The Stannis Plan and why he wrote the Pink Letter 2.0

[three-eyed monkey]

40 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Absolutely & more than that - as I said to divica Ramsay wouldn't think fArya would go to the wall or to Jon at all. He knows she isn't really Jon's sister so why would she? It's Stannis who believes fArya is going to the wall. 

Excellent observation. I never thought of it that way but of course you are right. Thank you.

[The Fattest Leech]

And a Wildcard  to this whole kerfuffle is Big Walder, who has been at Winterfell/with Ramsay since ACOK when Bran was still there (practicing as a ruler-type). This Big Walder is even linked to his own type of lying letters in the past. Big Walder is a source of info to fill in some of the gaps Ramsay needs to know, and BW has been turning into a mini-Ramsay as Ramsay is 'Reekifying" BW as his next puppet. Think of BW as Roy Helander and Ramsay as Steven Harmon from GRRM's story The Skin Trade.

• A Storm of Swords - Catelyn IV (discussing who burned Winterfell, etc)

  "We have heard naught of any battle," said Ser Brynden.

  "My nephews are young, I grant you, but they were there. Big Walder wrote the letter, though his cousin signed as well. It was a bloody bit of business, by their account. Your castellan was slain. Ser Rodrik, was that his name?"

  "Ser Rodrik Cassel," said Catelyn numbly. That dear brave loyal old soul. She could almost see him, tugging on his fierce white whiskers. "What of our other people?"

[sweetsunray]

34 minutes ago, The Fattest Leech said:

And a Wildcard  to this whole kerfuffle is Big Walder, who has been at Winterfell/with Ramsay since ACOK when Bran was still there (practicing as a ruler-type). This Big Walder is even linked to his own type of lying letters in the past. Big Walder is a source of info to fill in some of the gaps Ramsay needs to know, and BW has been turning into a mini-Ramsay as Ramsay is 'Reekifying" BW as his next puppet. Think of BW as Roy Helander and Ramsay as Steven Harmon from GRRM's story The Skin Trade.

• A Storm of Swords - Catelyn IV (discussing who burned Winterfell, etc)

  "We have heard naught of any battle," said Ser Brynden.

  "My nephews are young, I grant you, but they were there. Big Walder wrote the letter, though his cousin signed as well. It was a bloody bit of business, by their account. Your castellan was slain. Ser Rodrik, was that his name?"

  "Ser Rodrik Cassel," said Catelyn numbly. That dear brave loyal old soul. She could almost see him, tugging on his fierce white whiskers. "What of our other people?"

While it was BW who helped write the letter about Theon burning WF, the Walder who was becoming a mini version of Ramsay was LW, while BW distanced himself from it. I do think BW is the one who killed LW though.

[The Fattest Leech]

5 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

While it was BW who helped write the letter about Theon burning WF, the Walder who was becoming a mini version of Ramsay was LW, while BW distanced himself from it. I do think BW is the one who killed LW though.

Not to go off topic, just real quickly, I agree that it was (most probably) Big Walder who killed Little, but in recent rereads it seems that Big is being 'Reekified" maybe a little more than we first assume . Possible that Little Walder was also in training, but failed for whatever reason. But, ya know, TWOW will tell

[Alexis-something-Rose]

48 minutes ago, The Fattest Leech said:

This Big Walder is even linked to his own type of lying letters in the past. Big Walder is a source of info to fill in some of the gaps Ramsay needs to know, and BW has been turning into a mini-Ramsay as Ramsay is 'Reekifying" BW as his next puppet

I don't know if it changes anything to your speculation, but while Big walder is the one who wrote the letter, it's Little Walder who is turning into a mini-Ramsay. Little Walder is also the one who is murdered at Winterfell.

[The Fattest Leech]

39 minutes ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

I don't know if it changes anything to your speculation, but while Big walder is the one who wrote the letter, it's Little Walder who is turning into a mini-Ramsay. Little Walder is also the one who is murdered at Winterfell.

Right, I did briefly address this just above (failed "trainee"), but to go back to The Skin Trade one more time (just to try and stay within GRRM-style writing), Roy and his sister both encounter a "wolf" (a monstrous abomination, truly) and it is Roy who was blamed for the certain events that take place. Roy is closest to Big Walder. The same "Reek" scenario also happens in Fevre Dream. And in Armageddon Rag the "joker" dude (I forget his name) is like a Reek (not quite as much as in Skin Trade) and you assume it is he who does this thing, but it is actually someone else, but again, it is only after certain reveals that you can look back and see how it was being built-up. This Walder-Walder situation is looking more and more as how GRRM seems to let it play out.

ADDING: because I forgot two times now to mention it ... but the bag of silver. That is a consistent piece in Bolton betrayal/killings. Roose, Ramsay, and now Walder?

