Jon Snow ReRead Project! Part 6! (DwD--Pink Letter!)

[Fire Eater]

1. Hardhome - Selyse, Mel, Marsh, from too many different parts we are told that its doomed. Especially Mel, did she see anything in her flames? She doesn't claim so, but she seems convinced.

After the stabbing, I suppose that the mission will be suspended in which case the doom of Hardhome is a self-fulfilling "prophecy". It's not that the rescue mission is predestined to fail, it's that said mission doesn't take place at all.

Actually, now this gives me hope that the people of Hardhome will live. Virtually everyone is saying Hardhome is doomed, including Melisandre, and it looks pretty bleak with the logistics looking bad. GRRM has a habit of building impressions just to overturn them, and the impression regarding Hardhome is doomed, so the people may be saved.

I think if Davos lands at Eastwatch from Skagos, he can send the ships that carried him him, Rickon and the Skagosi to Hardhome to help the people there.

[horizon]

I see only a few survivors from Hardhome as a possibiliy and I wonder if Cottar Pyke will survive all of it. The dead things in the water... perhaps the ships do return but not with the crew in command who initially went there. But that would be odd, wights do not seem to be the types to control a ship. The Others? Perhaps.

And, yes, the variables of what will happen to Jon is pretty varied.

Now, what I like in the book is that first there is the chapter of Quentyn dying by Fire (Heat), followed by the chapter in which Jon is stabbed and feels the cold (Ice).

Now, with Quentyn one could make a stretch and imagine before his death that he was the prince that was promised... lolz, not.

And in the epilogue there is an echo of Jon's stabbing: Kevan Lannister has been hit by a cross bow but the he sees the children move in with the daggers at the very end.

What I think will happen is that (pretty common viewpoint) Jon will be warged into Ghost for a certain period. His body will be put in the Ice cells beneath the wall. As Ghost he will have a great bond with Val (Jon's remark: looks as if Ghost and Val belong together, their breath mixing just like Alys her breath mixed with the Then's breath at her wedding, typical George foreshadowing) and perhaps when Jon is ressurected he will wed Val. But concentrate on Val + Ghost: if the wall is in a "civil war" of wildling vs watch vs Queen's Men. Then I can imagine Val escaping with Ghost. Tormund? Will lead the wildlings in battle? Then we have that new proclaimed king at the wall, hmmm, wildlings will bond with Queen Selyse then? The Watch is doomed to me.

So Val with Ghost could be heading... south? No, Val doesn't know that territory .Then north, back into the cold of the Others (blue eyed Val...).

Lets bring in Melissandre, what will she do? Will she be occupied with the Pink Letter and try to search for Stannis? Or will she find Jon more important. If Jon's body is in the ice cell then she could be the one to ressurrect that body, but then Ghost must be near.

I see a partner ship between Val (Ice) and Melissandre (Fire) in the end to bring back Jon into Ghost.

All of this due a mindmelt, I had. assumptions. ;)

[bemused]

Julia H...

Yeah, I'm sort of projecting a best case scenario here, I know things may not go too far in Jon's favour.. but I'm feeling they'll be more in his favour than against... Obviously, I think every blow struck against Jon, except Wick's, is written in such a way to be ambiguous , if not outright misleading .. and we know Wick's was only a graze..I do feel that Jon's berserker side will come into play in a more dramatic way than has been seen so far. It may not be here, but this would be an excellent spot for it . :D

I guess I think the most important consequence will be that it will spark a fuller awareness of self, which will further develop on his journey, if he does ride south.( In a way, akin to what's happening with Dany, though I expect there will be differences as well.)

For both, it's not enough to say what they are ...e.g. blood of the dragon ; blood of (Ned) Stark ... or to even feel the certainty of it within themselves, each must learn to use their unique abilities as they should best be used and that can only truly be learned by doing. Dany has begun by riding Drogo .. we'll see what happens next with Jon.

( I'm not expecting a really fulsome explanation from Bran/BR, though probably some connection will will be made, one way or another.)

I think Mel is wrong at best , lying at worst about Hardhome. I think the mission will go ahead and be more or less successful. Even if only half or fewer are saved it's still fewer wights to contend with later. Amid all his wrestling with the logistics, Jon has already laid out the most practical plan for us. I expect it will be used , or revisited with some fine tuning. It fits in with other strategic musings of Jon's , which have all seemed well-founded, to date. He thinks specifically of taking the coastal route (enjoying slightly better weather) from Eastwatch, where the aid of some giants should be available... That would mean the trip as far as Eastwatch could all take place south of the Wall, making good time while being sheltered from the Others and wights. And not all the supplies would have to be schlepped all the way from CB.

If blessed with a POV ( Tormund? a known NW brother ? ) , it would be a good way to shed light on what's been going on at Eastwatch under Glendon Hewett.

So .. I've said Stannis is my #1 candidate for originator of the PL. It was the TWoW Theon chapter that nudged me in his direction and I've said (in spoilers) before, that I think he has all he needs to have been able to write and send it, but there's more - in regard to Ramsay, specifically.

For all Theon's hysteria, he seems to be pretty accurate in his projection of the relative size of Stannis' and Roose's forces. We

saw that Roose was sending out Frey and Manderly men. This combined force would have had some necessary delays, thanks to Mors. ...Theon knew who Roose was sending originally , but now , Theon is sure that Ramsay will be coming after his bride and his Reek. I believe he's right. Roose, too, will want Jeyne and Theon back, in the interest of the Bolton claim to WF.

Thinking back to Robb's campaign ,we saw how Roose made sure to protect his own men as far as he could, while sending others off to die. This tactic seemed to be a factor in sending out the Freys and WH men in the first place.

It seems most probable to me that Ramsay would be held back at first, and then sent out in mop-up position , maybe a number of hours later ( long enough for the worst of the fighting to be over) .. avoiding unnecessary waste of Bolton men. Roose would be thinking if Stannis had somehow managed to defeat the initial force, what men remained to him would then be exhausted from battle , on top of suffering from cold and starvation. Easy pickings for Ramsay.

Whatever "ground" Stannis holds.. we know he

seems to be planning to fake his own death. We know he has the Karstark men-at-arms captive ,who would likely be willing to play along with whatever deception he has in mind, and the WH men will turn. Ramsay could arrive to see the day apparently won ..Look, here's the sword ..here's Stannis head, or body (he's never met Stannis).There are the captives... But Stannis managed to send "Arya" and Reek on to CB with X amount of lead time.

Particularly without Roose's caution or restraining hand, I think Ramsay would hardly pause to catch his breath before following. Then Stannis would send the letter..Of course, Ramsay couldn't move as quicly as a small party, and if the snow kept up , they'd be more difficult to track. So, it would be taking him longer than normal to reach CB. Jon would know how long normal would be, be able to account (roughly) for the weather, and may have a guess at that "7 days", if it's a clue and not just a boast.

