The Ramsey's list and the true goal of the Pink Letter

[Clegane'sPup]

48 minutes ago, Trefayne said:

 

Yeah, Clydas might be a mole, even if the Boltons and the conspirators aren't in league and he was just nudging things in certain directions.

I'm merely spitballing. I have numerous names for the letter --- dastardly --- mind fuck --- mental masturbater.

Clydas wouldn't be a mole. Clydas would be a pawn to be used since the steward is in charge of the ravens flapping hither and yon at CB.

 

 

[The Mother of The Others]

I tore the letter out of my copy of the book 3 years ago and never looked back.

[three-eyed monkey]

16 minutes ago, The Mother of The Others said:

I tore the letter out of my copy of the book 3 years ago and never looked back.

lol

[three-eyed monkey]

5 hours ago, lalt said:

That’s why I don’t think that getting fArya back (and those other people) was never the real goal of the PL. But the contrary. 

Yeah, the author of the letter, regardless who it is, could not realistically expect the demands of the letter to be met. the demands are just padding to make it seem legit. The letter is constructed in a way that paragraph by paragraph either invites Jon to take action or else removes a barrier to Jon taking action.

The letter essentially reads:

Bastard,

Stannis is dead so there is no hope of him resolving this situation for you. If you want to fix this then you need to act. Come on down to Winterfell and take a look.

You are accused of serious crimes you did not commit, and we have proof, all of which should not sit well with your personal sense of justice and honor.

Mance went to save your sister and now he's dangling like a carrot in Winterfell just waiting to be rescued, which is the least you could do for him given that strong sense of honor I mentioned. By the way I skinned seven women who were with him which should outrage you and make you want to come and kill me.

Don't worry about your sister being our hostage because guess what... she is no longer in our possession.

Send me more women to skin and some children this time please or else I will come and kill you, unless you are the type of person who doesn't agree with psychos skinning women, in which case you best come and try kill me instead as this is clearly not going to be resolved until one of us is dead.

Signed,

Ex bastard but now Trueborn lord of Winterfell, despite the fact I am nowhere near worthy of your father's seat, but see my dad betrayed and killed your brother, so the Lannisters who murdered your dad and branded him a traitor rewarded us with his castle and gave me your favorite sister to skin someday, I mean marry. Eh, did I mention she escaped?

 

 

[Darth Sidious]

I believe Ramsay wrote the Pink Letter because he wanted those people in his custody.  Ramsay wrote the Pink Letter in the hopes of getting what he wanted with little further work on his part.  The Bolton forces are war weary from their victory over Stannis.  The last thing they want is another war.  But all of this is just discussion for the sake of discussion.  Whoever wrote the letter and whatever his intentions might be, Jon chose to commit treason.  Jon chose to betray the Night's Watch.  His acts of treason were brought to light by the Pink Letter and he was forced to make a public admission of guilt.  The letter exposed all of Jon's illegal activities.  He got caught with his pants down.  Jon compounded his poor choices by announcing his intent to further cause problems and attack the Boltons with an army of wildlings.  The men of the Night's Watch had no choice but to take him out.   

Who wrote the letter and what his intent might have been does not change the fact that Jon already broke his vows.  He gave Mance Rayder, the worst criminal known, a free pass and ordered the man to get his sister.  That is very inappropriate and illegal for a lord commander to do.  He sent a sworn brother of the Night's Watch to do something illegal.  I might also add that this sworn brother of the night's watch committed murder while guesting with the Boltons and is thus guilty of breaking guest rights.  All under Jon's orders and while performing the mission that Jon ordered him to do.  

