How do some people honestly think Ramsay wrote the pink letter?

[butterbumps!]

4 hours ago, Makk said:

Jon believes there is truth in there because he doesn't want to risk it being true and then doing nothing to save Arya. He also in a way wants to "gather his banners" and go south to smash the Boltons. This is the sub-conscious justification for him. He doesn't believe it blindly, he sits down with Tormund and discusses how much is true. He knows about Mance and there is very little benefit in Ramsay lying. If this was all a lie, how would messing around with the nights watch help Ramsay? How would telling Jon Arya escaped help him?

This might be going beyond the topic of this thread, but I'm not really sure that's what's Jon's thinking or doing in that chapter.  I don't think he plans to actually go to Winterfell either (at least, not to march on WF and conduct a siege).  I get that he tells the Shieldhall this is his plan, but based on Jon's previous thoughts about battle strategy and what this letter is actually saying about the state of affairs (that Arya isn't even there to rescue, for example), I don't think the plan he announced is exactly what he's truly intending.    I think the Shieldhall speech had everything to do with distancing himself from the Watchmen (giving the Watchmen every reason to reject him and owning his "crimes," so the Boltons should ostensibly leave them alone), while hitting every note that would rouse Wilings to his cause.

As it pertains to the letter, I think Jon's announcement to march south in defiance is not what the Boltons would have expected, as nothing in the letter really points to that as a particularly logical, strategic response (Arya isn't there, after all, by the letter's own admission), or even something that being called a few names would truly incite even the most egregious hothead to do given the stakes.

[Lord Varys]

@butterbumps!

I'm not inclined to buy that Jon Snow did not want to march to Winterfell and/or against Roose/Ramsay. His thoughts when he has his public triumphs suggest that he wanted to take control, not just over the wildlings but also about those men of the NW who were willing to go with him. He is dismissive of Marsh and his gang when they leave the hall because he knows he no longer needs them.

But that doesn't mean he actually wants the NW to stay out of the whole thing. Just the cowards. His whole speech is a rhetoric trick to get as many Watchmen as possible to join him. He is mostly addressing the wildlings, of course, but not exclusively.

The intention to march against the Boltons is definitely not what they intended - but then, neither Roose nor Ramsay have any means of knowing that Jon Snow actually allowed quite a few wildlings to cross the Wall. The whole march only makes sense if Jon Snow has an army. And if they assume he has none or only a few wildlings then there is no reason to expect that they would ever see him a real political or military threat. And, of course, the success of Jon's attack would have greatly depended on him showing up unexpected and attacking the Boltons before they knew what hit them. Anything else would never have worked considering that Jon's army would consist mostly of undisciplined wildlings.

[butterbumps!]

52 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

@butterbumps!

I'm not inclined to buy that Jon Snow did not want to march to Winterfell and/or against Roose/Ramsay. His thoughts when he has his public triumphs suggest that he wanted to take control, not just over the wildlings but also about those men of the NW who were willing to go with him. He is dismissive of Marsh and his gang when they leave the hall because he knows he no longer needs them.

But that doesn't mean he actually wants the NW to stay out of the whole thing. Just the cowards. His whole speech is a rhetoric trick to get as many Watchmen as possible to join him. He is mostly addressing the wildlings, of course, but not exclusively.

I disagree.  He's sending the rangers-- the 1/3 of the Watch that's usually in his camp, who'd be most likely to back him on this-- off to Hardhome, which will ostensibly keep them away from whatever fallout from Jon's past and future actions may ensue.

I don't have my books with me so I can't quote directly, but we also get Jon's interior monologue during the speech, where he takes ownership of his "crimes," and says something to the effect of "if this is oathbreaking the crime was his and his alone.   No man can say I made my brothers break their vow."  "No man," meaning, not merely "no Watchmen such as Bowen and Co," but also No Bolton, No Lannister, No clansman, No one.  It's to say, "no one will blame my brothers for my actions, past and future."