Unlike Bumps,I think Mors' men would just melt away and let Ramsay pass. They probably were giving Mance a chance to get "Arya" out , but I don't think that's all they were there for. I don't even think it was job 1 for them. ...They seem to have been taking care of most of the scouts Roose sends out. I think they're there to draw out as many men as they can, and try to prevent them from getting back in... to give better odds to the northmen inside WF who will try to take it from within. I think this is separate from any similar plan Stannis may have. I don't think they like the idea of Stannis claiming WF (with his attendant strings) much better than they like Roose claiming it. (If they had control, I think they'd be happy to offer Stannis guest right , though.)

[Mithras]

If blessed with a POV ( Tormund? a known NW brother ? ) , it would be a good way to shed light on what's been going on at Eastwatch under Glendon Hewett.

I am counting on Davos. I think he will arrive with a Skagosi host and the giants will join them. Davos's smuggling experience is needed in Hardhome mission. That would be a perfect way to introduce Davos to Jon, a man who accomplished Jon's last desire (as a Snow :P).

[butterbumps!]

Actually, now this gives me hope that the people of Hardhome will live. Virtually everyone is saying Hardhome is doomed, including Melisandre, and it looks pretty bleak with the logistics looking bad. GRRM has a habit of building impressions just to overturn them, and the impression regarding Hardhome is doomed, so the people may be saved.

I think if Davos lands at Eastwatch from Skagos, he can send the ships that carried him him, Rickon and the Skagosi to Hardhome to help the people there.

I'm with you guys on this. Mel keeps saying that "the ships are lost." Is that what the vision was? That the ships are lost? If the plan is to lead people over land, including the Watchmen, then, yea, the ships would obviously be abandoned. If that was the vision, then this doesn't speak to the success of the mission either way. But more ominously, I had the same thought Shadowcat did-- did she see something that more precisely showed those at Hardhome to be dead, and if so, was the assassination the event that doomed them?

Unlike Bumps,I think Mors' men would just melt away and let Ramsay pass. They probably were giving Mance a chance to get "Arya" out , but I don't think that's all they were there for. I don't even think it was job 1 for them. ...They seem to have been taking care of most of the scouts Roose sends out. I think they're there to draw out as many men as they can, and try to prevent them from getting back in... to give better odds to the northmen inside WF who will try to take it from within. I think this is separate from any similar plan Stannis may have. I don't think they like the idea of Stannis claiming WF (with his attendant strings) much better than they like Roose claiming it. (If they had control, I think they'd be happy to offer Stannis guest right , though.)

I agree with the idea that Mors and Co are positioned to keep people from getting back in. But in the case of Rams, I rather suspect that taking this guy out if given the chance would be at the top of their list of priorities.

On the letter itself: Roose has a monopoly on the 3 maesters within Winterfell right now. If Rams is sending letters, then either Roose is dead/ incapacitated, or Roose is the one who put him up to it. I don't tend to think that Roose is dead yet, so the latter option might be more likely. And if Roose is involved, then I think we can't so easily write off the letter as Rams' mad ravings. I happen to think Rams is pretty smart-- a lot more so than he's given credit for on here. Even if the letter were Rams' solo enterprise, I'm already inclined to look for more strategy to it. But Roose's potential involvement/ sanctioning should create even more certainty that there's logic and strategy to the letter. So that's the framework I'm looking at this from.

What are the messages being sent? Or more specifically, if we assume the letter comes from Rams (and possibly a joint-Bolton enterprise), what purpose is it hoping to achieve? If you are a Bolton, and you wanted to kill Jon (and the Boltons have sundry reasons to want Jon out of the game well beyond the Arya mission), and were willing to ride out to CB to do it, why not just ride out and do it, without sending advance warning? Why give Jon an opportunity to prepare?

I think the announcement of the intention to attack might imply that they aren't actually truly willing to ride out, but wanted to convince Jon that they would. If the Northmen did truly fold, Stannis was truly dead, and the Boltons were in control, I'd suspect that Rams would just ride out for a surprise attack on the Watch if that's what he truly wanted. That is, if the conditions presented in the letter were true, and the goal is to take Jon out of the game, Rams should just ride out without warning. But the conditions aren't primed for the Boltons to ride out to CB. Not least of which is because Jon can definitively prove that the escaped girl is not Arya, and that Jon's the most likely Stark-related candidate for Northmen to start rallying around. So they send a letter to Jon letting him think the conditions are right and that an attack is coming, without actually intending to launch said attack, but needing Jon taken out of the game.

So what would be the purpose of making Jon think he's cornered like this? Why write 3 paragraphs about Mance Rayder, bring up the Arya mission, and frame the letter as a demand for hostages that's "justified" because Jon had intervened to take Arya? Well, I'd say it's to get Jon's Brothers to do the job for the Boltons. As in, Jon was the recipient of the letter, but the real audience was the rest of the Watch. Rams would have no idea about Tormund's people up at the Wall, or that Jon was becoming seen by the wildlings as a leader. I'm thinking that, if the Boltons sent this letter, they were anticipating Jon's having to explain to the other Watchmen what had happened, and were banking on the Watchmen to turn Jon over, if not remove him themselves.

That's really the message of the letter when read from a Bolton-strategic POV-- that the Watch no longer has allies, that the Boltons have control of the North, that the LC of the Watch overstepped bounds about Mance and Arya, that the Boltons have the right to be given certain specified hostages, without which Ramsay will attack, and emphasize Jon as the prime target of Bolton wrath. All of which would inspire the Watchmen to turn over Jon and anyone else for the sake of saving their own hide.

[Ibbison from Ibben]

So what would be the purpose of making Jon think he's cornered like this? Why write 3 paragraphs about Mance Rayder, bring up the Arya mission, and frame the letter as a demand for hostages that's "justified" because Jon had intervened to take Arya? Well, I'd say it's to get Jon's Brothers to do the job for the Boltons. As in, Jon was the recipient of the letter, but the real audience was the rest of the Watch. Rams would have no idea about Tormund's people up at the Wall, or that Jon was becoming seen by the wildlings as a leader. I'm thinking that, if the Boltons sent this letter, they were anticipating Jon's having to explain to the other Watchmen what had happened, and were banking on the Watchmen to turn Jon over, if not remove him themselves.

That's really the message of the letter when read from a Bolton-strategic POV-- that the Watch no longer has allies, that the Boltons have control of the North, that the LC of the Watch overstepped bounds about Mance and Arya, that the Boltons have the right to be given certain specified hostages, without which Ramsay will attack, and emphasize Jon as the prime target of Bolton wrath. All of which would inspire the Watchmen to turn over Jon and anyone else for the sake of saving their own hide.

The PL is tough to interpret (GRRM designed it that way so we would have something to occupy us for a few tears while he write tWoW), but if I'm the Boltons, and I wanted to accomplish this, I would have left out the part about (f)Arya, I think. It makes the Boltons look weak, and alerts Jon that maybe his sister is headed his way, which could lead the the (f)Arya fraud being exposed. I'd let Jon and the Watch think I still had her, so they wouldn't make an effort to go look for her, and hope I could catch her before she got to CB. Yet the demands for (f)Arya are a prominent part of the letter.