ALSO: As far as literary symbolism in Martinworld, they are parallel opposites of each other with the whole big-little name and image structure. You expect one but might get the other. Old Lord Frey is extremely Other-ish anyway, and the other family members very wight-ish, and this includes the mirror symbolism.

[divica]

5 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Well if we take the letter at face value, as you do, then for the Bolton's to demand  that Jon returns fArya then they must expect him to come into contact with her. They know she is a fake, and they know Jon would know it too. It makes no sense that they would ask Jon to return her, given her fake identity is vital to their tenuous hold on Winterfell and the North.

Given that they think she is already with Jon what are they supposed to ask him? 

They need her because they have convinced everybody she is the real Arya. And they need to kill Jon before he spreads the truth... 

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

The issue with Ramsay writing the letter is that Ramsay wouldn't know fArya would go to the wall - in fact he knows she is fake & has every reason to believe she would not go to the wall, why would she? Stannis believes Arya is real & knows about Mel's vision of her going to the wall. 

Actually he would. Any prisoner he gets from Stannis would tell him he sent her to the wall. From Ramsay's pov that is the only place she can be. 

5 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

They haven't accused him of anything yet because they didn't write the letter.

If they did they can have a used him of kdnaping the real Arya... 

5 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Jon doesn't know who Reek is regardless of who wrote the letter. Stannis included the line because he is quoting Theon, who told him what Ramsay would want. This quote is a slam dunk really.

It really isn t. Whoever wrote the letter thinks farya is already there and she knows who reek is. And for her Stannis stayed with him... This line raises suspicion for Jon. 

If she isn t there it is a useless line because Jon has no idea who reek is or that ramsay would ask for him. So it is a useless line to convince Jon that this is ramsay writing. 

And using theon's words is useless to convince Jon. He is the target of the letter, not the reader. 

5 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Look at the flaw in your logic here. You believe the letter is from Ramsay, no question. You say that signing the letter Ramsay just raises questions about the veracity of the letter. Yet the letter is signed Ramsay.

Obviously it raises questions because roose is the one in charge. If ramsay wrote it he doesn t care. If Stannis writes it he wants the letter to look as real as possible. Signing it as ramsay doesn t accomplish it. 

5 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Do you really think Jon would comply with the letter? Jon said he would go alone if needs be, and as I said, based on all I have read of Jon's character, I believe him

What I ask you again is. What is Jon going to do riding alone to Winterfell. Why would Stannis think Jon would ride alone to Winterfell? 

You need to have good answers for these questions. And you don't. 

5 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Where is he clear about this? From what I quoted above it seems clear that he is forswearing his vows and he won't ask his brothers to do the same.

Here is pretty clear he isn't leaving the NW despite moving to attack Winterfell. 

He did not want them. No man can ever say I made my brothers break their vows. If this is oathbreaking, the crime is mine and mine alone. Then Tormund was pounding him on the back, all 

He isn t even sure if he is breaking any vow given ramsey's threat. Hell, if marsh thought he was deserting he wouldn t try to kill him because once Jon left nobody had to follow his orders. He could even write to ramsay and say that the NW accepts his terms and the traitor Jon snow is ridding to Winterfell with a willing army.... 

5 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

He still has no means to take Winterfell, even with Tormund's army, which is estimated at around 3000 I believe. Stannis is thought to have 5000 men and Mance knows that is not nearly enough to take a castle of that strength. So by your logic Jon still should not have went but the fact is he was still going to go.

Actually Jon can take Winterfell quite easily. 

He knows secret entrances to Winterfell and the wildlings can climb the walls of Winterfell. 

Stannis doesn t have this. 

5 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

11 hours ago, divica said:

 

 

5 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Jon's not going to prepare Castle Black for an assault from the south. And Ramsay's not coming for Jon because if he was he would not have warned him first with a pointless letter.

 

Why shouldn t Jon prepare CB against an attack? That is just your bias... 

And the letter isn t useless. Not only does it create chaos in the NW making people rebel against Jon because they don t want to die as it actually made some NW brothers kill Jon. If tormund's army wasn't there the NW might just comply with Ramsay's demands and spare him a fight. The letter is very useful for ramsay. 

5 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Ramsay is not going to write to Jon, of all people, to ask for his bride back when Ramsay knows she is not Arya and her fake identity is crucial to his hold on Winterfell.

Ramsay will be at the battle of ice, not writing letters back in Winterfell.

Without winning the battle and taking prisoners, Ramsay does not know or care about the wildling princess.

Theon does not have the power to predict what Ramsay will say word-for-word.

Ramsay was at the battle and he won it. And nowwrote the PL. 

And the sentence I want my bride back and I want my reek is hardly something unusual for ramsey to say... Theon did a good prediction. 

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

very well written. It's probably one of the best I've seen on the PL. I'm sold. 

You are sold that after reading the PL (given that Stannis doesn t know about Tormund's army) he thinks Jon will desert the NW and if needed ride to Winterfell alone to do some mistery thing? 