He pretty much said everything to sell this conundrum-- which, let's face it, is actually quite relevant to the Watch, and which they'd be arguably justified in answering-- as a personal issue rather than a Watch issue.   He's purposely distancing himself from the Watch and endearing himself to the wildlings.

ETA: regarding marching South, I suspect he's thinking more in terms of an ambush/ interception or trickery than full battle, or, least likely, any sort of siege of storming of WF itself.

52 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

@butterbumps!

The intention to march against the Boltons is definitely not what they intended - but then, neither Roose nor Ramsay have any means of knowing that Jon Snow actually allowed quite a few wildlings to cross the Wall. The whole march only makes sense if Jon Snow has an army. And if they assume he has none or only a few wildlings then there is no reason to expect that they would ever see him a real political or military threat. And, of course, the success of Jon's attack would have greatly depended on him showing up unexpected and attacking the Boltons before they knew what hit them. Anything else would never have worked considering that Jon's army would consist mostly of undisciplined wildlings.

I fear there's a misunderstanding.   I was pointing out that contrary to Jon's announcement to go south, nothing in that letter leads to the rational, strategic conclusion to do so.  As in, the Boltons (or whoever one believe the author to be) weren't trying to elicit that reaction, having written nothing in the letter that would elicit that reaction.   I was speaking to what appears to be a fairly common interpretation of the letter as luring or enticing or enraging Jon toward Winterfell (and/ or rescuing Arya).   I'm pointing out that the letter doesn't really do that.

[Lord Varys]

@butterbumps!

Don't have to books with me right now, either. But the idea after the Pink Letter was to put the expedition to Hardhome under the command of Tormund. I always thought then this would be, mostly, made up of wildlings not Watchmen. Perhaps they changed that when they changed the plan to Jon going south, but that's all not very clear.

It is correct that Jon tries to twist things in his mind that the crime is his but that is sort of moot because he is the Lord Commander of the Night's Watch. Regardless whether he commands or allows his men to volunteer to accompany he still hurts the Watch in the eyes of the Realm. Just as a king declaring war on another nation or a lord rebelling against his king affects all the people in his domain to the degree that they, too, become legitimate targets of in the coming war.

And just as nobody is going to care about the 'paper shield' Jon sent to Tommen, nobody will care that he allowed each man a choice in the matter of the march against Winterfell. If the Boltons or Lannisters won they can kill anyone they want to kill, regardless what Jon Snow once said or did. One assumes that the Night's King or Runcel Hightower also had good reasons to justify what they did, and perhaps also left their brothers the choice whether they were with them or against them (and somehow I think a majority was with them rather than against them or else other people hadn't been forced to correct the mess at the Wall).

Oh, I'm completely with you that the letter in itself wasn't supposed to draw Jon out and have him march against the Boltons. That makes little sense. My take on that is that Ramsay/Roose got very pissed about Jon Snow sending Mance to abduct 'Arya', and they wanted her back and hostages against Stannis, too.

And we can safely assume that Ramsay would have written a different letter had he known or suspected that Jon had enough men to actually march against them.

[butterbumps!]

24 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

@butterbumps!

Don't have to books with me right now, either. But the idea after the Pink Letter was to put the expedition to Hardhome under the command of Tormund. I always thought then this would be, mostly, made up of wildlings not Watchmen. Perhaps they changed that when they changed the plan to Jon going south, but that's all not very clear.

The plan once the letter arrives is for Tormund to lead a force entirely comprised of the rangers to Hardhome.  The wildlings were not to be involved in that mission any longer, but were conveniently left for Jon to win over with a rousing speech (wildlings don't get told to follow a man, the man must win them over first).

24 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

@butterbumps!