On Hardhome - In her POV chapter, Mel sees the cold getting into the caves, and the lights going out. I doubt many survivors escape. Perhaps another ship full of refugees makes it to Braavos, and Arya will give us a report. I've always wondered if Pyp and Grenn were included in the mission.

butterbumps! - Thanks for the reply on the duality/synthesis issue. I'm mulling my reply. (As in I'm not sure I agree, but I'm having trouble clearly stating why! :) )

[Maia]

I will never manage to keep up with this explosion of awesome analysis, so I am going to give up my attempts to read all the comments and just post my thoughts. Great work Butterbumps!, and everybody who made this thread so captivating.

Anyway, here is my take:

I really don't understand why Jon is trying hard to convince Selyse to help him with Hardhome. Did he really think that she and her entourage would offer some useful advice? Or that she would send some of her few men on the mission, which would be stupid on her part? How many has she? 50 at most? She is in a perilious situation and needs all the protection she can get. Jon has hundreds of NW and hundreds of wildlings.

Not to mention, that Jon knows very well that those are pretty useless men, and southerners who didn't yet properly acclimate to the north to boot, so they would be more trouble than they are worth beyond the Wall. I can understand that Jon might want to bring Selyse, as some sort of Stannis's representative on board, at least pro-forma, but he seems to try for something more tangible than an official blessing, when Selyse and Co., apart from, perhaps, Melisandre, clearly have nothing to offer. And if he wanted Melisandre's help, it would have been better to confer with her privately.

"We have no food for them" - and again I have to point out that it is a reasonable argument, whether it comes from Bowen or not. And it doesn't have to come from him really - stewards who work with him are also aware of condition of the stores and I am sure that Bowen himself mentions it freely when in public. And as Jon himself noted on a previous occasion, there are few secrets in Castle Black. People talk and all that.

So, why on earth didn't Jon publicize his Iron Bank loan already? Surely, a lot of people on the Wall are concerned about the state of food reserves and can't be good for morale or NW's willingness to help with the Hardhome expedition.

And Jon's intention of leading the ranging himself is... problematic to say the least. Surely he must be aware of the fragility of his new alliance and the fact that he didn't have Tormund and his chiefs swear to NW publicly before a hearttree, but to himself personally doesn't bode well for smooth transition to working with Jon's castellan in his absence or his successor should he die. Jon did little to foster trust between the wildlings and NW, which such a piblic ceremony would have helped with. He is not thinking this through, IMHO.

Selyse's marriage shenangians always seemed perplexing to me, since even in Westeros, where blood matters, so do actual possessions and power. And every other noble we have seen tended to take the whole sum of these factors into account. So, Selyse's and her knights' conviction that lands and followers _must_ flow from a blood claim - and such a dubious one at that! when there is no actual evidence of Gerrick having any power or men, looks like sheer insanity, rather than mere southern prejudice. Is it Stannis rubbing off on them?

It is also odd that Selyse doesn't seem to consider that Val might refuse to marry, even though Westerosi women technically have that right and Val is neither a Baratheon nor a minor under her wardship.

Not to mention that Stannis already stated his intention to marry Val to whoever is going to hold Winterfell... and surely, not even Selyse and fools around her can seriously believe that it could be somebody who didn't share in Stannis's trials and victories in winning it in the first place, but was left behind as a mere bodyguard?

Oh, and how didn't Jon see that mentioning abduction as a way to get Val would have only encouraged somebody like Ser Patrek?!! A man, who must have been _chafing_ at being left behind and burning to prove his courage?

Speaking of Stannis, I find it amusing and unexpected that he apparently had "green velvets" among his clothing, in which Gerrick was clad, as Stannis always struck me as somebody who preferred to dress simply and if he felt that occasion called for pomp, would have worn his House colors.

Melisandre counsels Jon to keep Ghost around, yet again and to send for her once he gets his answer "from the skies". Jon is going to disregard both of these pieces of advice.

Also, he is thinking about using carts and wagons to transport food through wilderness to Hardhome. This is sheer madness guaranteed to doom the mission, albeit I am not sure if it is intentional on GRRM's part or not. After all, not even the northeners told Stannis to abandon his carts and transport supplies on pack animals, which would have allowed him to reach Winterfell before the snow storm. Or even to put runners on carts/wayns, which all people living in northerly latitudes did iRL.

Anyway, I think that Yarwick actually gave Jon good advice when he suggested sending wildlings. Wildlings know the terrain well and they know the danger of the Others well and have experience with suriving it for months/years. Some NW presence would be necessary to establish that the rescue mission is happening under NW's authority, but sending unwilling, prejudiced men would be worse than useless, IMHO, it might be actually harmful, as they could sabotage the mission en route or alienate the wildlings, both in of the rescuse mission and those and Hardhome.

If rangers are on board with this, send some of them. There must be only a couple of dozens of them left, though, and we didn't hear anything from them, apart from Leathers, who is very recently inducted wildling. Jon going himself would unconscionably endanger everything he has built so far, not to mention that there is no passable representative/successor in sight, one who could be trusted to support and continue Jon's policies and be respected and obeyed by the wildlings. One who could be trusted with lives and deaths (if necessary) of wildling hostages.

Frankly, I can't help but feel that Hardhome was Jon's "hard choice" test, which he failed. I just don't see how the overland mission could possibly succeed. And would even wildlings be as enthusiastic about it, if the knew about the state of NW's food reseves? After all, if the seas continue to be "wracked by storms" even Jon's loan from IB would be worthless, as food can currently only be transported to the Wall by sea.

Yes, yes, extra wights, but balanced against the likelyhood of adding the members of expedition to the armies of wights too, wasting a lot of precious food, weakening garrisons on the Wall again, so soon after first being able to man them properly in a long while?

Ghost behavior is very interesting - attacking Mully, but merely sniffing Bowen, not even showing him teeth or anything. This is so different to Grey Wind's reactions to various conspiracies! He snarled at Spicers and attacked the Freys. And I'll be the odd woman out and say that it proves that Bowen wasn't part of any longstanding conspiracy to kill Jon. That, or Ghost, unlike his siblings, fails at detecting enemies, despite both Jon's and Mel's conviction to the contrary.

_Mully_ may be involved in things, I agree. There may have been a conspiracy to kill Jon during the expedition. But if so, Bowen doesn't seem to have been part of it. Otherwise, why the contrast between Grey Wind's and Ghost's reactions?

[ShadowCat Rivers]

The PL is tough to interpret (GRRM designed it that way so we would have something to occupy us for a few tears while he write tWoW), but if I'm the Boltons, and I wanted to accomplish this, I would have left out the part about (f)Arya, I think. It makes the Boltons look weak, and alerts Jon that maybe his sister is headed his way, which could lead the the (f)Arya fraud being exposed. I'd let Jon and the Watch think I still had her, so they wouldn't make an effort to go look for her, and hope I could catch her before she got to CB. Yet the demands for (f)Arya are a prominent part of the letter.