And then he will accept Stannis pardon and offer to be lord of Winterfell... Really? 

[Back in Black-Snow]

3 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Once we understand what the author of the letter is trying to achieve and why the author is trying to achieve it, then the who becomes clear.

But to know the first two (what and why), dont you have to assume the who?

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

40 minutes ago, divica said:

Actually he would. Any prisoner he gets from Stannis would tell him he sent her to the wall. From Ramsay's pov that is the only place she can be

For starters we don't know that Ramsay has any prisoner of Stannis but which prisoner would be privvy to this info ? 

41 minutes ago, divica said:

Given that they think she is already with Jon what are they supposed to ask him

Who thinks that??

We have zero evidence to suggest Ramsay would think fArya would go to the wall, & considering he knows she isn't the true arya we have evidence to suggest he would not think she is going to the wall. 

43 minutes ago, divica said:

They need her because they have convinced everybody she is the real Arya. And they need to kill Jon before he spreads the truth

Yes they need her, which is why they would be looking for her. Jon doesn't know the truth & there is no reason for Ramsay to think he does. 

45 minutes ago, divica said:

she isn t there it is a useless line because Jon has no idea who reek is or that ramsay would ask for him. So it is a useless line to convince Jon that this is ramsay writing. 

Right but she isn't there & that is what is written. If it's a useless line to convince Jon Ramsay is writing (something Ramsay would have no need to do anyway) then whoever wrote the line had a different goal in mind no? The goal was to antagonize Jon. Ramsay as the letter writer wouldn't say this to antagonize Jon because he knows the girl is not his sister.

50 minutes ago, divica said:

Obviously it raises questions because roose is the one in charge. If ramsay wrote it he doesn t care. If Stannis writes it he wants the letter to look as real as possible. Signing it as ramsay doesn t accomplish it

Of course it doesn't raise questions. There isn't one single reason Ramsay wouldn't have signed this letter. It's nonsense to say Roose would sign it, Roose wouldn't write a letter like that to begin with let alone make those demands. Ramsay signed the other letters he sent out, why would he not sign this one whether it was him or not? 

Anyway if your belief is Ramsay wrote the letter but that it should have been signed by Roose would that not be further proof that someone other than Ramsay wrote it? Surely, if it should have been signed by Roose, Ramsay would know that right? That would be an odd mistake for Ramsay to make. It wouldn't be such an odd mistake for someone else to make 

(Just to clarify I don't agree the letter should be signed by Roose even if Ramsay did write it, I'm just showing the flaw in your logic.)

54 minutes ago, divica said:

What I ask you again is. What is Jon going to do riding alone to Winterfell. Why would Stannis think Jon would ride alone to Winterfell

He tells us exactly what he is going to do riding alone to WF - to make the bastard of Bolton answer for his words. Whether you think it's plausible for Jon to ride alone to WF or not doesn't matter because apparently Stannis has the right of it because HE WAS GOING TO RIDE ALONE TO WF. 

55 minutes ago, divica said:

You need to have good answers for these questions. And you don't. 

Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean it isn't a good one. There is solid textual evidence to suggest exactly what 3EM says & no textual evidence to say what you suggest would be true. 

57 minutes ago, divica said:

He did not want them. No man can ever say I made my brothers break their vows. If this is oathbreaking, the crime is mine and mine alone. Then Tormund was pounding him on the back, all

This passage says very clearly that Jon believes this could be breaking his vows. 

58 minutes ago, divica said:

He isn t even sure if he is breaking any vow given ramsey's threat. Hell, if marsh thought he was deserting he wouldn t try to kill him because once Jon left nobody had to follow his orders. He could even write to ramsay and say that the NW accepts his terms and the traitor Jon snow is ridding to Winterfell with a willing army

This is nonsense. Marsh would absolutely kill him for deserting. And it would be absolutely ignorant for him to alert Ramsay not only that he is coming but also with an army. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

Actually Jon can take Winterfell quite easily. 

He knows secret entrances to Winterfell and the wildlings can climb the walls of Winterfell. 

Stannis doesn t have this

Well there, you have answered your own question. This is why Jon may ride to WF alone. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

Why shouldn t Jon prepare CB against an attack? That is just your bias

It isn't anyone's bias. He knows Jon isn't going to prepare CB for an attack from the south because he doesn't. That isn't what he does. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

And the letter isn t useless. Not only does it create chaos in the NW making people rebel against Jon because they don t want to die as it actually made some NW brothers kill Jon. If tormund's army wasn't there the NW might just comply with Ramsay's demands and spare him a fight. The letter is very useful for ramsay

Maybe but Ramsay has no way of knowing what chaos it may or may not cause at the wall. He isn't overly smart. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

Ramsay was at the battle and he won it. And nowwrote the PL.