 

[dialt]

5 hours ago, Silver Bullet 1985 said:

I believe Ramsay wrote the Pink Letter because he wanted those people in his custody.  Ramsay wrote the Pink Letter in the hopes of getting what he wanted with little further work on his part.  The Bolton forces are war weary from their victory over Stannis.  The last thing they want is another war.  But all of this is just discussion for the sake of discussion.  Whoever wrote the letter and whatever his intentions might be, Jon chose to commit treason.  Jon chose to betray the Night's Watch.  His acts of treason were brought to light by the Pink Letter and he was forced to make a public admission of guilt.  The letter exposed all of Jon's illegal activities.  He got caught with his pants down.  Jon compounded his poor choices by announcing his intent to further cause problems and attack the Boltons with an army of wildlings.  The men of the Night's Watch had no choice but to take him out.   

Who wrote the letter and what his intent might have been does not change the fact that Jon already broke his vows.  He gave Mance Rayder, the worst criminal known, a free pass and ordered the man to get his sister.  That is very inappropriate and illegal for a lord commander to do.  He sent a sworn brother of the Night's Watch to do something illegal.  I might also add that this sworn brother of the night's watch committed murder while guesting with the Boltons and is thus guilty of breaking guest rights.  All under Jon's orders and while performing the mission that Jon ordered him to do.  

 

First... I love your avatar: it gives me Sheevs 

But... I don't agree with that. I believe it's more fair to say that only Selyse and more importantly Shireen - as Stannis's heir - have politcal value. However if Ramsey wrote the letter and he has won the battle, Stannis forces are smashed and his cause - as far as Ramsey knows -  lost in the immeditate future .  The few men left with Selyse, would most likely take the black to be forgiven by the Crown. In addition: if we have to believe the PL Ramsey missed fArya and Tyco, so he knows nothing about the IB etc.. (and in fact the PL ignores that too). So Ramsey has not reasons to believe there's a war/battle coming if he wrote the letter. Unless... he provokes the wildlings and Jon which is exacly - and oddly enough from this pov - what the PL does.

Val and Mance's son, in fact, don't have any political value in Seven Kingdom's terms. They're wildlings, period. Threatening them togheter with informing Jon, therefore the FF  too, that Mance (their king) is still alive but hold captive, it's something that Ramsey should avoid, if he really wants to avoid any avenge by the FF and thus another battle. 

That said, without the reaction that PL provokes in Jon, Ramsey should prove his accusations vs him: and the only things he has are Mance's words. The words of a traitor, of someone who foresaw his vow, if Abel is Mance for real. Abel is someone  that "proclaims" to be Mance Rayder and people saw Mance burnging. To prove that Jon's did what Mance said he did, people have to believe that Mance didn't die.

However, all of these problems are overcome - and that is why I agree with the second part - thanx to the PL. That is the best way to push Jon to do what he does and in short: to fuc**** him.

[The Mother of The Others]

Jon edged himself into the war already, secretly, and the letter ends that secret.  The boltons weren't served by staying quiet in this case so they went loud.   The watch is constrained in their behavior and can't respond to the letter's challenge without ruining themselves and ending their neutral status, at which point Boltons have an excuse to attack and end the watch problem, no more harboring stannis rebels, etc.  So the letter puts the ball firmly in the watch's court and says Your Move, knowing full well the watch can't move.  Unless they do... which is an instant win for the Boltons, who gain legitimacy to wipe out Jon's support faction.  The letter is one big I've Got You , So Enjoy Twisting in your straight jacket, which can only get tighter as it finds its way up to your neck as a noose.

Among the letter's outright aims is to get Jon shanked by the rest of the watch who ain't down with going to war.   So, success.   Inner ructions among the 'brothers.'    Mission accomplished.  It's winter after all.  Ask Stannis.  Rams doesn't want to go to the Wall to take care of this, he'd rather it took care of itself.  Done and done.  The true purpose of the letter.

Of course with that being said my fav author for it is Stannis, re- using the broken wax from the letter Rams sent everybody before, giving Stan something to do in his desperate shivering ice tent, and tossing in some character development for him too.  There's always someone who chimes in with how Theon couldn't have known and conveyed all the letter's info to Stan, but just stay quiet about that and it works fine.