Hmm, assuming Bolton hand wrote the letter...

Roose Bolton would welcome such a fight, he sensed. He needs an end to this. The castle was too crowded to withstand a long siege, and too many of the lords here were of uncertain loyalty. Fat Wyman Manderly, Whoresbane Umber, the men of House Hornwood and House Tallhart, the Lockes and Flints and Ryswells, all of them were northmen, sworn to House Stark for generations beyond count. It was the girl who held them here, Lord Eddard’s blood, but the girl was just a mummer’s ploy, a lamb in a direwolf’s skin. So why not send the northmen forth to battle Stannis before the farce unraveled? Slaughter in the snow. And every man who falls is one less foe for the Dreadfort.

These are Theon's thoughts, I'm not entirely convinced that his understanding of northern politics is perfect, but Lady Dustin also makes a similar claim, so there must be some validity in the bolded statement.

By the end of last Theon's chapter, this underlined but is starting to have an effect inside Winterfell. The farce did not unraveled, not yet, but the girl is gone. They can't hide this fact from their Northern "allies". Frey and Manderly forces may be out allready, but for those who are still in the castle this escape can cause a snowdrift of implications, not to mention that sooner or later it would become known outside the castle too.

I wouldn't put it past Roose to sneak out Winterfell with the best of his forces and retreat to his well provisioned Dreadfort, leaving Ramsey to deal with the shitstorm - and let the rest of the northmen die. In that case, Roose would have no part in authoring the letter... Ramsey is not stupid but he tends to over rely in brute force (and/or menace of it) especially when he is excessively angry, as he must surely be at that point.

And Jon's intention of leading the ranging himself is... problematic to say the least. Surely he must be aware of the fragility of his new alliance and the fact that he didn't have Tormund and his chiefs swear to NW before a hearttree, but to himself personally doesn't bode well for smoof transition to working with Jon's castellan in his absence or his successor should he die. He is not thinking this through, IMHO.

I was wondering about this too. He has been the one that kept all those different fractions together in a very sensitive balance.

I was thinking that perhaps it was a sort of escapism, being fed up with this all.

[butterbumps!]

The PL is tough to interpret (GRRM designed it that way so we would have something to occupy us for a few tears while he write tWoW), but if I'm the Boltons, and I wanted to accomplish this, I would have left out the part about (f)Arya, I think. It makes the Boltons look weak, and alerts Jon that maybe his sister is headed his way, which could lead the the (f)Arya fraud being exposed. I'd let Jon and the Watch think I still had her, so they wouldn't make an effort to go look for her, and hope I could catch her before she got to CB. Yet the demands for (f)Arya are a prominent part of the letter.

On Hardhome - In her POV chapter, Mel sees the cold getting into the caves, and the lights going out. I doubt many survivors escape. Perhaps another ship full of refugees makes it to Braavos, and Arya will give us a report. I've always wondered if Pyp and Grenn were included in the mission.

butterbumps! - Thanks for the reply on the duality/synthesis issue. I'm mulling my reply. (As in I'm not sure I agree, but I'm having trouble clearly stating why! :) )

I've been writing a more dedicated reply about the synthesis in a Word doc, but keep getting distracted with irl things, lol. I have more developed ideas than what I'd quickly posted before, but have been kind of filibustering about sitting down to finish the response.

But yea, it's the fact that the letter explicitly states that the Boltons do not have Arya that makes me question the authenticity of authorship. Unless the point is to not draw Jon down to Winterfell, to not actually attack the Watch, but rather to inspire the other Watchmen to turn against Jon. The letter doesn't really work from a Bolton POV if the goal is to either attack the Watch or get Jon to Winterfell. The virtue of the sum of the letter would be to get someone else to take Jon out, I think.

Hmm, assuming Bolton hand wrote the letter...

Roose Bolton would welcome such a fight, he sensed. He needs an end to this. The castle was too crowded to withstand a long siege, and too many of the lords here were of uncertain loyalty. Fat Wyman Manderly, Whoresbane Umber, the men of House Hornwood and House Tallhart, the Lockes and Flints and Ryswells, all of them were northmen, sworn to House Stark for generations beyond count. It was the girl who held them here, Lord Eddard’s blood, but the girl was just a mummer’s ploy, a lamb in a direwolf’s skin. So why not send the northmen forth to battle Stannis before the farce unraveled? Slaughter in the snow. And every man who falls is one less foe for the Dreadfort.

These are Theon's thoughts, I'm not entirely convinced that his understanding of northern politics is perfect, but Lady Dustin also makes a similar claim, so there must be some validity in the bolded statement.

By the end of last Theon's chapter, this underlined but is starting to have an effect inside Winterfell. The farce did not unraveled, not yet, but the girl is gone. They can't hide this fact from their Northern "allies". Frey and Manderly forces may be out allready, but for those who are still in the castle this escape can cause a snowdrift of implications, not to mention that sooner or later it would become known outside the castle too.

I wouldn't put it past Roose to sneak out Winterfell with the best of his forces and retreat to his well provisioned Dreadfort, leaving Ramsey to deal with the shitstorm - and let the rest of the northmen die. In that case, Roose would have no part in authoring the letter... Ramsey is not stupid but he tends to over rely in brute force (and/or menace of it) especially when he is excessively angry, as he must surely be at that point.

I can see the scenario you're saying as it pertains to Roose-- it wouldn't surprise me if he pulled that move if he felt cornered. Thing is, though, I'm not sure that even Rams alone would be so overwrought by incandescent anger that he unintentionally shows his cards like this (not having Arya).

I mean to say, I'm not so sure that even Rams operating completely alone would make this oversight. If it was Rams writing this, I'm inclined to think that all facets of the letter add up to a singular purpose. They're trying to get Jon to do "something," but neither drawing Jon to Winterfell, nor keeping him at the Wall seem to be the desired outcome. I'm thinking that all those pieces might have been about provoking an assassination or turning the Watch against Jon.

Frankly, I can't help but feel that Hardhome was Jon's "hard choice" test, which he failed. I just don't see how the overland mission could possibly succeed. And would even wildlings be as enthusiastic about it, if the knew about the state of NW's food reseves? After all, if the seas continue to be "wracked by storms" even Jon's loan from IB would be worthless, as food can currently only be transported to the Wall by sea.

Yes, yes, extra wights, but balanced against the likelyhood of adding the members of expedition to the armies of wights too, wasting a lot of precious food, weakening garrisons on the Wall again, so soon after first being able to man them properly in a long while?