 

1 hour ago, divica said:

And the sentence I want my bride back and I want my reek is hardly something unusual for ramsey to say... Theon did a good prediction

But what a coincidence is it that we have heard Theon say these exact words. Not Ramsay - Theon. Certainly Ramsay will want them both back but we haven't heard Ramsay say these words, we have heard Theon say them verbatim. What makes more sense: that Stannis took Theon's words & used them, or that Theon some how predicted the exact verbage Ramsay would use in a letter to Jon? 

1 hour ago, divica said:

You are sold that after reading the PL (given that Stannis doesn t know about Tormund's army) he thinks Jon will desert the NW and if needed ride to Winterfell alone to do some mistery thing

Lol! Tormunds army means nothing. All Stannis needs is Jon. Yes, I think Jon will desert & ride to WF (because this is exactly what he did!) Alone if needed (because he says he will) if Stannis won the battle he doesn't need Jon & an army, he needs Jon. Jon alone. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

And then he will accept Stannis pardon and offer to be lord of Winterfell... Really

Well let's see if Jon is given 2 options 1. To accept the position of Lord of WF or 2. Return to the watch & be killed for deserting yeah I think he will pick #1. Now maybe he wouldn't have been executed for deserting (I disagree for obvious reasons, first & foremost, because he was 'killed' before he even left) but what is important is that Stannis believes those will be Jon's options. 

[divica]

2 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

For starters we don't know that Ramsay has any prisoner of Stannis but which prisoner would be privvy to this info ?

Probably everybody. The arrival of theon, farya and tycho atracted a lot of atention and he will need to tell the clansmen and important members of his army where he sent farya and massey… So it will become comon knowledge pretty fast...

4 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Who thinks that??

We have zero evidence to suggest Ramsay would think fArya would go to the wall, & considering he knows she isn't the true arya we have evidence to suggest he would not think she is going to the wall. 

Who wrote the PL asked jon for farya because he/she thinks she is there. And given that stannis men know he sent her with some people to help her get to the Wall where can ramsay think she is?

7 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Yes they need her, which is why they would be looking for her. Jon doesn't know the truth & there is no reason for Ramsay to think he does. 

Depends when the letter is written. If farya is already at the Wall jon knows she is fake. Dont Forget she isn t riding alone.

15 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Right but she isn't there & that is what is written. If it's a useless line to convince Jon Ramsay is writing (something Ramsay would have no need to do anyway) then whoever wrote the line had a different goal in mind no? The goal was to antagonize Jon. Ramsay as the letter writer wouldn't say this to antagonize Jon because he knows the girl is not his sister.

You are mixing things. Ramsay would always need to write that he wants his bride back wether she is arya or not because he convinced the north that she is the real arya. 

The useless line is asking for reek. Because either jon doesn t know who he is or thinks he was with stannis (and the letter claims stannis is defeated). So this line makes jon question the veracity of the letter or has no effect...

And neither jon nor anyone close to him knows that ramsay would want is reek back. Even if farya was there it would raise questions about the veracity of the letter because she thinks reek is with stannis.

So in all scenarios the line about reek makes jon question the veracity of the letter or has no effect.

22 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Of course it doesn't raise questions. There isn't one single reason Ramsay wouldn't have signed this letter. It's nonsense to say Roose would sign it, Roose wouldn't write a letter like that to begin with let alone make those demands. Ramsay signed the other letters he sent out, why would he not sign this one whether it was him or not? 

Anyway if your belief is Ramsay wrote the letter but that it should have been signed by Roose would that not be further proof that someone other than Ramsay wrote it? Surely, if it should have been signed by Roose, Ramsay would know that right? That would be an odd mistake for Ramsay to make. It wouldn't be such an odd mistake for someone else to make 

(Just to clarify I don't agree the letter should be signed by Roose even if Ramsay did write it, I'm just showing the flaw in your logic.)

I am not saying that.

I am saying that if someone wants to convince jon that the Boltons are threatning the Wall this person should have signed the letter as roose Bolton because he is the leader of the Bolton forces.

On the other hand, ramsay is a loose canon that is angry enough to write a letter making threats wether he can go through with them or not. He doesn t care if jon believes him or not….

So it makes sense for ramsay to send the letter but it doesn t make sense for someone to sign the letter as ramsay if they really want jon to not question its contents.

26 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

He tells us exactly what he is going to do riding alone to WF - to make the bastard of Bolton answer for his words. Whether you think it's plausible for Jon to ride alone to WF or not doesn't matter because apparently Stannis has the right of it because HE WAS GOING TO RIDE ALONE TO WF. 

He says that to inspire the wildlings to join him. What was he going to do riding alone winterfell? How would that acomplish anything? 

28 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

This passage says very clearly that Jon believes this could be breaking his vows. 

Exactly! If he was deserting the NW he wouldn t have any doubt that he was breaking his vows.

32 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Well there, you have answered your own question. This is why Jon may ride to WF alone. 