[Moiraine Sedai]

13 hours ago, Silver Bullet 1985 said:

I believe Ramsay wrote the Pink Letter because he wanted those people in his custody.  Ramsay wrote the Pink Letter in the hopes of getting what he wanted with little further work on his part.  The Bolton forces are war weary from their victory over Stannis.  The last thing they want is another war.  But all of this is just discussion for the sake of discussion.  Whoever wrote the letter and whatever his intentions might be, Jon chose to commit treason.  Jon chose to betray the Night's Watch.  His acts of treason were brought to light by the Pink Letter and he was forced to make a public admission of guilt.  The letter exposed all of Jon's illegal activities.  He got caught with his pants down.  Jon compounded his poor choices by announcing his intent to further cause problems and attack the Boltons with an army of wildlings.  The men of the Night's Watch had no choice but to take him out.   

Who wrote the letter and what his intent might have been does not change the fact that Jon already broke his vows.  He gave Mance Rayder, the worst criminal known, a free pass and ordered the man to get his sister.  That is very inappropriate and illegal for a lord commander to do.  He sent a sworn brother of the Night's Watch to do something illegal.  I might also add that this sworn brother of the night's watch committed murder while guesting with the Boltons and is thus guilty of breaking guest rights.  All under Jon's orders and while performing the mission that Jon ordered him to do.  

 

 

7 hours ago, lalt said:

First... I love your avatar: it gives me Sheevs 

But... I don't agree with that. I believe it's more fair to say that only Selyse and more importantly Shireen - as Stannis's heir - have politcal value. However if Ramsey wrote the letter and he has won the battle, Stannis forces are smashed and his cause - as far as Ramsey knows -  lost in the immeditate future .  The few men left with Selyse, would most likely take the black to be forgiven by the Crown. In addition: if we have to believe the PL Ramsey missed fArya and Tyco, so he knows nothing about the IB etc.. (and in fact the PL ignores that too). So Ramsey has not reasons to believe there's a war/battle coming if he wrote the letter. Unless... he provokes the wildlings and Jon which is exacly - and oddly enough from this pov - what the PL does.

Val and Mance's son, in fact, don't have any political value in Seven Kingdom's terms. They're wildlings, period. Threatening them togheter with informing Jon, therefore the FF  too, that Mance (their king) is still alive but hold captive, it's something that Ramsey should avoid, if he really wants to avoid any avenge by the FF and thus another battle. 

That said, without the reaction that PL provokes in Jon, Ramsey should prove his accusations vs him: and the only things he has are Mance's words. The words of a traitor, of someone who foresaw his vow, if Abel is Mance for real. Abel is someone  that "proclaims" to be Mance Rayder and people saw Mance burnging. To prove that Jon's did what Mance said he did, people have to believe that Mance didn't die.

However, all of these problems are overcome - and that is why I agree with the second part - thanx to the PL. That is the best way to push Jon to do what he does and in short: to fuc**** him.

Ramsay would have only superficial knowledge of Wildlings culture.  Learning about their culture was not the topic of his interrogation of the spearwives.  He would assume the son and lover of Mance have political value.  Ramsay wrote that letter to get his bride back. 

[dialt]

 

41 minutes ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

 

Ramsay would have only superficial knowledge of Wildlings culture.  Learning about their culture was not the topic of his interrogation of the spearwives.  He would assume the son and lover of Mance have political value.  Ramsay wrote that letter to get his bride back.

As you are pointing, he would assume that Mance’s son and Val may be important... to the Wildlings. And that is why he may be literally inviting them to fight him together with Jon. So that his marriage to a fake won’t be discovered. That matters to him. The legitimacy of his marriage. Not his bride. She may die. He’s still the heir as her widower just like he is of lady Hornwood. That as long as nobody will dispute fArya’s identity.

[Lluewhyn]

On 11/30/2018 at 8:30 PM, three-eyed monkey said:

Yeah, the author of the letter, regardless who it is, could not realistically expect the demands of the letter to be met. the demands are just padding to make it seem legit. The letter is constructed in a way that paragraph by paragraph either invites Jon to take action or else removes a barrier to Jon taking action.