I don't think this is a fair statement for a number of reasons. First, Hardhome is hardly the first tough choice Jon's been up against. Secondly, I'm not so certain of its inevitable doom. Will there be tradeoffs? Yea, of course. And there's negatives to not doing the mission too. And you also brought up the bank loan to criticize Jon's not having told the other Watchmen. Even if Jon didn't tell his men of this, we know that Jon will be able to feed these people, so that can't really be our criticism of this. The ships wouldn't be going up to the shivering sea for food importation. In fact, they don't even need to go to Eastwatch. That's the beauty of having the Manderlys at White Harbor. Thirdly, he didn't "fail" wrt Hardhome. I think his intention to lead it is rather perplexing, but settling on Tormund leading it is actually a good idea, and one Yarwyck even came up with.

[ShadowCat Rivers]

I can see the scenario you're saying as it pertains to Roose-- it wouldn't surprise me if he pulled that move if he felt cornered. Thing is, though, I'm not sure that even Rams alone would be so overwrought by incandescent anger that he unintentionally shows his cards like this (not having Arya).

I mean to say, I'm not so sure that even Rams operating completely alone would make this oversight. If it was Rams writing this, I'm inclined to think that all facets of the letter add up to a singular purpose. They're trying to get Jon to do "something," but neither drawing Jon to Winterfell, nor keeping him at the Wall seem to be the desired outcome. I'm thinking that all those pieces might have been about provoking an assassination or turning the Watch against Jon.

I was trying to point out that the Boltons (either both or Ramsey alone) might have reasons to believe that the information has already leaked... Just that Roose might come up with something more sophisticated to deal with it while Ramsey would be more like "fuck it, I'll skin them all" :)

If the bolded was the intention, the letter was 100% successful. I believe this was the best case scenario for the Boltons, but I think that they'd be content with any anomalous situation. A fight between fractions of the Watch and Stannis forces at the Watch would be more close to an expected outcome I suppose. But yea, the letter functions as an agent provocateur to destabilize things at the Watch, it makes sense.

[butterbumps!]

I was trying to point out that the Boltons (either both or Ramsey alone) might have reasons to believe that the information has already leaked... Just that Roose might come up with something more sophisticated to deal with it while Ramsey would be more like "fuck it, I'll skin them all" :)

If the bolded was the intention, the letter was 100% successful. I believe this was the best case scenario for the Boltons, but I think that they'd be content with any anomalous situation. A fight between fractions of the Watch and Stannis forces at the Watch would be more close to an expected outcome I suppose. But yea, the letter functions as an agent provocateur to destabilize things at the Watch, it makes sense.

Oh, I'd understood that, but was trying to see how they'd strategically spin it to their advantage (even the Rams, lol). As damage control, destabilizing the Watch, and having Jon be turned over, is in the Boltons' interests. ETA: I realized I spoke to Rams' rage in my response-- sorry, that's a force of habit. I always address that point even when inappropriate to do so, because I guess I've just become that much of a Bolton shill at this point.

The hostages are all very choice picks-- it's only the Watchmen with no one important to turn over, except Jon, and I could see how the Boltons might anticipate that many might be willing to see him go after learning about the Mance/ Arya mission. But given the hostages requested, I'd suspect that the Watchmen would advocate turning over the Queen's people and the wildlings, thereby causing a major rift up at the Wall as the 3 factions fought over this. That is, the letter sets it up such that the Watch has no incentive to retain any of the hostages, and further, to turn over their leader, whereas the other 2 factions there do and as such, turn against the Watch. So yea, I think if this did actually come from the Boltons, the point wasn't to draw Jon out or anything, but rather to make the Watch collapse through division.

I'm not sure if Jon worked it out that far, but I do think that anticipating the division this would create is why he made a point of winning over the majority faction in the Shieldhall. Having the highest proportion of fighters beside him would ostensibly work as a form of insurance against the sort of in-fighting I'm talking about. It would conceivably neutralize the possibility of a 3-way clash somewhat to have the majority behind him. And these fighters are the ones Rams wouldn't have known about. I'm guessing that the Boltons wouldn't have anticipated Jon's winning himself a majority, but it would appear the plan played out as they wanted nontheless.

[Maia]

To continue from the previous installment of my mega-post ;):

Tormund only brings fifty warriors instead of the promised eighty. Is his word iron? Hm... Maybe the wildlings aren't quite as thrilled with the expedition as Jon seems to think. Or maybe it is the same king of maneuvering as subtly happened when Jon was hammering out the deal in Tormund's camp and saw 3 women and as many children for every warrior... But when the wildlings actually crossed, there were closer to a thousand warriors than to 500 in Jon's estimation, i.e. the ratio of fighters to civilians in Tormund's force was closer to 1: 3 than to 1 : 7 that Jon was led to expect. IMHO, Tormund isn't quite the straightforward, selflessly reliable fellow that Jon sees him as. That is not to say that he is disloyal, but maybe their interests don't align as completely as Jon fondly believes.

Mully _is_ insistent that Jon admit Clydas at once. But the letter... I dunno. It reads to me like something Ramsey would write. And who on the Wall would know or care about Reek? I mean, Melisandre may have seen some of the things written there in the flames, but Reek?! And Ramsey's irrational attachment to him? No, I don't think so. Ditto Thorne or Bowen or whoever.

Stannis? He didn't know that Abel was Mance, did he? And I don't see any reasons offered for his authorship as persuasive. Why would he endanger Shireen and Melisandre with the news of his fake death? Not to mention that maester Tybald is from Karhold and not from the Dreadfort. He just had ravens for Winterfell and Dreadfort, IIRC. He may have seen Ramsey's letters a time or two, but hardly would have been an expert in forging his hand. So, personally, I think that the letter is genuine. Shocking, I know :).

But it may have been opened and read and delivered at a precisely timed moment. If so, Clydas is in on it and his fear was partly due to knowing the contents of the letter and partly because of playing Jon false. Also, it makes sense that Clydas would need to be part of any conspiracy, because his sending ravens to Eastwatch and the Shadow Tower immediately would be crucial for keeping the wildlings from turning on NW after Jon's death, as I'll explain later. Hence, the "pink smear" as opposed to "pink button", maybe - the letter has been opened and resealed. I don't see it being altered, though - unless they have some notorious former forger on the Wall, something like that would stand out.

Anyway, Jon gets the letter and it never even occurs to him to consult with Melisandre or to inform Selyse. Argh! He immediately proceeds to making plans with Tormund. Now, I agree that the former have been of limited use and obstructionist respectively, but still, they had the right and needed to hear the news first.

While Jon insists that Shiedhall was "for knights", he also thinks that "wolves", "buckets" and " flayed men" used to be among the sigils hanging on it's walls, so northern nobility must have been granted equal status to knights without being such themselves. Oh, and also krakens, so the same courtesy was extended to the Ironborn. Presumably, none of the current knightly/noble members of NW have shields hanging in the hall, since the remaining shields are "sad, grey things", which, for instance, Royce's or even Mormont's wouldn't have been yet. And they couldn't have been buried with them. I do wonder very much if one of the shields bears the white dragon of Bloodraven, though. Granted, he joined closer to 70 years previously, but "a hundred years past" is used as a rather imprecise term by the Westerosi. And, again, no burial.

