is used as the ink. Maybe not all three but I do know he mentions the distinct penmanship of Ramsay's. So throughout the entire series we have 3 letters sent and all 3 in blood. Then all of a sudden we have the BASTARD letter where Martin doesn't mention the type of ink or the penmanship. You are right that it doesn't say black ink was used but it def. doesn't state blood was used like the previous 3 letters. You questioned the penmanship wasn't mentioned either. This is Jon's POV chapter, if you got that letter you honestly mean to tell me you would be checking the penmanship, i doubt it my mind would be racing from the words written. This is a style of writing that Martin uses. He sets up the style of letters Ramsay's sends and then all of sudden there is no mention of that style in the fourth letter. Also, the timing of everything along with the Reek chapter in the 6th book that was released really leads us to believe that the letter is a fake. It is not about what Martin says its about what he doesn't say that makes the reader have theories about who wrote this letter.

The point about Reek is NOT irrelevent either. Everyone at the wall including Jon do not know who Reek is. Ramsay would have said Theon instead of Reek so Jon knew who he meant. Ramsay used the name Theon in other letters instead of Reek. I get that that point is mute because Theon prob wasn't "reek" at those times. However, my point still is the same Jon wouldn't have know what Ramsay meant by Reek. Now, Mance was spending time in WF prior to everything that went down. That is enough time to for him to know that Reek is Ramsay's little bitch. But Mance doesn't know that Reek is Theon. Therefore Mance thinks Reek is a known person and that is why he titled him Reek in the letter instead of Theon, he doesn't know it is Theon.

The timing of the letter, the mere fact that there was no mention about the characteristics of the BASTARD letter compared to the previous 3 letters sent by Ramsay, and the request for Reek and certain wildings (that Ramsay wouldn't care about), leads me to truly believe that Mance wrote the letter.

You want to many details to get your answer instead of opening your own mind and thinking. I saw one of your arguments was how would Mance know how to write, how did he know to use the Pink Wax, how did he know to use the correct Raven, how did he not get caught doing it. If Martin gave us details about every little action the story would never end. This is filler that is not important and you shouldn't get hung-up on it. I truly believe Mance can write he is King beyong the wall because he is smart. he spent time at WF before everything went down and easily could have seen that pink wax is used - the fact that it was smeared wax with no stamp makes me think he was in a rush when putting the wax down and there was no time for a Bolton stamp or he simply didn't know which one was the Bolton stamp, lastly, How does a new maester show up to WF and know which ravens will fly to castle black? There is some system set-up that Martin doesn't explain. I am sure he would have been able to figure out which raven goes to castle black. Remember these are their lives and their world. If it was in our world we are so lazy we make other people do this type of work.

I wish I had your mindset about these theories because I do believe that type of mindset is naive and therefore you will be surprised more by the story then say people who buy into these theories. Sometimes you have to look at what was previously said to what is being said. Alot can be told by not mentioning something.

[Stargaryen81]

Missy's Bastard - it's not just one letter written in blood it's every letter that Ramsay sent was written blood prior to the Bastard letter. If only one of the three letters was in blood then this theory wouldn't be as strong however, martin made a point to show all three letters before the BASTARD letter were in blood. If Ramsay truly killed Stannis or had Mance he would def. write that letter in blood.

Please don't respond back either stating show me where it states that the letters were blood. I am telling you they were, I do believe someone mentioned them in this thread and if you want to prove me wrong then look it up yourself.

[the conquoring bastard25]

I have given you 3 other letters that Ramsay has written.

The letter to Cat before the Purple wedding was written by Ramsay and it was written in blood. Probably in Theon's own blood seeing as there was a piece of Prince sent along with the letter. This was a letter written to show the Starks he was dealing with the North's enemies. Cat asks what Ramsay has done to Theon and Roose replies that he removed some skin nothing really important.

The letter to Asha was written in blood. In the blood of 63 ironborn men. A warning that her turn was coming if she didn't leave. Asha is disgusted with this tactic and thinks about her brother Theon.

The letter inviting Jon to the wedding was written in blood. A wedding announcement! That's a happy occasion and still he wrote the damn letter in blood. Jon wipes the flaky brown ink off of his hands. He purposely thinks about the ink that was used.

Ramsay is a creature of habit. His rages/calmness it's all apart of his ruthless, crazed personality. Ramsay is not the type to write such a threating letter and not write the letter in blood.

The point about Theon/Reek is important. If you are demanding that someone or something is brought back, it's best that the person your talking to knows who the hell your talking about. Jon doesn't know who Reek is. He does know who Theon is they grew up together. Jon knows about Theon's supposed crimes, he doesn't know who the Hell Reek is.