How does jon riding to winterfell alone acomplish anything? I don t follow

33 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

It isn't anyone's bias. He knows Jon isn't going to prepare CB for an attack from the south because he doesn't. That isn't what he does. 

He doesn t do this because 3 days earlier tormund arrived with 3K wildlings. And whoever wrote the PL simply didn t have time to learn of this. If you take these 3k wildlings out of the equation jon's options would be diferent...

35 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Maybe but Ramsay has no way of knowing what chaos it may or may not cause at the wall. He isn't overly smart.

Doesn t know? The NW killed its last comander quite recently. They are a bunch of criminals without honor. He is sending a letter that makes these people fight a battle where they have a high probablilitiy of dying to save a group of people they don t even like.

It isn t needed much brain power to know that it will create chaos in the NW. That some people will either desert or try to meet his demands. That there will be plenty of chaos… 

40 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

But what a coincidence is it that we have heard Theon say these exact words. Not Ramsay - Theon. Certainly Ramsay will want them both back but we haven't heard Ramsay say these words, we have heard Theon say them verbatim. What makes more sense: that Stannis took Theon's words & used them, or that Theon some how predicted the exact verbage Ramsay would use in a letter to Jon? 

 

Quote

 

"Frey and Manderly will never combine their strengths. They will come for you, but separately. Lord Ramsay will not be far behind them. He wants his bride back. He wants his Reek ."

"  I will have my bride back. If you want Mance Rayder back, come and get him. I have him in a cage for all the north to see, proof of your lies. The cage is cold, but I have made him a warm cloak from the skins of the six whores who came with him to Winterfell.

I want my bride back. I want the false king's queen. I want his daughter and his red witch. I want this wildling princess. I want his little prince, the wildling babe. And I want my Reek."

 

 

The first time ramsey asks for his bride it isn t even verbatin. And the second time is just how ramsay speeks. The whole sentence is "I want…" theon saying that ramsay wants his reek and bride isn t weird...

"And what do you want, my sweet Reek?"

"Ramsay would want his Reek "

"Ramsay says you're to bring his bride  to his bed."

59 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Lol! Tormunds army means nothing. All Stannis needs is Jon. Yes, I think Jon will desert & ride to WF (because this is exactly what he did!) Alone if needed (because he says he will) if Stannis won the battle he doesn't need Jon & an army, he needs Jon. Jon alone. 

Jon deserted? Where does jon say he deserted? Nobody thinks this! Not even jon that isn t sure he is breaking his vows by marching to winterfell. And now you are saying he deserted?

Members of the NW can ride south if the LC allows it. Look at the NW brothers that rode with tycho, at benjen that visited winterfell… If jon thinks he must ride south on the NW business how is he deserting? At most he is breaking the "vow" of not taking part in the wars of the 7 kingdoms.

Then the whole reason jon is marching to winterfell is because he has an army supporting him. You using the words he said in a speech to inspire the wildlings to join him don t prove he would ride alone to winterfell. I ask you again, what would jon acomplish by riding alone to winterfell? Why would stannis think jon would do this?

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Well let's see if Jon is given 2 options 1. To accept the position of Lord of WF or 2. Return to the watch & be killed for deserting yeah I think he will pick #1. Now maybe he wouldn't have been executed for deserting (I disagree for obvious reasons, first & foremost, because he was 'killed' before he even left) but what is important is that Stannis believes those will be Jon's options. 

Again, how is jon deserting when he is riding south to handle the mater of the lord of winterfell threatning the NW? How is jon deserting if he thinks he might not be breaking his vows?

Who in the NW will kill jon? He is the LC. He is the one who makes this decisions!

And jon refused stannis offer when he thought thorne or slint would be elected and kill him...

[three-eyed monkey]

48 minutes ago, divica said:

Ramsay was at the battle and he won it. And nowwrote the PL. 

This is what the Ramsay theory is based on if you ask me, a scenario outlined in the letter that contains elements that didn't really happen or are not going to happen.

For Ramsay to have written the letter he really needs to have won the battle at the crofter's village, killing Stannis off-screen, and then taken prisoners who told him about the wildling princess.

One prisoner he did not take was Reek, who must have escaped the battle undetected. When Ramsay failed to find Reek he assumed Reek would take Jeyne to Jon at Castle Black and the one or two day lead they had meant they were already beyond being caught, despite the fact it is a journey of over 600 miles. It seems an odd assumption given the fact Castle Black is probably the last place Reek would go. Jon would execute him for his treachery against the Starks, and Jon would also know Jeyne is not Arya. Not that that's going to stop Ramsay asking Jon for her back in letter sent by raven that is obviously going to get there well ahead of her.

But his best trick was writting the exact words Theon said to Stannis a few days before.

As I said, we had a 20 page thread on the Ramsay theory and in the end the only bit of text that supported Ramsay doing any of this came from the pink letter itself, like the letter being signed Ramsay Bolton.