There being so few "crows" in Shiedhall - is it just that Castle Black is so weakly held by NW, after Jon sent off so many people to re-open the other forts, or is it also an expression of NW's opinion about the expedition? BTW, why were the only NW men Jon consulted on the matter Marsh, Yarwick and the wildling Leathers (and he was consulted only in a very perfunctory manner?). Shouldn't Jon have asked the rangers, who are supposedly the most supportive of his policies? All the water under the bridge at that point, of course...

Except that Jon puts Tormund, a wildling most of NW distrusts with a good reason, in command of expedition to Hardhome, with permission to take "as many men as he requires". Which, to a suspicious mind, would allow him to remove NW's presence from Castle Black and free the hostages there, his own son formost among them.

Jon's speech... I agree it was tailored to the wildlings, but Jon failed to realize that NW and Queen's men and possibly northmen, if their presence in Wun Wun scene is not an editorial error, would also be listening. And what do they hear?! They hear Jon breaking all and any promises he made regarding letting the wildlings through and his justifications for doing it:

He had promised to Flint and Norrey, in Marsh's and Yarwick's presence that wildlings would remain at the Wall. That under no circumstances would they be allowed to go south.

He had argued that they desperately needed the wildlings to man the Wall. Now he is leading most of their warriors far away from the Wall to Winterfell, while sending NW away from the Wall in another direction. As a result, it will be more weakly held than prior to admittance of wildlings.

He had promised that security of their lands and those of other northmen would be guaranteed by the wildling hostages, which he would be prepared to execute if necessary. He is now leaving south and effectively leaving Tormund(!) in charge of Castle Black.

Jon effectively admits to his oathbreaking - " I will not ask my brothers to forswear their vows" , yet he still arrogates to himself the right to order NW on a suicide mission to Hardhome, under command of a wildling, no less.

He states his intention to ride with the wildlings to Winterfell, with the intention to attack it, which sounds completely insane. I agree with all the arguments that it wasn't his real plan, but that's what he announces for everybody to hear.

To an already unsympathetic and suspicious minds that grudgingly went along so far, this makes Jon look like an inverterate liar, who doesn't mind breaking his promises when it suits him best, or even as somebody who planned to seize power through the wildlings and intended to mix it up in the south via a wildling army from the beginning.

And even for somebody initially sympathetic, it may be difficult to accept Jon doing what looks like a complete 180 on so many crucial issues. I will note that Jon's guards Horse and Rory, who stuck close to him on his own command, don't interfere with the stabbing, for some reason.

Now, I too used to think that the Wall was bound to sink into bloody chaos after Jon's death, but on my recent re-read of ADwD I have noticed that wildling hostages to Eastwatch and the Shadow Tower have been dispatched immediately after they had crossed over.

There are few, if any wildlings in these locations and if Clydas is on-board with the assassination, he'd be able to send ravens and warn Mallister and Hewett, who might then manage to keep wildlings in check by threatening the hostages. Both are men who would be willing to make good on their threats and they have 60 hostages between them. So, Bowen himself might be doomed, but he may have valid reasons to think that the NW itself not necessarily is. Hence "For the Watch!"

[butterbumps!]

To an already unsympathetic and suspicious minds that grudgingly went along so far, this makes Jon look like an inverterate liar, who doesn't mind breaking his promises when it suits him at best, or even as somebody who planned to seize power through wildlings and intended to mix it up in the south via a wildling army from the beginning.

And even for somebody initially sympathetic, it may be difficult to accept Jon doing what looks like a complete 180 on so many crucial issues. I will note that Jon's guards Horse and Rory, who stuck close to him on his own command, didn't interfere with the stabbing, for some reason.

Well, yea, I think that's kind of the point. He's trying to make the Watchmen (and Boltons and Lannisters) believe he's gone rogue. He's explicitly not trying to win them over.

Also, though, sending a letter to the other locations to kill the hostages will inspire the Wildlings to lash out. They'll have nothing to lose. The thing to do is to not advise the other commanders to kill them. That's what brings a stalemate and stays the wildling's hands.

[Maia]

Well, yea, I think that's kind of the point. He's trying to make the Watchmen (and Boltons and Lannisters) believe he's gone rogue. He's explicitly not trying to win them over.

Yet, he somehow believes that NW is still going to obey him concerning Hardhome, which they have only gone grudgingly along with even back before he lost any and all legal and moral authority over them by seemingly going rogue, as you say.

Also, though, sending a letter to the other locations to kill the hostages will inspire the Wildlings to lash out.

Not to kill them, obviously. But to securely imprison them, in order to prevent any attempts to free them and to be on alert for any wildling attacks on their forts. And to be ready to make some examples, if wildlings fall over NW after Jon's death.

[butterbumps!]

Yet, he somehow believes that NW is still going to obey him concerning Hardhome, which they have only gone grudgingly along with even back before he lost any and all legal and moral authority over them by seemingly going rogue, as you say.

Not to kill them, obviously. But to securely imprison them, in order to prevent any attempts to free them and to be on alert for any wildling attacks on their forts. And to be ready to make some examples, if wildlings fall over NW after Jon's death.

I think the hostages thing goes without saying.

The people involved in the Hardhome mission are rangers. The rangers haven't been against Jon or the wildlings for the most part. They're the ones who'd see the sense in the mission independently of Jon's giving the order. They're the ones who know what the Watch is up against, and it's their ranks who are stranded out there (Cotter's rangers). I'm not taking for granted that the rangers will automatically go on this mission, but I don't think we can take for granted that they wouldn't, which seems to be what you're implying. The rangers, independently of Jon, would have an incentive to follow through with this.

[bemused]

Stannis very easily could have known that Mance had masqueraded as singer. He's had lots of discussion with Mance. Mance is not shy to mention the many times he's been over the wall. He told Jon he'd been to WF to size up Robert and the Starks. I don't know why he wouldn't tell Stannis .. possibly even he name he used.

But even assuming Mance didn't mention it , Stannis knew about the glamour. He knowingly gave Jon captive "Rattleshirt" for Jon to make use of. Jon had argued for Mance's life , saying how useful he could be . As Rattleshirt , Mance gave Jon some very broad hints bout his ID, in Stannis' hearing..And Stannis has Theon ,to whom the spearwives revealed they were wildlings , by talking about "kneelers".. and squirrel talking about how often she had climbed the wall, personally..

More later..

[Maia]

I'm not taking for granted that the rangers will automatically go on this mission, but I don't think we can take for granted that they wouldn't, which seems to be what you're implying. The rangers, independently of Jon, would have an incentive to follow through with this.

Well, first of all, how many rangers are there at Castle Black? IIRC, most of the brothers who had gone with Mormont were rangers and only a handful of them survived. More rangers fought and died with Marsh at the Shadow Tower, then Jon sent some to garrison the newly re-opened forts and 9 to scout and try and contact the wildlings.

Given that rangers only constituted about 1/3 of the NW numbers to begin with and that there are still some at Eastwatch and the Shadow Tower, Jon can't have more than 2 dozen at CB. Yet he told the audience in the Shieldhall that Tormund could "take as many men as he requires" from NW.