 

Well, you are correct in that the main purpose of the PL is to get Jon to take action. Specifically, GRRM wrote it to have Jon take a specific action that would further his character arc (getting killed by the NW, presumably to get resurrected).

It would be really unfortunate if this was a time where GRRM was sloppy about the details and all of this speculation back and forth was pointless because GRRM had Ramsay write the PL to push Jon along his path and didn't think through all of the various details that us fans would quibble about because he just needed to get the plot moving to complete the book*.

Now, I really don't believe this, as there's too many fine details in the letter to be that crude, but I can imagine the reaction from all of the fans who have argued this for the past seven years were this to be revealed.

*I'm thinking of my reaction to watching Revenge of the Sith. I imagined George Lucas realizing that he was 2.5 films into a 3 film story of Anakin Skywalker's downfall, still had Anakin being mostly on the side of good and realized he needed to hurry things up because he was running out of time, so has Anakin go full Dark Side in a rather abrupt fashion. Your own mileage may vary.

 

[The Commentator]

On 12/1/2018 at 2:01 PM, Moiraine Sedai said:

 

Ramsay would have only superficial knowledge of Wildlings culture.  Learning about their culture was not the topic of his interrogation of the spearwives.  He would assume the son and lover of Mance have political value.  Ramsay wrote that letter to get his bride back. 

Which he wrongly assumed would give him leverage over the Wildlings who are now in the north.  The Boltons will have to deal with the wildlings and having these people as house guests would make sure everything went as smooth as possible.  He doesn't know that wildlings only value strength and care not for Rayder's blood line.  

[kissdbyfire]

Mance's "lover" is dead. 

[three-eyed monkey]

56 minutes ago, Lluewhyn said:

Well, you are correct in that the main purpose of the PL is to get Jon to take action. Specifically, GRRM wrote it to have Jon take a specific action that would further his character arc (getting killed by the NW, presumably to get resurrected).

Yes, but the letter must also fit the author's character arc. GRRM always says every character is the hero in their own story. If we take a quick look at Stannis arc we see:

Stannis' has said several times that winning the north to his cause would be far easier if Jon were to swear his sword and rise Jon Stark, Lord of Winterfell. The north do not love Stannis but they would rally to the son of Eddard Stark. The walls of Winterfell can be rebuilt but it's the man that makes a lord. Stannis' goal is clearly stated.

Jon has refused each time, citing his vows. The obstacle to Stannis achieving his goal is established.

We learn that subterfuge is clearly not beyond Stannis, as seen with the burning of Mance, when it comes to overcoming obstacles, such as the law in the case of Mance.

Stannis learns the Boltons have blundered and sent out a portion of their strength against him, and he sees a route to a victory in the battle as well as a means to take the castle. He starts planning a few steps ahead, beyond taking the castle.  Sending Massey to Braavo is clearly a longer term plan as it is going to take months to bare fruit. A more immediate concern is who the castle will go to once it is won? Stannis distant second choice, Arnulf Karstark, is ruled out by his treachery. There are no alternative candidates. If Stannis is to overcome the obstacle and achieve his goal then he needs to devise a way to get Jon to break his vows and come to Winterfell.

So the letter fits Stannis arc better than any other candidate in my opinion.

 

[Tagganaro]

On 12/1/2018 at 6:01 AM, lalt said:

But... I don't agree with that. I believe it's more fair to say that only Selyse and more importantly Shireen - as Stannis's heir - have politcal value. However if Ramsey wrote the letter and he has won the battle, Stannis forces are smashed and his cause - as far as Ramsey knows -  lost in the immeditate future .  The few men left with Selyse, would most likely take the black to be forgiven by the Crown. In addition: if we have to believe the PL Ramsey missed fArya and Tyco, so he knows nothing about the IB etc.. (and in fact the PL ignores that too). So Ramsey has not reasons to believe there's a war/battle coming if he wrote the letter. Unless... he provokes the wildlings and Jon which is exacly - and oddly enough from this pov - what the PL does.