Not to mention that Roose would never have shown his hand so openly. He's the type to sit back and send someone else to do his dirty work. He would quietly send someone to slip a blade between Jon's ribs and be done with it.

On the surface asking for his bride back is reasonable. Yet, she's Jon's blood what could be the harm for sending her to "visit" her brother. Unless you have something to hide like she isn't Arya and could blow the whole game wide open.

Jon is the one person in the North that could cause the Bolton's whole operation come crumbling down.

He's the last of Ned's sons. He's the blood of Winterfell. He knows the north and it's habits. He's the one person that can knit the North back together under the direwolf banner.

I'm not disputing that Ramsay isn't sick or stupid enough to write the letter, but the lock for me was the lack of blood. If its Ramsay that wrote the letter he would have made mention that he was writing this letter in the blood of the six spear wives that are in Winterfell. He has the king beyond the Wall in his grasp and yet he didn't take the opportunity to write the letter in his blood, something is foul in the state of Demark.

We won't know who wrote the letter until Winds and then we shall see who is write. I'm done arguing.

[TheCrannogDweller]

But Mance doesn't know that Reek is Theon. Therefore Mance thinks Reek is a known person and that is why he titled him Reek in the letter instead of Theon, he doesn't know it is Theon.

This just goes to show that you don't know what you're talking about. Mance does know who Reek is. He is present at the wedding where Theon gives fArya away - and Theon also has a conversation with one of the spearwives later in which she clearly shows that she knows who he is - and if she knows, so does Abel.

The woman leaned close. Her breath smelled of wine. “If you have no smile for me, tell me how you captured Winterfell. Abel will put it in a song, and you will live forever.”

“As a betrayer. As Theon Turncloak.”

“Why not Theon the Clever? It was a daring feat, the way we heard it. How many men did you have? A hundred? Fifty?”

If Ramsay truly killed Stannis or had Mance he would def. write that letter in blood.

Ramsay didn't kill Stannis - and he doesn't claim that in the Pink Letter either. He says that Stannis is dead, "smashed in seven days of battle".

You should probably learn to recheck your sources before posting. You know, so that you can avoid embarrassing yourself in the future. :)

I have given you 3 other letters that Ramsay has written.

The letter to Cat before the Purple wedding was written by Ramsay and it was written in blood. Probably in Theon's own blood seeing as there was a piece of Prince sent along with the letter. This was a letter written to show the Starks he was dealing with the North's enemies. Cat asks what Ramsay has done to Theon and Roose replies that he removed some skin nothing really important.

The letter to Asha was written in blood. In the blood of 63 ironborn men. A warning that her turn was coming if she didn't leave. Asha is disgusted with this tactic and thinks about her brother Theon.

The letter inviting Jon to the wedding was written in blood. A wedding announcement! That's a happy occasion and still he wrote the damn letter in blood. Jon wipes the flaky brown ink off of his hands. He purposely thinks about the ink that was used.

Catelyn didn't receive a letter from Ramsay - she was only told about it by Roose and shown the piece of Theon's skin the bastard sent with it. And the other two letters were most likely written at the same time - seeing how they are almost identical.

So what you've given me is 2 letters, which were written on the same occasion, and one strip of skin.

The point about Theon/Reek is important. If you are demanding that someone or something is brought back, it's best that the person your talking to knows who the hell your talking about. Jon doesn't know who Reek is. He does know who Theon is they grew up together. Jon knows about Theon's supposed crimes, he doesn't know who the Hell Reek is.

Not to mention that Roose would never have shown his hand so openly. He's the type to sit back and send someone else to do his dirty work. He would quietly send someone to slip a blade between Jon's ribs and be done with it.

Again, the point about Reek is irrelevant. Everybody at Winterfell knows that Reek is Theon. And Ramsay is the only one who would actually refer to Theon as Reek.

Also, Roose didn't write the letter, Ramsay did. So that's a moot point as well.

[MadScience]

Wow Missy, that's a nice opinion you have there.

A lot of the points you are challenging are valid.

Some of yours are valid as well.

This was one of the many intentionally vague sections left open by Martin, and he delights in readers discussing and trying to figure them out. Though, he prefers his readers to be more open minded while in discussion, rather than writing off all differing opinions as a 'moot point.'

Since you are interested in small details, I find it interesting that the letter refers to the Night's Watch as 'black crows.' Where in the books does anyone other than wildlings use the term 'black crows' to describe the NW? It's an interesting choice, nonetheless.

[MadScience]

Also, here's some info someone gathered that I found interesting. Some speech patterns Mance has used (some while he was prancing around as Rattleshirt.)

Mance Rayder is the only name in the letter (if we discount Ramsay's signature). Everyone else is called "false king," "red whore," "my bride," "little prince" etc.