And just as nobody is going to care about the 'paper shield' Jon sent to Tommen, nobody will care that he allowed each man a choice in the matter of the march against Winterfell. If the Boltons or Lannisters won they can kill anyone they want to kill, regardless what Jon Snow once said or did. One assumes that the Night's King or Runcel Hightower also had good reasons to justify what they did, and perhaps also left their brothers the choice whether they were with them or against them (and somehow I think a majority was with them rather than against them or else other people hadn't been forced to correct the mess at the Wall).

I'm not so sure of that.   I think the plan is that Jon was going to stop Rams from destroying the Watch or die trying, and that by involving none of the Watchmen-- men who'd remain at their posts and likely renounce their LC in the process-- would ultimately be spared.   idk if the Boltons would necessarily destroy the entire Watch based on the actions of the LC, as LC's have been taken out by the realm in the past without destroying the whole Watch.   I think that's largely why he wants those rangers-- the ones who might actually put up a fight for him against Boltons-- away from CB, and so arranges them to go with Tormund.

[Lord Varys]

@butterbumps!

Do we really know that only NW were supposed to make up the ranging under Tormund?

Sure, those NW men who stayed behind might be spared by the Boltons or Lannisters. Or not, if Tommen or Roose decided that they were traitors, too, because they did not stop Jon Snow the way Bowen Marsh did stop him.

And we also have no clear picture who, individually, declared for Jon Snow in the hall. If it turned out that only, say, 50-100 men were truly on Marsh's side then the NW would be effectively dead regardless whether Roose/Tommen spared the pitiful few cowards that remained at the Wall or not.

The Night's Watch is clearly split between Jon Snow's faction and the traditionalists. However much support either side has is completely unclear as of yet, especially if we keep in mind that we have effectively no idea what the guys at Eastwatch and the Shadow Tower think about the present situation, nor all the garrisons of the reopened castles.

[Greg B]

7 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, the idea that a survivor of a battle near Winterfell showed up at the Wall makes no sense. Nobody near Winterfell involved in the battle would head for the Wall in the middle of a snowstorm unless he had enough horses and provisions to make the journey. It would be much more logical to head for a near castle/holdfast/village/hiding place.

So I'd settle it had to be a letter. The only other option would be a vision from Mel, but those wouldn't carry the same weight as an actual existing letter - at least not in Jon's mind.

I would expect Stannis's routed troops to make their way back to the Wall. At least, if I were them, I'd try to reach my lord's queen and heir rather than try to hide in the North, surrounded by enemies who want to kill me. Either way, yes, a letter, or better yet, multiple letters from multiple sources confirming Stannis's defeat. This is big news, so one would expect lots of birds in the air. If I were Jon, I'd certainly want verification before I acted -- I wouldn't swallow whole one letter ostensibly from Ramsay Bolton.

Without attempting to get inside Martin's head, we can certainly imagine him writing the Battle of Winterfell in a way that would make logical sense of Jon's actions. Justin Massey shows up at the Wall with "Arya" and the Iron Banker and tells Jon of his sworn duty to raise sellswords and put Shireen on the throne. The letters announcing Stannis's defeat might beat them to the Wall, including perhaps a damning one (for Jon) from Ramsay himself. Then the surviving king's men start straggling in. Maybe they report that Ramsay's outriders have pursued them the whole way, and the Bastard of Bolton is marching on the Wall with his main strength. Now Jon's in a pickle: The charges Ramsay has leveled against him are true and his days as lord commander are numbered. At the same time, he realizes that Bolton is in a precarious position: His "bride" is false, and given enough time, Massey can return with 50,000 sellswords to challenge his claim. Perhaps Roose is dead. Bolton will never allow the wildlings to settle the Gift and help defend the Wall, but perhaps Jon can buy Massey time if he leads the wildlings to war. The status quo is a disaster, with what Jon knows is coming, but Jon has a chance to overturn the status quo by breaking his vows (again, once and for all) and turning warlord.