Additionally, yes, the rangers were more on-board with Jon's new policies than stewards and builders, but we have been given zero indication concerning rangers' feelings about the Hardhome expedition, or being put under the command of an actual wildling. For some reason, Jon didn't bother to consult with any of them, except briefly with Leathers, who sees things from the wildling PoV. Even though even rank-and-file rangers would probably have a better idea whether carts could be taken to Hardhome, etc. than Yarwick and Marsh, who probably haven't gone further north than the weirwood grove beyond the Wall.

As to Pyke's ships, his terse message can mean many things, but I didn't get the impression that he was asking for the rescue for himself and his men, rather than saying that wildlings could only be rescued overland, as they refused to board ships. Black brothers still were on-board their ships, after all, only one of which was damaged, and if the seas continue to be "wracked by storms" by the time an overland expedition could reach Hardhome, everybody on the Wall would have much greater problems anyway, because even with the loan it would be impossible to ship food to Eastwatch.

BTW, as far as anybody on the Wall knows, White Harbor is not an option as a port, because they have ostensibly executed Davos and openly joined the Boltons. Not to mention that food would have to be transported overland from it through the lands of Bolton allies and other people who may be interested in taking it for themselves.

Stannis very easily could have known that Mance had masqueraded as singer.

Even if true, which is far from clear, why would Stannis choose to wantonly endanger Shireen, whom he sees as his heir, as seen from his conversation with and orders to Justin Massey? Surely, he has to know that news of his "death" would result in great tumult on the Wall, with people who disapproved of lending him aid trying to cut their losses. Not to mention that he hates lies. And what is the upside for him? No, I am not seeing it.

[Ibbison from Ibben]

What can Jon hope to accomplish with the wilding force he is proposing to lead south? He can't face Ramsay if indeed Ramsay is headed north - wildings can't stand up to regular soldiers in open battle. Wildings are irregulars, skilled in raids and ambushes, but lack the discipline to act as an organized army. If Ramsay wants to attack CB, Jon can't stop him. (Ramsay's beef isn't with the NW, though. It's only with Jon. And If the Boltons take out the NW, then the Boltons will have to man the Wall themselves.)

An attack on, or a siege of, Winterfell is of course completely out of the question.

I think Jon is planning on executing a reconnaissance-in-force. He's going to head down the Kingsroad, hopefully finding Arya somewhere along the way, and then stop short of Winterfell and set up camp in a defensible position. He'll then do the same thing that worked when he was scouting the wildings in the Frostfangs - send Ghost ahead to have a look at things. Jon really needs to know how much of that letter is true. He needs to get a look at Winterfell, and needs to find the battlefield where Stannis and Ramsay supposedly fought.

Jon may indeed plan to make Ramsay answer for his words, but I don't think it is on the agenda for this trip.

[butterbumps!]

Well, first of all, how many rangers are there at Castle Black? IIRC, most of the brothers who had gone with Mormont were rangers and only a handful of them survived. More rangers fought and died with Marsh at the Shadow Tower, then Jon sent some to garrison the newly re-opened forts and 9 to scout and try and contact the wildlings.

Given that rangers only constituted about 1/3 of the NW numbers to begin with and that there are still some at Eastwatch and the Shadow Tower, Jon can't have more than 2 dozen at CB. Yet he told the audience in the Shieldhall that Tormund could "take as many men as he requires" from NW.

Additionally, yes, the rangers were more on-board with Jon's new policies than stewards and builders, but we have been given zero indication concerning rangers' feelings about the Hardhome expedition, or being put under the command of an actual wildling. For some reason, Jon didn't bother to consult with any of them, except briefly with Leathers, who sees things from the wildling PoV. Even though even rank-and-file rangers would probably have a better idea whether carts could be taken to Hardhome, etc. than Yarwick and Marsh, who probably haven't go further than the weirwood grove beyond the Wall.

As to Pyke's ships, his terse message can mean many things, but I didn't get the impression that he was asking for the rescue for himself and his men, rather than saying that wildlings could only be rescued overland, as they refused to board ships. Black brothers still were on-board their ships, after all, only one of which was damaged, and if the seas continue to be "wracked by storms" by the time an overland expedition could reach Hardhome, everybody on the Wall would have much greater problems anyway, because even with the loan it would be impossible to ship food to Eastwatch.

BTW, as far as anybody on the Wall knows, White Harbor is not an option as a port, because they have executed Davos and openly joined the Boltons. Not to mention that food would have to be transported overland from it through the lands of Bolton allies and other people who may be interested in taking it for themselves.

What do their numbers have to do with whether they'd be on board with actually going on the mission? Is that comment about trying to emphasize that Jon doesn't have a majority of Watchmen behind him?

And yes, we have no indication what the rangers thought about the revised Hardhome mission by and large. Which means that we can't assume they'd be on board, nor can we assume that they'd categorically balk, which seems to be what you keep implying. I think Jon needs to address them in some capacity prior to their actually leaving on this mission. Which Jon believed as well. Earlier in the day, Jon had Leathers call the Shieldhall meeting in the first place to discuss it with them. That meeting was supposed to be a "war room" type thing. The letter changed it. I'm curious whether Jon intended to leave it there, or to address them more privately before they left for Hardhome. All that said, the rangers are the segment who'd have incentive to go independently of Jon.

Pyke didn't state that he was coming back in that letter either. The omission of "we're aborting the mission and going to return" from the letter implies that there's a good possibility that they might not make it back, especially considering the parameters (few ravens left, terrible weather, dead things in water and land). Are you trying to argue that it doesn't sound like Cotter's men were in danger?

Let's sort out this loan business. You keep criticizing Jon for not telling his men about the food loan. The implication being that this would be a way to get more men on board with Jon's policies. But you also keep harping on the idea that a food loan is useless because apparently food can't get to the Wall. You can't have this both ways. If the loan is apparently so useless that importing food is impossible anyway, then stop criticizing Jon for not telling his men about this allegedly useless loan that won't serve any purpose anyway.

Eastwatch is not Hardhome. Getting food from the Vale to Eastwatch isn't a foregone impossibility. Further, White Harbor is another Northern port, much closer to the Vale. The White Knife is suitable for boats to get food inland up to Last Hearth. There's also sleds for such a purpose. The "Watch takes no part" so Davos' execution doesn't automatically mean that Manderly won't send the Watch food (and does Jon even know about Davos yet?) Point being, if the loan can buy food, there will be a way to get it to the Wall.

What can Jon hope to accomplish with the wilding force he is proposing to lead south? He can't face Ramsay if indeed Ramsay is headed north - wildings can't stand up to regular soldiers in open battle. Wildings are irregulars, skilled in raids and ambushes, but lack the discipline to act as an organized army. If Ramsay wants to attack CB, Jon can't stop him. (Ramsay's beef isn't with the NW, though. It's only with Jon. And If the Boltons take out the NW, then the Boltons will have to man the Wall themselves.)