50 minutes ago, Travis said:

But to know the first two (what and why), dont you have to assume the who?

The what is the pink letter itself, a letter designed to provoke Jon and draw him to into the conflict. Repeated use of bastard, threats, wrongful accusation of saving Mance from the fire and sending him to Winterfell to steal Ramsay's bride, twice taunting him to come to Winterfell, baiting him with Mance dangling in a cage, informing him that his sister is no longer a hostage, and needling him with the trueborn lord of Winterfell in the signature.

Why would someone write all that, including the part about Arya escaping? It makes no sense for Ramsay to include that part as he knows she is not really Arya and Jon would not be fooled. The author of the letter is telling Jon that Arya is no longer a hostage. As hostages are used to deter action against their holder, it seems the author wants to remove that deterrent, because the author is clearly trying to motivate Jon to ride to Winterfell, and riding to Winterfell means forswearing his vows.

So who wants Jon to ride to Winterfell and forswear his vows in the process? Who benefits from that? We know Stannis does, he's been courting Jon since the end of ASoS and he's been refused on the basis of Jon's vows. No other character has explicitly mentioned such a motive even once in the text. Stannis has mentioned it several times.

 

[redriver]

3 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

and riding to Winterfell means forswearing his vows.

I'm not so sure about this part. According to the PL Ramsay has made a threat on the life of the LC of the NW.I see nothing in the vows that prohibits him from defending himself even if that means attack.  

[divica]

3 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

For Ramsay to have written the letter he really needs to have won the battle at the crofter's village, killing Stannis off-screen, and then taken prisoners who told him about the wildling princess.

No. Here is your first mistake. You assume stannis and ramsay fought for 1 day and the battle ended. I have no idea if stannis wasn t able to hold his position inside CV for several days (he has been fortyfing the place for quite some time). If stannis won the battle in the CV and then he and ramsay battled near winterfell (stannis doesn t have any greater plan after CV to infiltrate winterfell).

There are several ways for stannis to ocupy ramsay in battle for several days. 

8 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

One prisoner he did not take was Reek, who must have escaped the battle undetected. When Ramsay failed to find Reek he assumed Reek would take Jeyne to Jon at Castle Black and the one or two day lead they had meant they were already beyond being caught, despite the fact it is a journey of over 600 miles. It seems an odd assumption given the fact Castle Black is probably the last place Reek would go. Jon would execute him for his treachery against the Starks, and Jon would also know Jeyne is not Arya. Not that that's going to stop Ramsay asking Jon for her back in letter sent by raven that is obviously going to get there well ahead of her.

This is another mistake. After interrogating stannis men ramsay knows that farya rode to the Wall with massey, alysane and some nw brothers. If we assume that the battle at CV happened on the second day after theon arrival (1 day after farya left) and we have no garantee of this because the weather may have delayed the frey forces and stannis was able to hold for several days or defeat the freys and march to winterfell where he met ramsay then a lot of days pass before ramsay finds out that farya is going to the Wall.

If we are to believe that he only defeated stannis after 7 days of battle then he might be close to 10 days behind farya… In a journey that took jon 18 days riding leisurely it makes sense that it is indeed too late. If farya's party was in a hurry, despite the weather they might make good time to the Wall… And not Forget that alysane and people from the NW were in her party so they know how to travel in northern weather.

The strange part is theon. What can happen to theon in his trial to make stannis men he is going to the Wall? And as I said previously, stannis asking for reek in a letter for jon either has no effet or has the oposite effect of convincing jon that ramsey wrote the letter (remember that jon isn t the reader).

As long as you believe the duration of the battle it makes perfect sense that ramsay wrote the Pl. Your problem is that you are presuming there are too many lies there...

[kissdbyfire]

7 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Thank you. Indeed, Tormund signposted the mystery when he said it might all be a skin o' lies.

And Jon replies, 

“He has Lightbringer. He talks of heads upon the walls of Winterfell. He knows about the spearwives and their number.” He knows about Mance Rayder. “No. There is truth in there.”

Let’s look at what each one say... Tormund proposes it could all be lies, but Jon knows for a fact that “there is truth in there”. And Jon is right, and the reader knows Jon is right: there is truth in the letter. The mystery regarding the PL is, what is true and what isn’t. Not its authorship. IMO. 

 

7 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

It has to really. As I said, the alternative is simply ludicrous.

How can the alternative be ludicrous? I think the argument that Theon helped Stannis pen the missive because (at least in part) the letter asks for Ramsay’s bride and his Reek makes no sense. Because there’s someone who really, really wants “his bride and his Reek”, and that someone is Ramsay. 

7 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Again I agree. I don't think Mance planned on leaving the castle just yet and he had plenty of time to get to the crypts or some other hiding place with Rowan, Myrtle, and Willow before the alarm was raised. Squirrel would have been in a more difficult position but not without hope of escaping as planned. We don't know if the Bolton's took any of the women alive. The two we know about were Holly, who was dead, and Frenya, last seen in mortal danger on the drawbridge.