And in the text we get, Jon essentially acts as though all this (or something very like it) has happened. The problem, from the perspective of narrative craft, is that he does this entirely on the basis of one letter of uncertain provenance and veracity. Again, whatever truth he knows is in the letter, he flatly believes that Stannis is dead. Why? Because the letter is a plot device meant to get us from A -> C after B has been cut from the book. And it's a plot device crafted specifically to leave us still interested in B, since we're going to get B in the next book.

@Makk This has been hashed out before, but Jon literally isn't thinking about Arya when he leaves the Shieldhall. He's thinking about getting Melisandre to help him find someone in the snow, but that someone isn't Arya -- it's Ramsay Bolton. This isn't a case where potentially unreliable narrators give us some wiggle room. Jon's thoughts are focused on one thing: finding Bolton and kicking his ass.

[butterbumps!]

19 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

@butterbumps!

Do we really know that only NW were supposed to make up the ranging under Tormund?

"But now I find I cannot go to Hardhome.  The ranging will be led by Tormund Giantsbane, known to you all.   I have promised him as many men as he requires" (the "men" Jon would be promising are Watchmen).   And then further down, "The NIght's Watch will make for Hardhome..."

I think it's pretty clear that Tormund is leading Watchmen.

19 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

@butterbumps!

Sure, those NW men who stayed behind might be spared by the Boltons or Lannisters. Or not, if Tommen or Roose decided that they were traitors, too, because they did not stop Jon Snow the way Bowen Marsh did stop him.

And we also have no clear picture who, individually, declared for Jon Snow in the hall. If it turned out that only, say, 50-100 men were truly on Marsh's side then the NW would be effectively dead regardless whether Roose/Tommen spared the pitiful few cowards that remained at the Wall or not.

The Night's Watch is clearly split between Jon Snow's faction and the traditionalists. However much support either side has is completely unclear as of yet, especially if we keep in mind that we have effectively no idea what the guys at Eastwatch and the Shadow Tower think about the present situation, nor all the garrisons of the reopened castles.

I think you may be letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.   The Boltons might end up killing some Watchmen anyway, sure, but probably a hell of a lot fewer than without Jon making such a clear break from them.   Can we at least agree that more Watchmen will be spared if the Rams shows up to the Wall without the rangers there to be heroes about it, and even possibly with the stewards and builders having chosen another LC, renouncing this "oathbreaking wildling warg"?
 

[Lord Varys]

@Greg B

Well, I'm not willing to speculate about the outcome of the battle(s) at Winterfell. Not to mention that your scenario most likely would culminate in the end of Jon Snow in any case. If he is murdered shortly before Roose arrives then there is little or no chance that he'll come back from the dead and so on.

I'd like to turn out something else:

George did not include Theon 1 in ADwD despite the fact that this chapter was already finished. If you carefully read the Stannis/Wall story in ADwD then you get a feeling that doom is coming for Stannis. The imminent Karstark betrayal is hinted at/revealed early on, Stannis is stupid enough to actually consider attacking the Dreadfort (which shows a lack of judgment that could seal his doom later), then there is a little bit of hope with the success at Deepwood Motte, but then the snowstorm strikes. And that one really gives you a sense and feeling of death and doom.

Only in Theon 1 is everything suddenly emotionally reversed - Stannis seems almost happy and very confident that he can turn the tide of the war, the Karstark betrayal is dealt with decisively, and Stannis suddenly controls the means to feed the enemy false information.

I actually think there is a pretty good chance that not only the size of ADwD led to excision of the lake/Winterfell battles but also an actual intention on the side of the author to begin the next book with a twist.

@butterbumps!

Well, 'men' isn't very specific, and the Night's Watch is the institution led by Jon Snow. You cannot really deduce from these vocabulary that only NW men would make up the ranging. I find the idea not very convincing that Tormund and Jon would decide to put the command of force completely made up of Watchman to a wildling chieftain. How likely is it that Tormund would keep that command and/or return alive from the ranging?