I'm not sure Selyse and Shireen even have any value if what the PL claims is true (which I don't think anyone actually does).  If stannis is defeated nobody is following Shireen whether she is his heir or not.  Not only is she a child but she has greyscale- we know how Westeros feels about that in general.

And I don't see how Val and "Monster" have any value either- even in a misconceived "southron fool" kind of way of believing the wildlings would follow Mance's sister and son, it's entirely impractical to ever get to use them, when the North would probably not be aware of Tormund's band being allowed through the Wall.  

That's why I still view the letter as written on purpose to be provocative, asking for hostages that the author knows that Jon either does not have or would be unwilling to part with.

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Yes, but the letter must also fit the author's character arc. GRRM always says every character is the hero in their own story. If we take a quick look at Stannis arc we see:

Stannis' has said several times that winning the north to his cause would be far easier if Jon were to swear his sword and rise Jon Stark, Lord of Winterfell. The north do not love Stannis but they would rally to the son of Eddard Stark. The walls of Winterfell can be rebuilt but it's the man that makes a lord. Stannis' goal is clearly stated.

Jon has refused each time, citing his vows. The obstacle to Stannis achieving his goal is established.

We learn that subterfuge is clearly not beyond Stannis, as seen with the burning of Mance, when it comes to overcoming obstacles, such as the law in the case of Mance.

Stannis learns the Boltons have blundered and sent out a portion of their strength against him, and he sees a route to a victory in the battle as well as a means to take the castle. He starts planning a few steps ahead, beyond taking the castle.  Sending Massey to Braavo is clearly a longer term plan as it is going to take months to bare fruit. A more immediate concern is who the castle will go to once it is won? Stannis distant second choice, Arnulf Karstark, is ruled out by his treachery. There are no alternative candidates. If Stannis is to overcome the obstacle and achieve his goal then he needs to devise a way to get Jon to break his vows and come to Winterfell.

So the letter fits Stannis arc better than any other candidate in my opinion.

 

My one issue with Stannis being the author is that once he wins back Winterfell, I don't think he really needs Jon nor would he really want him.  Stannis would have won the North's loyalty and probably would just as easily install another Northern Lord, as he planned to do with Karstark.  He could easily go with an Umber, Glover, or Manderley instead of Jon IMO.  And I think Stannis is also sincere in wanting to defeat the Others, something he may have come to think of Jon as being important to that cause.  

[three-eyed monkey]

35 minutes ago, Tagganaro said:

My one issue with Stannis being the author is that once he wins back Winterfell, I don't think he really needs Jon nor would he really want him.  Stannis would have won the North's loyalty and probably would just as easily install another Northern Lord, as he planned to do with Karstark.  He could easily go with an Umber, Glover, or Manderley instead of Jon IMO.  And I think Stannis is also sincere in wanting to defeat the Others, something he may have come to think of Jon as being important to that cause.  

"Granite does not burn easily," Stannis said. "The castle can be rebuilt, in time. It's not the walls that make a lord, it's the man. Your northmen do not know me, have no reason to love me, yet I will need their strength in the battles yet to come. I need a son of Eddard Stark to win them to my banner."

He could go with another northern lord, and he may have to go with one considering what happened. But there is no doubt that restoring the Starks to their rightful place would be the preferable option. You might not think he needs Jon but Stannis has been clear on several occasions about his thoughts on the matter.

Without a son of Winterfell to stand beside me, I can only hope to win the north by battle.

Stannis came north knowing he would have to battle the Boltons sooner or later. They are loyal to the Lannister's after all. When Stannis says the quoted line, by win the north he means the other lords, as battle with the Boltons is inevitable. Even having Jon by his side will not prevent that.