An attack on, or a siege of, Winterfell is of course completely out of the question.

I think Jon is planning on executing a reconnaissance-in-force. He's going to head down the Kingsroad, hopefully finding Arya somewhere along the way, and then stop short of Winterfell and set up camp in a defensible position. He'll then do the same thing that worked when he was scouting the wildings in the Frostfangs - send Ghost ahead to have a look at things. Jon really needs to know how much of that letter is true. He needs to get a look at Winterfell, and needs to find the battlefield where Stannis and Ramsay supposedly fought.

Jon may indeed plan to make Ramsay answer for his words, but I don't think it is on the agenda for this trip.

I think Jon's thinking an ambush. Rams' men wouldn't have the advantage in the forests with their horses and swords. The kind of discipline needed in open battle wouldn't be the same for an ambush. And if Jon plans to bring wildlings south, then it means he's planning to make common cause with the clansmen, since he'd be occupying their territory. I'm thinking the ambush would involve more men than the wildlings.

[bemused]

I think this is where we all find ourselves "face-to-face in the narrow passage" .. where we'll all probably be stuck until TWoW is released. Did anyone bring sandwiches ? ;)

Maia..

Yes, I said .. "Stannis very easily could have known that Mance had masqueraded as singer.", but I also said .." But even assuming Mance didn't mention it .." , and went on to point out the other knowledge and new information from Theon that Stannis has. The two go together... I assume you don't think Stannis is stupid. He has enough information to figure it out, even if he didn't know Mance's alias.

But please, at this stage of the game ( after how many re-reads ? ), it's no longer sensible to argue "Stannis hates lies." and hope for that to be taken as proof. ( At least, not IMO). I don't think we should set our opinions by the fact that Stannis didn't want to say he loved Renly when he was feeling all hurt and aggrieved .. not to mention bloody angry, dammit ! (Poor baby...) What he says and does are often two very different things.

In fact, the man waves a flaming lie about , frequently. He knows "the thing" ( his words) is not what it's claimed to be. He enlisted Mel to promulgate the huge lie that he executed Mance. Anyone who still doesn't think he knows about that, I think, should re-read all his early conversations with Jon and the Mel chapter and take note of the way neither Mel nor Mance ever actually say Stannis doesn't know.

Stannis keeps secrets and doesn't want to be seen to be lying publicly, if he can avoid it. But he'll stand next to Mel and let her do the lying... endorsing her lie by his very presence. And there's this too : Stannis is considered to be an able tactitian and deceiving the enemy is an important tactical ploy. How is that not a lie ?

.. Maester Tybald

is the Dreadfort maester, "on loan" to Arnolf Karstark. He's not the same Dreadfort maester from the time of Domeric's death, but has probably been there at least since Roose brought Ramsay to the Dreadfort. I'm sure he knows Ramsay's writing well... It's odd that we should just find out , in this chapter, how raven mail normally works , not long after we learn that Bran and Bloodraven can inhabit ravens at will and can very likely direct them where they choose, to judge by Mormont's raven.

I explained why I think Stannis would include the claim of his own death (in spoilers), back upthread... but I'll go this far, without repeating my self fully... He obviously has plans both for Shireen and for faking his death.. What difference would it make , from his perspective, if the word comes to Jon from him, or from the Boltons ? (If the Boltons did really kill him , or thought they did , they would be trumpeting the news far and wide. Which is why he warns Massey of the possibility.) ... He has no idea Mel has not been able to see him in her visions.. she's never had any problem seeing him before. He would be sure she could correct the claim for Jon .. and he would have no thought that anyone at the Wall would read the letter before Jon, or that Jon would feel the need to read it aloud, for his own purposes... So for Stannis, if the raven flies to WF, it contributes to his tactical deception of Roose. ..If the raven flies to CB , Mel can confirm he's alive...

No upside ? .. I'd say there's really no downside for Stannis , considering the desperate situation he's in.

However , I never expected you to be persuaded.

I think Bumps has laid out the most plausible case to be made if we take Ramsay as the author (with or without Roose's blessing) and, as I've said, I think plausible cases can be made for Ramsay/Roose , Mance and Stannis.. I just happen to prefer Stannis, based on what we've read of events and the characters of the characters (as I see them) so far.

Actually , I disagree with so much that you've written, that I could go on at length, but I'll stick to just a few points , since you've stated your intention to play devil's advocate here.( Accordingly I don't know if you're representing what you think or just trying to take a contrary position whether you actually think it has merit or not.) I'm not really interested in debating just for the sake of debate... Or dredging up the same points, e.g.the loan (which 'Bumps has addressed),or.. why didn't Jon "have" the wildlings swear before a heart tree ( He was not their commander, to "have" them do anything . That they would simply give their word , and hostages as guarantee, was the best bargain Jon could hammer out ... I repeat, leaving aside the logistics involved in a heart tree swearing.) ...Those that swore to Jon personally did so of their own accord.. he didn't "have" them swear to him ,either.

When you say.. "Yet he told the audience in the Shieldhall that Tormund could "take as many men as he requires" from NW" ..or in regard to the rangers... "For some reason, Jon didn't bother to consult with any of them," .. it seems to me either a deliberately skewed reading , or you're not taking into consideration things that we know about Jon's character .. or the normal workings of a military style organization .

Tormund would obviously be given the men he required by Jon. Jon would assign them to the mission, he's the LC . ... As I and ( I'm quite sure ) others have pointed out before.. Jon wouldn't be walking out of the shieldhall, hopping on a horse and riding out. He would be overseeing the necessary details beforehand, as he always has, before.. Why would we assume any different ? ..Jon's established pattern has been to discuss and explain assignments to those being assigned .. Why would we assume he wouldn't address the men he was putting under Tormund's command, and allay their concerns? (see Bedwyck)... The NW men may actually be very glad to have someone of Tormund's stature to vouch for their intentions to the wildlings.

But since you point out how few the NW are, I've never imagined Tormund would be leading only NW men (Jon didn't say so)... just that Jon would be leading only wildlings . That probably leaves Tormund with a mixed force, wildlings and rangers, and probably some non-ranger support. One of the benefits of the mission (besides saving lives, preventing more wights, etc.) could be a certain amount of bonding between the men , once they see they can rely on each other. Could do wonders for integration at the Wall.

Flint and Norrey had concerns about the wildlings moving south on their own, or being settled on their lands, not men under Jon's command, going to fight Ramsay, who the clans already consider their enemy.And they and their men appear to still be at the wall ( referred to earlier in Tze's post from LtL ). They may even volunteer to act as guides when the dust settles. I imagine they'd like to spill a bit of Bolton blood themselves. They already were willing to side with Jon atop the wall... And I feel they'll side with him now . They will see the attack as cowardly and unjustified , I'm sure .. They would probably ask Jon to explain his plan to them more fully, and I'm sure he would... But their way is to hear a man out , not attack him out of nowhere.