Similarities in speech patterns:

I have him in a cage, for all the north to see (letter)
He burned the man he had to burn, for all the world to see ("Rattleshirt")

Your false king is dead, bastard (letter)
I want his daughter and his red witch (letter)
I'll range for you, bastard ("Rattleshirt")
Ask your red witch, bastard ("Rattleshirt")

The letter also uses the term "black crow," which seems to be used exclusively by wildlings.

Also, a weak "hint" that might just be coincidence, but two colors are mentioned in the letter: red and black. Those are the colors of the cloak that Mance left the Night's Watch for (his black cloak repaired by pieces of red fabric)

Oh, and another thing: Cutting someone's heart out doesn't seem like Ramsay's style, who rather likes to threaten to flay your skin off and cook it, make boots of it or whatever. But Styr once suggested to Mance, that Jon's heart might still be black, and Mance told him "Then cut it out."

[the conquoring bastard25]

All right your right about the letter to Cat.

That doesn't change the fact that the letter to Jon in the from of a wedding invite was, nor the fact that the letter to Asha was written in the blood of her own Ironmen. Nor do we know when the letter to Jon was written. The letter very well could have been written when they got to Winterfell and executed all of the squatters in Winterfell. Roose did hang them after they helped build the new roof for the great hall.

Mance also knows the Ramsay calls Theon Reek as you yourself pointed out. Also the Bolton boys call Theon, Reek, the Frey boys call him Reek as well. There a lot of people in Winterfell that call Theon, Reek, there aren't a lot of people at the Wall that know anything about Reek. Yet Jon does know about Theon Turncloak. If I wanted you to know who I was talking about does it make sense to call him by a name I know you would recognize or one that you have never heard of and hope you figure out who I'm talking about.

Not to mention what purpose could having Val, The red Witch, Wildling Prince, have any value to Ramsay? When the people he should be concerned with are his wife and daughter. Can't remember if he mentions them or not. They could stand hostages to the Iron Throne, Shireen could be wed to Ramsay or Roose and they would have a true claim to the throne as soon as they got a child on her.

I'm not saying the Mance wrote the letter either but I definitely know that Ramsay didn't.

In a world where lords and ladies open their mouths and lies pour forth, it's a little naïve to think this letter is on the up and up. Martin has gone through remarkable pains to show that nothing should be taken at face value. That reality and perception aren't mutual. That what's said on the surface is never what it seems. That there are few truly honest men in this life.

That to get to the truth of thing is never simple and straight forward. That no conversation or action is simply what it seems, nothing should be taken for granted everything should investigated. That the old adage is most true believe half of what you see and none of what you hear. That just because something is reality or truth for one doesn't mean that it's going to be your truth.

If Ramsay wrote the letter, and he wants Jon to know who he's talking about, why would he call him Reek? That doesn't make sense. It just doesn't I don't care what you say or what you think, I doesn't make sense.

[TheRealRedRonnet]

None taken. :)

My point is that he is not only a bastard, but also a sworn brother of the Night's Watch. So I don't see how they can see him as a serious threat, unless Roose knows about Robb's will.

Also, not for nothing, but wouldn't Roose also know about Bran and Rickon being alive?

[joluoto2]

They don't need to see his as a potential pretender to realize he's a threat. He is a Lord Commander of the Watch who has been helping their enemy (Stannis). Of course he's a threat.

[BorhPT]

I just finish reading the Pink Letter again and i'm even more sure that it was made as a provocation to make Jon act... but, by whom???

If anyone has seen HBO's Rome, Julius Caesar (Mance Freaking Rayder in GoT ahah) had one similar episode to this one when he sent Pompeius terms that he just couldnt accept, thus starting a war. The Pink Letter reminds me of that.

There's one thing i find weird about this. The Boltons would gain absolutely nothing by doing this. Simple... if it's true, their army is weakened, in moral and numbers. They lost men against Stannis, their bannermen are near rebellion, the weather is relentless, they cant march to the Wall to get fArya and their warehouses are depleting fast.

The only thing to gain was if Jon accepted to trade Arya, which he would probably never accept, but they go even further and undermine that by asking plenty other hostages, which just makes it completely impossible for Jon to even think about. Also Ramsay signs as the Trueborn Lord of Winterfell. Is there any bigger provocation than that? If Jon ever accepted this trade, he would also be accepting Ramsay as the Trueborn Lord of Winterfell, thus despising all of his family's past.

Also, if this was true, the Boltons would have taken Reek and Asha prisioners most likely, but she is not mentioned and Reek is said to have left to Castle Black with Jeyne, which didnt happened.

I think it's too many mistakes from the Boltons.

In fact, Jon's best plan should be to fortify and let the Boltons come to the Wall, breaking the neutrality of the Watch and not the other way around, but no, he

I think this was the job of someone that predicted his actions.