So Stannis knows he needs to win the northern lords. They do not love him. They did not pay him homage, yet paid it to Roose once requested. Stannis has some selling points. He will have removed the Boltons, serving justice and vengeance for the Red Wedding. Defeated the Wildlings at the Wall. Returned Deepwood to the Glovers. Holds the key to the Ironborn problem in Theon or Asha, perhaps. Restoring a son of Eddard Stark to Winterfell and the house to it's traditional place in the northern hierarchy would be bigger than all of the rest put together. It offers stability, which both the northern lords and Stannis would value. And Stannis has told us he would consider that an advantage. So why not at least make one more play for it? What has he got to lose? Besides unwittingly killing the guy he wants of course.

As for Jon's value in the war against the Others. As Warden of the North he would be strongly placed to help on that front, just as Eddard once thought he would have to call his banners to deal with the King-beyond-the-Wall. Being Lord of Winterfell would not exclude him from going to Castle Black or the Wall. He would lose command of the Watch but gain command of the North, which is much stronger.

[The Mother of The Others]

2 hours ago, Tagganaro said:

My one issue with Stannis being the author is that once he wins back Winterfell, I don't think he really needs Jon.

  Stannis is also sincere in wanting to defeat the Others, something he may have come to think of Jon as being important to that cause.  

Ooooh, ah, oh my, yes.   (Fuck yes.)    raises hand to be called upon, then just blurts it out....     He needs Jon, not Lord Commander Snow, and he's failed to pry Jon away from the Watch, so now he's prying the Watch away from Jon.

If the Letter also effectively Ends The Watch, then Jon has nothing to go back to at the Wall, and is released from his vows on those cheeky grounds, which leaves the claiming of Winterfell lordship as the way to go for him.   Stan may have been betting on Jon to be the one left standing after the dust up, and lost when Jon lost. 

The people listed in the letter are folks stan and jon would want to be saved from the wall as jon rides away.  

[dialt]

2 hours ago, Tagganaro said:

I'm not sure Selyse and Shireen even have any value if what the PL claims is true (which I don't think anyone actually does).  If stannis is defeated nobody is following Shireen whether she is his heir or not.  Not only is she a child but she has greyscale- we know how Westeros feels about that in general.

 And I don't see how Val and "Monster" have any value either- even in a misconceived "southron fool" kind of way of believing the wildlings would follow Mance's sister and son, it's entirely impractical to ever get to use them, when the North would probably not be aware of Tormund's band being allowed through the Wall.  

That's why I still view the letter as written on purpose to be provocative, asking for hostages that the author knows that Jon either does not have or would be unwilling to part with.

My OP tries in fact to prove that the PL letter purpose is to provoke Jon. and that those women and children are demanded just because they are women and children and Jon won't accept that ultimatum. Not because of their political values, ties of blood etc...

In short, not because they are "important" for the author, but because they are to Jon and they are for the very simple reason that they are women and children.

That said, I believe that among them, Shireen - as the only heir of Stannis - may have some value (her mother only because she may help her, à la Margeret of Agiou). The idea is... the Crown can't exclude that in a x years time the context may change and she will be able to claim the throne. From this pov whoever rules at KL may want to get rid of Shireen too. That's all...

I agree about Val and Mance's son.

And more importantly, I agree with the idea that if the PL tells true (or a lot of true)... there's no battle coming for the Boltons. To say better: there should not be. They are in the position to fight anymore.

Stannis is dead, the few men left with his wife are probably going to take the black to be forgiven. And dead are all the lordlings not loyal to the Boltons. Their heads upon WF walls. It's almost perfect.

That's why it makes no sense- imo - to provoke not only Jon, but the wildilings too... to provoke them to the point they choose what they choose: to go fight Ramsey. Because....