In addition, we have to keep in mind that the wildlings at Hardhome are fellow wildlings of the gang that has crossed the Wall. They will be interested in helping them much more than any Watchmen. In that sense, one would expect that many wildlings would volunteer to go on that mission - only as many as Jon would allow, of course, but still quite a few.

Could be that there is a chance that the NW would be in better position if some brothers had stayed back. But that's really difficult to say. It would depend on many other factors. In how bad a mood is Ramsay at that point? How many losses did the Boltons have?

I'd say Jon still tries to twist things in his own mind so that he isn't forced to call himself a traitor.

I'm pretty sure Tommen/Roose could pin Jon Snow's help of Stannis collectively on the Watch. Again, the crimes of the lord can become the crime of his people (and vice versa).

[butterbumps!]

18 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

 

@butterbumps!

Well, 'men' isn't very specific, and the Night's Watch is the institution led by Jon Snow. You cannot really deduce from these vocabulary that only NW men would make up the ranging. I find the idea not very convincing that Tormund and Jon would decide to put the command of force completely made up of Watchman to a wildling chieftain. How likely is it that Tormund would keep that command and/or return alive from the ranging?

In addition, we have to keep in mind that the wildlings at Hardhome are fellow wildlings of the gang that has crossed the Wall. They will be interested in helping them much more than any Watchmen. In that sense, one would expect that many wildlings would volunteer to go on that mission - only as many as Jon would allow, of course, but still quite a few.

Could be that there is a chance that the NW would be in better position if some brothers had stayed back. But that's really difficult to say. It would depend on many other factors. In how bad a mood is Ramsay at that point? How many losses did the Boltons have?

I'd say Jon still tries to twist things in his own mind so that he isn't forced to call himself a traitor.

I'm pretty sure Tommen/Roose could pin Jon Snow's help of Stannis collectively on the Watch. Again, the crimes of the lord can become the crime of his people (and vice versa).

I don't think it could be much clearer that Jon is sending the Watchman rangers to Hardhome under Tormund.   Whether you agree with the wisdom of that move is another issue, but the "men" Jon is referring to is not unclear or ambiguous, especially in how he follows it up with "The Watch will go to Hardhome."  The point I'm trying to get at is that Jon is conveniently removing the Watchmen who'd be most likely to stand with him and resist the Boltons away from the Wall, and hence, avoid the risk of Bolton confrontation.   Sure, this scenario creates other problems and challenges, but it can easily be seen as preparation for Jon's detaching himself from the Watch (and vice versa).

Again, sure, the Watch could be wiped out anyway, but the chances for that seem considerably less than if they all stood beside their traitorous LC.

also, idk if Jon cares about being a "traitor" at this point.   I think he's of the mind that no matter what he does, he's always going to be a wildling, traitor warg to some of these people, and finally comes to realize that just running with this identity so many come to expect from him is in his best interest to get things done (it keeps the Watch a bit safer from the south, gets him his wildlings, etc).

 

[Lord Varys]

@butterbumps!

Jon is mainly addressing the wildlings in the hall and uses his rhetorics to win them over. Considering that he isn't yet completely sure of their loyalty he would be ill advised to mention that they would accompany 'the Watch' to Hardhome. The Lord Commander of the Night's Watch can speak for the Night's Watch but not for the wildlings.

The idea that Jon would send his guys to Hardhome under the command of Tormund isn't clear, either. That's just your assumption, is it not?

Come to think of it there is actually no chance that all the Watchmen would have stood at the side of their Lord Commander. Jon's approach is actually the only one possible. He cannot possibly command any brother of the Night's Watch to leave his post and march against the Boltons. He doesn't have the right to do that. If he did that, he would most likely also get himself executed unless he has not long ago himself as a supreme dictator like the Night's King. By leaving the decision to every man in the hall he ensured that many would actually willingly join him, and he could that then use as a means to keep the minority in check who opposed his politics.