Also, we know Robb's Will determined that Jon would follow him as King in the North and it was commented that the NW would surely find a way to relieve him of his duty... in the NW vows it's stated that: "Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death".

So... Melisandre was at the meeting, as was Bowen Marsh. They both left early. Then the Queen's men started the trouble. Jon got stabbed in an awkward situation by his men. Wick was almost sorry after stabbing him and Bowen Marsh was crying and saying "For the Watch!". But it can also be interpreted as a sacrifice they are making in order to save the NW integrity and let Jon free of his duty. I think Melisandre played a part in this. Maybe convincing them to do it, so she can bring him to life and make him trust her, since she's been trying to do it since she met him. Even if it was in fact treason, I think Mel had an idea.

[TheCrannogDweller]

There's one thing i find weird about this. The Boltons would gain absolutely nothing by doing this. Simple... if it's true, their army is weakened, in moral and numbers. They lost men against Stannis, their bannermen are near rebellion, the weather is relentless, they cant march to the Wall to get fArya and their warehouses are depleting fast.

Whether Jon decides to comply, defy or ignore them, the Boltons win.

If he decides to comply - they get valuable prisoners (Shireen alone is worth at least 6 Kingdoms).

If he decides to ignore them - they can use that to justify an attack on the Watch and the remaining Stannis loyalists there.

If he decides to defy them, they save themselves a long march north and instead get to use the high ground of Winterfell in their advantage.

Though to be fair, I don't think there was a lot of thought put into the letter. I think it was just Ramsay gloating when he received news of Stannis's defeat.

Also, if this was true, the Boltons would have taken Reek and Asha prisioners most likely, but she is not mentioned and Reek is said to have left to Castle Black with Jeyne, which didnt happened.

I think it's too many mistakes from the Boltons.

Which is why I think that part of the letter is based on misinformation, planted by Stannis. Note how the letter doesn't mention his head being mounted on the walls of Winterfell - only the heads of his friends. So, Ramsay received a letter via Arnolf Karstark's raven, saying that Stannis has been defeated and someone (the Manderlys, perhaps) is bringing back his magic sword as proof of that.

Also, we know Robb's Will determined that Jon would follow him as King in the North and it was commented that the NW would surely find a way to relieve him of his duty...

How does anyone in the Watch know about Robb's will? I doubt he sent it by raven - if he had, the letter would've showed up. I'm not even sure Roose Bolton is aware of its existence - it was written just prior to the RW and probably sent to the Neck with Galbart Glover and Maege Mormont.

[jarl the climber]

All we have is questions about whats going on in WInterfell at this point. The most signifigant thing is that it is signed by Ramsey and Ramsey alone, not by Roose or any of the other bannermen. Ramseys treatment of Arya was notorious, Jons actions would have been perceived as a rescue and being justified. In his speech in the Sheildhall Jon refered to Ramsy as a creature, who skins the body of women, who has probably offended all the Northern Lords with his conduct and has been abandoned, even by his own Father. We really do not know Jons excact thinking because of the two hour gap, he seems sure that Stannis is dead, that Arya has escaped and that he has the bastard to deal with not the Boltons, he doesn't say that he going after the Boltons just the Bastard creature who skins woman, who threatened him directly and who happens to be married to his sister, who has fled from him. Ramsey is quite clear that he has Mance and has killed the spearwives so he can not claim that she was kidnapped, they helped her flee and got caught or at least, that is what is implied.

[BorhPT]

Which is why I think that part of the letter is based on misinformation, planted by Stannis. Note how the letter doesn't mention his head being mounted on the walls of Winterfell - only the heads of his friends. So, Ramsay received a letter via Arnolf Karstark's raven, saying that Stannis has been defeated and someone (the Manderlys, perhaps) is bringing back his magic sword as proof of that.

The problem with that is that Stannis doesn't know Mance is alive. Theon couldn't have said it because he doesn't know who he is...

All these theories are missing something, i think it was intended by GRRM and it has not been shown to us yet. Many things in the letter imply it was Mance, others that it was Stannis, Ramsay, Melisandre, etc, etc.

I could see it being the Boltons, it's the most obvious thing, but if they were, i don't believe Stannis died. Possibly the Boltons sent even more men with the Freys and Manderlys, led by Ramsay (i don't picture him staying in WF), after learning of fArya's escape. Stannis was against too many foes and had to retreat, maybe to Deepwood Mote or Asha's ships. If the Manderlys dared betraying the Boltons now, Wyman would be captive in WF.

I believe the northern lords would only turn on Roose if they were sure they could kill them all and take many captives, specially Freys, so that their own family members held by the Freys/Lannisters didnt suffer and an exchange was possible.