3 hours ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Which he wrongly assumed would give him leverage over the Wildlings who are now in the north.  The Boltons will have to deal with the wildlings and having these people as house guests would make sure everything went as smooth as possible.  He doesn't know that wildlings only value strength and care not for Rayder's blood line.  

sure, they may not care about the blood line to choose who lead them (they don't)... but they may care about revenge. More importantly theauthor is telling them that Mance - their last chosen King - is still alive but  prisoner at WF. Whereas Jon and the late Stannis - as the letter conveniently informs the wildlings - have only faked Mance's death.

So if Ramsey believes that for the FF blood matters, he's pushing them to defend the child. If he knows they don't care about it... he's pushing them to avenge/try to save Mance. In short, it doesn't really matter what Ramsey may know about the FF culture. He's giving them plenty of reasons to join Jon in a revenge expedition. 

And that's incredibly stupid for the Boltons. Because they are in the position to not fight anymore. Unless... that's what they want. And if that's what they want, they must have a very good reason to do so. And the only reason good enough to put themselves in this position, is that the Boltons are afraid of the consequences of a meeting fArya/Jon and maybe Theon/Jon too. So Jon has to leave the Wall as soon as he can, to die not having meet fArya (and maybe Theon too).

But that Jon leaves immediately with an army, is what someone else (Stannis or Mance, or them both) wants too, if he wrote the PL.

Because, I agree...

2 hours ago, Tagganaro said:

My one issue with Stannis being the author is that once he wins back Winterfell,

I think Stannis as author holds better if he hasn't take at least Winterfell. 

 

[divica]

Do you guys really think stannis or an ally could have written the letter?

Do you guys think that when jon reaches winterfell and learns that he was lied he would simply do what they want? That jon wouldn t still be an oathbreaker if he becomes warden? 

from an ally point of view the letter doesn t make sense. It doesn t accomplish anything because nobody knows about the wildling army ( they arrived at the Wall very recently) and jon wouldn t march to winterfell with his brothers… basically without the wildlings there is nothing jon can do...

 

If on the other hand it is written by a Bolton then it is a brillant move. Jon Reading that letter to his brothers almost garantes a mutiny. Without the wildling army how could the watch respond to the letter? either jon complies (and no son of ned stark would comply) or it garantes a mutiny and makes the watch an ally to the boltons because the night watchers don t want to die in order to protect stannis familly, wildlings and mel. 

[divica]

27 minutes ago, lalt said:

My OP tries in fact to prove that the PL letter purpose is to provoke Jon. and that those women and children are demanded just because they are women and children and Jon won't accept that ultimatum. Not because of their political values, ties of blood etc...

In short, not because they are "important" for the author, but because they are to Jon and they are for the very simple reason that they are women and children.

That said, I believe that among them, Shireen - as the only heir of Stannis - may have some value (her mother only because she may help her, à la Margeret of Agiou). The idea is... the Crown can't exclude that in a x years time the context may change and she will be able to claim the throne. From this pov whoever rules at KL may want to get rid of Shireen too. That's all...

I agree about Val and Mance's son.

And more importantly, I agree with the idea that if the PL tells true (or a lot of true)... there's no battle coming for the Boltons. To say better: there should not be. They are in the position to fight anymore.

Stannis is dead, the few men left with his wife are probably going to take the black to be forgiven. And dead are all the lordlings not loyal to the Boltons. Their heads upon WF walls. It's almost perfect.

That's why it makes no sense- imo - to provoke not only Jon, but the wildilings too... to provoke them to the point they choose what they choose: to go fight Ramsey. Because....

sure, they may not care about the blood line to choose who lead them (they don't)... but they may care about revenge. More importantly theauthor is telling them that Mance - their last chosen King - is still alive but  prisoner at WF. Whereas Jon and the late Stannis - as the letter conveniently informs the wildlings - have only faked Mance's death.

So if Ramsey believes that for the FF blood matters, he's pushing them to defend the child. If he knows they don't care about it... he's pushing them to avenge/try to save Mance. In short, it doesn't really matter what Ramsey may know about the FF culture. He's giving them plenty of reasons to join Jon in a revenge expedition. 