The scenario in which Jon Snow commands his brothers to follow would make him a traitorous tyrant. Whoever slew him would most likely be cheered by a majority of the Watch. The scenario we got was him leaving his men a choice and now he most likely will be seen as martyr rather than a tyrant, and Marsh and his gang will have as much longterm success as Brutus and Cassius did.

Therefore I'd say Jon only ever had the chance to take the road he took. Any other in which all the Watchmen were with him would be pretty much impossible.

And by the way: Roose/Ramsay/Tommen could also consider the entire treaty with the wildlings as treason already and as pretext to rid themselves of the entire Watch. The Night's Watch and the Wall are supposed to protect the Seven Kingdoms from the wildlings, and a NW who makes common cause with them and a pretender and traitor could easily not survive this.

[butterbumps!]

22 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

@butterbumps!

Jon is mainly addressing the wildlings in the hall and uses his rhetorics to win them over. Considering that he isn't yet completely sure of their loyalty he would be ill advised to mention that they would accompany 'the Watch' to Hardhome. The Lord Commander of the Night's Watch can speak for the Night's Watch but not for the wildlings.

The idea that Jon would send his guys to Hardhome under the command of Tormund isn't clear, either. That's just your assumption, is it not?

Lord Varys, I confess I'm having some difficulty understanding why this point is contentious.  I quoted the aDwD text where this is explicitly stated (I downloaded it to my phone earlier in order to do so):

1 hour ago, butterbumps! said:

"But now I find I cannot go to Hardhome.  The ranging will be led by Tormund Giantsbane, known to you all.   I have promised him as many men as he requires" (the "men" Jon would be promising are Watchmen).   And then further down, "The NIght's Watch will make for Hardhome..."

As I quoted earlier, he states that "The ranging will be led by Tormund," so the idea that Tormund will lead the ranging to Hardhome is not my assumption.   We know that "men" refers to Watchmen since the wildling men are not his to order around (whereas he's the LC of the Watch, the only men that could be said who belong to him at that point truly), made even more explicit by his statement further down the page that "The Watch will make for Hardhome."

 

ETA: as to the rest, yes, I agree, he isn't yet the leader of the wildlings so he'd be ill-advised to just start ordering them around on missions before winning them over.  

And to that end, it is noteworthy that he doesn't give them a rousing speech about joining Tormund on the Hardhome rescue to encourage them to that mission.   Instead, he's delivering this personalized agit-prop to get them to follow him south/ deal with the Boltons.  Which also tells us that getting the wildings to follow Tormund is not part of the plan, but winning them to a different mission is.

[Lord Varys]

@butterbumps!

The point is a little convoluted. Jon and Tormund make plans off screen before the speech. While Jon cannot order the wildlings around before the speech he and Tormund could have made plans including some wildlings (say, men of Tormund's) into the planned ranging to Hardhome. But he wouldn't say that in his speech.

Anyway, that is a moot point. There won't be a march to Winterfell and neither will there are ranging to Hardhome. And certainly not under the command of Tormund.

[Greg B]

11 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Anyway, that is a moot point. There won't be a march to Winterfell and neither will there are ranging to Hardhome. And certainly not under the command of Tormund.

Do we know this? I mean, what should happen is that the Night's Watch, Queen's Men, and wildlings slaughter each other, but have we seen teaser chapters showing us what actually happens?

[Little Lark]

27 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

@butterbumps!

The point is a little convoluted. Jon and Tormund make plans off screen before the speech. While Jon cannot order the wildlings around before the speech he and Tormund could have made plans including some wildlings (say, men of Tormund's) into the planned ranging to Hardhome. But he wouldn't say that in his speech.

Anyway, that is a moot point. There won't be a march to Winterfell and neither will there are ranging to Hardhome. And certainly not under the command of Tormund.