I’m not married to any theory idea regarding Mance. Not like I am married to the idea that Ramsay wrote the letter, say.

I think there are a few possible scenarios regarding Mance, and there’s no way to be sure of anything w/ the info we have so far. I will say, I sure hope he is well and whole  I also think it’s likely someone has been captured, so if not him, one of the spearwives. 

7 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Absolutely.

I don’t. And I don’t have to see him in a fatalistic way to think he wrote the letter.

 

7 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Yes he does. The letter fits perfectly with Stannis arc and with what he has been trying to achieve since he landed in the north. The letter fits perfectly with Jon's inner conflict between Stannis' offer of legitimization as Lord of Winterfell and his oath to the Watch, between family and duty, etc. Once we understand what the author of the letter is trying to achieve and why the author is trying to achieve it, then the who becomes clear.

I very strongly disagree w/ you and @sweetsunray here. I don’t think Stannis has the best motivation, not even close. Ramsay does, though. Again, IMO. (Free booze free booze free booze)

 

[three-eyed monkey]

20 minutes ago, redriver said:

I'm not so sure about this part. According to the PL Ramsay has made a threat on the life of the LC of the NW.I see nothing in the vows that prohibits him from defending himself even if that means attack.  

The letter did not just threaten Jon without reason. It accused Jon of crimes, some of which in themselves could be described as oathbreaking, such as secretly saving an oathbreaker from lawful execution and conspiring with that oathbreaker to act against the Lord of Winterfell. The letter also offers a peaceful resolution, if Jon would only comply.

Nor was Jon responding in his capacity as Lord Commander. Jon did not ask his sworn brothers to respond with him because he would not ask them to forswear their vows too. The Watch take no part.

For me, it's straight up oathbreaking. Perhaps there is room for legal debate here, but I think this could at least by construed as oathbreaking by parties that want to see it that way.

25 minutes ago, divica said:

You assume stannis and ramsay fought for 1 day and the battle ended.

Yes I do, and I think it is far more plausible than your assumption that it lasted seven days.

28 minutes ago, divica said:

This is another mistake. After interrogating stannis men ramsay knows that farya rode to the Wall with massey, alysane and some nw brothers.

Then he would have learned that Reek was not with that party and asking Jon for him back would be pointless.

34 minutes ago, divica said:

If we are to believe that he only defeated stannis after 7 days of battle then he might be close to 10 days behind farya…

That's a big IF.

35 minutes ago, divica said:

In a journey that took jon 18 days riding leisurely it makes sense that it is indeed too late. If farya's party was in a hurry, despite the weather they might make good time to the Wall… And not Forget that alysane and people from the NW were in her party so they know how to travel in northern weather.

Earlier in the thread you ask what will Stannis do for the month he is waiting for Jon to get to Winterfell, but now you have Jeyne making it in 18 days or better. You can't have it both ways, my friend, but I guess you have to if you are definitely decided on Ramsay as the author rather than looking at what makes sense.

I'm not sure how long the journey will take. It could be anything from 2-4 weeks given the conditions. Jeyne is frail and badly hurt so she will not be riding fast, and the speed of her party will be dictated by her unless they plan on leaving her behind. But however long it takes Jeyne, I would think Jon and the wildlings could have made the journey in faster time.

49 minutes ago, divica said:

The strange part is theon. What can happen to theon in his trial to make stannis men he is going to the Wall?

I'm sure you'll come up with something.

51 minutes ago, divica said:

As long as you believe the duration of the battle it makes perfect sense that ramsay wrote the Pl. Your problem is that you are presuming there are too many lies there...

It's all a skin o' lies.

1 minute ago, kissdbyfire said:

“No. There is truth in there.”

Let’s look at what each one say... Tormund proposes it could all be lies, but Jon knows for a fact that “there is truth in there”. And Jon is right, and the reader knows Jon is right: there is truth in the letter. The mystery regarding the PL is, what is true and what isn’t. Not its authorship. IMO. 

There is truth there, because the author knows about Mance. We know Stannis knows Mance is alive, are we really so sure Ramsay does?

4 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

How can the alternative be ludicrous? I think the argument that Theon helped Stannis pen the missive because (at least in part) the letter asks for Ramsay’s bride and his Reek makes no sense. Because there’s someone who really, really wants “his bride and his Reek”, and that someone is Ramsay. 

I agree Theon knew what Ramsay wanted, but word for word?

7 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I’m not married to any theory idea regarding Mance. Not like I am married to the idea that Ramsay wrote the letter, say.

I think there are a few possible scenarios regarding Mance, and there’s no way to be sure of anything w/ the info we have so far. I will say, I sure hope he is well and whole  I also think it’s likely someone has been captured, so if not him, one of the spearwives. 