And that's incredibly stupid for the Boltons. Because they are in the position to not fight anymore. Unless... that's what they want. And if that's what they want, they must have a very good reason to do so. And the only reason good enough to put themselves in this position, is that the Boltons are afraid of the consequences of a meeting fArya/Jon and maybe Theon/Jon too. So Jon has to leave the Wall as soon as he can, to die not having meet fArya (and maybe Theon too).

But that Jon leaves immediately with an army, is what someone else (Stannis or Mance, or them both) wants too, if he wrote the PL.

Because, I agree...

I think Stannis as author holds better if he hasn't take at least Winterfell. 

 

you have written a lot of things that aren t actually true.

First, unless there is someone sending letters from the Wall to winterfell there isn t enough time for anyone to know that there is an army of wildlings on the Wall. (we have no indication that such traitor exists (no even the IT receives letters from a possible traitor on the Wall) and there is no mention of an army of wildlings in the PL so lets assume the Bolton don t receive letters from the Wall). So from everyone's point of view jon only has his brothers and a couple of wildlings with him.

Second, shireen is super important. Anyone that marries her has a claim to the IT. At the very least they can sell her for a fortune to someone interested in the throne. And selyse and mel have lots of political value. how much would the lannisters and tyrells pay for them?

On the other hand, any Southern prisioner that they have would think that val is a wildling princess and mance's son their future king. which means they have lots of value! Anyone that marries them would have lots of power among the wildlings. We just have to see how many Southern knights are interested in val.

And we also have to take into account that the letter is written by ramsay that is a psicotic fuck. He doesn t need a reason to want hostages or people he wants to hurt.

Third, it is important to note that the boltons have to kill jon as fast as possible. he can t spread that farya isn t arya or that bran and rickon are alive (reek knows it). It would colapse the boton power over the north. So by sending that letter they are provoking a mutinee because the night watchers don t want to die protecting all these people from the boltons. It isn t in their vows and they have no reason to do it. therefore their only option is to get rid of jon and do as ramsay wants in order to save themselves (remember, from ramsay pov he doesn t know about the wildling army).

The really hard part to explain about the letter is sttanis defeat because he had a lot of the remaining northerns with him. But to me the northmen will desert stannis (that makes sense for a lot of reasons) and the battle that ramsay talks is about his Bolton men and stannis men after he defeats the freys. And therefore stannis friends are some iron born, some remaining northmen, the survivors that were with moors when he was surrounding winterfell or the manderleys. So we could have a hard battle between 2 armys with less than a thousand men in each army.

[three-eyed monkey]

3 hours ago, Tagganaro said:

And I don't see how Val and "Monster" have any value either- even in a misconceived "southron fool" kind of way of believing the wildlings would follow Mance's sister and son,

Val, (who is Dalla's sister by blood or otherwise), and Mance's son do have value to Stannis. The child is his hold over Mance and Mance is the only man who can bind the Wildlings to his cause. As Mel said to Jon, Mance will not betray you as we hold his son.

I think Stannis planned to marry Val to Jon to further help incorporate the Wildlings into his realm, as he saw it. Of course Stannis wrongly sees her as a wildling princess, as he even says in the letter, and while she is not as valuable as that, I still think if Stannis got his way and married her to the Lord of Winterfell there would be some value in the Wildlings seeing one of their own married into a high house.

1 hour ago, lalt said:

My OP tries in fact to prove that the PL letter purpose is to provoke Jon. and that those women and children are demanded just because they are women and children and Jon won't accept that ultimatum. Not because of their political values, ties of blood etc...

In short, not because they are "important" for the author, but because they are to Jon and they are for the very simple reason that they are women and children.

I will totally accept this as the reason those people are named in the letter. The people demanded are people Jon would never hand over to someone like Ramsay, and therefor leaves him no choice but to not comply with the demands. That sounds very reasonable to me. But this line of reasoning stands for whoever wrote the letter. So I will agree that it is why Stannis included them in the letter.