I don't think it matters whether or not Jon and Tormund decided to include wildlings. What Jon actually says is that he has promised Tormund as many men as he needs for the expedition. The only men that Jon has any authority over are his brothers and these are the only men that he could've promised. 

Also, we don't know for sure whether a march on Winterfell or an expedition to Hardhome have been totally ruled out. I think it's unlikely but certainly not impossible, especially considering we don't know what will happen to Jon, Tormun, Mel, etc.

[Lord Varys]

Just now, Greg B said:

Do we know this? I mean, what should happen is that the Night's Watch, Queen's Men, and wildlings slaughter each other, but have we seen teaser chapters showing us what actually happens?

Nope, but I think the ranging taking place as at was is very unlikely. Even if there is no slaughtering there will be some sort of chaos to resolve, and even if all parties involved reach an understanding (very unlikely) those people will dream lesser dreams than Jon Snow and Tormund together while everything was still fine.

[Greg B]

11 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Nope, but I think the ranging taking place as at was is very unlikely. Even if there is no slaughtering there will be some sort of chaos to resolve, and even if all parties involved reach an understanding (very unlikely) those people will dream lesser dreams than Jon Snow and Tormund together while everything was still fine.

I agree the Hardhome expedition is extraordinarily unlikely, but I think it's very likely that Jon goes toe-to-toe with Bolton. In fact, I'll be shocked if that's not where his arc goes from here.

[Free Northman Reborn]

1 minute ago, Greg B said:

I agree the Hardhome expedition is extraordinarily unlikely, but I think it's very likely that Jon goes toe-to-toe with Bolton. In fact, I'll be shocked if that's not where his arc goes from here.

Agreed. It is the obvious way forward.

[Lord Varys]

Just now, Greg B said:

I agree the Hardhome expedition is extraordinarily unlikely, but I think it's very likely that Jon goes toe-to-toe with Bolton. In fact, I'll be shocked if that's not where his arc goes from here.

Well, that would depend on the outcome of the battle. Or, not necessarily - on the amount of information that comes in throughout the time Jon's dead. The only very good hint we have about what's going on in the books is that Stannis still lives and that George had not yet written Shireen's death scene by the time this came up in the show. That could very well mean the Boltons will remain Stannis' problem for the time being.

It is not out of the question that Jon will also want to deal with Ramsay - but the question is: Will Ramsay still be alive by that point? How much time has passed, and how has the political situation changed at the Wall? A majority of the wildlings might easily decide to leave the Wall at once considering that the guy they made their deal with is now a corpse. And then Jon would not have an army.

@Little Lark

Tormund himself has men of his own. My idea above was that the expedition to Hardhome was never supposed to be completely made up of Watchmen. Jon Snow does not talk about dispatching wildlings during his speech but he might have agreed with Tormund that Tormund would take a certain number of his own people with him to Hardhome.

And come to think of it:

Jon Snow actually had the authority to command the wildlings as per the agreement of their original treaty. They agreed to fight at his side in support of the NW when the Others came. It is not that difficult to interpret the Hardhome ranging as part of the war against the Others so he may actually have been to call upon their help prior to the speech.

In that sense, the speech may have been more to convince the wildlings and whatever Watchmen sat on the fence to march with him against Winterfell than anything else.

[Greg B]

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

A majority of the wildlings might easily decide to leave the Wall at once considering that the guy they made their deal with is now a corpse. And then Jon would not have an army.

For all we know, Bolton may not have much of an army! In any case, Jon may go south thinking to run a BwoB-style guerilla operation against the Boltons, only to discover he has quite a few more allies in the North than he imagined. Along similar lines, by the time he recovers from being dead, there may be open civil war in the North and he merely has to step in to unify and lead the anti-Bolton, Stark-loyalist side. Regardless of the details, I think that's the direction it will go and finding men willing to fight for him won't be a problem. In the end, in my view, he needs to unify the North -- including what's left of the wildlings -- to defend the Wall (one way or another, and not necessarily successfully).