I agree we don't have enough about Mance to know. Foreshadowing for the crypts is there though and the location of the enterance was information they were fishing for from Theon so I do expect that to happen. But my gut tells me someone was captured, probably Squirrel climbing out of the tower or Frenya taken alive on the drawbridge.

11 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I don’t. And I don’t have to see him in a fatalistic way to think he wrote the letter.

But you're not "most readers".

13 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I very strongly disagree w/ you and @sweetsunray here. I don’t think Stannis has the best motivation, not even close. Ramsay does, though. Again, IMO. (Free booze free booze free booze)

Stannis wants Jon to be Lord of Winterfell... Jon is torn... he refuses the offer because of his vows... Stannis persists... Jon holds out... Stannis has to settle for a Karstark... Stannis sees Jon is unhappy about that because the Karstarks abandoned Robb in the south (although not as treacherously as the Boltons did)... Jon sends Stannis a letter that outs the Karstark as a turncloak... so who does Stannis turn to now? Stannis warns Massey about rumors of his death... then Jon gets a letter that informs him Stannis is dead and provokes him into getting involved in the conflict at Winterfell and thus forswearing his vows. It all spells free booze to me.

 

[Nevets]

So many problems I hardly know where to start.

1.  Jon.  Jon is quite useful to Stannis right where he is; as LC of the NIghts Watch.  He is carrying out policies Stnanis supports, such as allowing wilidlings across the Wall, and preparing to fight the Others, which many NW men are opposed to.  He is also protecting Stannis's family.

Not to mention that Jon the Deserter may be of limited use to Stannis.  If the Northerners are angry at Jon for deserting,, he is of no use at all.  And if Jon finds out he has been fooled, watch out.  Jon is the type who makes a good friend, and a bad enemy.

If Stannis can defeat Ramsay, he will probably be able to obtain the Northerners' homage.  The Manderlys may well bend the knee just to avoid retaliation for the supposed death of Davos.  And they are the important ones, as they have the only decent forces outside of Stannis and the Boltons.

2.  FArya.  Ramsay needs Arya as a hostage to control the Northerners.  With her gone, he is in trouble.  He needs her back, and there are only two places she will reasonably go, Stannis's camp and the Wall.  He probably knows she made it to Stannis's camp.  Finding out that she went to the Wall shouldn't be too difficult.  They should be able to make decent time.  Jeyne is not frail and seriously injured.  She has frostbite, and is traumatized, but otherwise reasonably healthy, and likely a decent rider.  Ramsay is probably hoping that Jon will be willing to give her back, since she isn't really his sister, so has no reason to protect her.  And if Stannis has really lost, it would be in Jon's interest to keep his mouth shut about her identity.  If he does say she is fake, the Boltons can brand him a liar trying to cause trouble for the Boltons, and trying to keep his sister from Ramsay.

3.  Stannis's family.  Why would the letter even mention Stannis's family if Stannis wrote it.  All that does is make it likely that they will be forced to go to Essos, which is not in Stannis's interest.  Adding them is unnecessary and counter-productive.

4.  Jon's speech. I do not believe for a minute that Jon was intending to go to Winterfell all by himself, nor do I see any reason for Stannis to think that he would.  There is nothing he can accomplish by doing so, and Stannis would be aware of this fact.  And Jon is neither stupid or reckless.

By the way, I do not believe that there are secret entrances to Winterfell.  If there were, they would have been used by now.  Theon would have used it to gain access when he took it, instead of his risky gambit of climbing the walls.  And Ser Rodrick would certainly have used it to remove Theon, instead of sitting outside in a siege.

That's all for now.  I'll probably think of other stuff later.

 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

1 hour ago, divica said:

he will need to tell the clansmen and important members of his army where he sent farya and massey

Why would he need to tell them that? 

You are presuming too much to make it fit. 1st that he would have told people, 2nd that those people would have survived the battle 3rd that Ramsay would have allowed them to live & 4th that they would have told what they know. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

Who wrote the PL asked jon for farya because he/she thinks she is there

Yes & the person that knows that is Stannis. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

And given that stannis men know he sent her with some people to help her get to the Wall where can ramsay think she is?

We don't know that Stannis's men know this or that they told Ramsay. Ramsay probably thought she ran South not North. Possibly to the Ironmen if he believes she is with Theon. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

Depends when the letter is written. If farya is already at the Wall jon knows she is fake. Dont Forget she isn t riding alone.

I don't know what her not riding alone has to do with it but yes some of it depends on when the letter was written. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

You are mixing things. Ramsay would always need to write that he wants his bride back wether she is arya or not because he convinced the north that she is the real arya. 

You said it was a useless line. I'm saying if it's a useless line there must be some other motive to it. 

Besides that the last person he would want to alert that he had lost fArya is the one person who can expose him - Jon.

1 hour ago, divica said:

The useless line is asking for reek. Because either jon doesn t know who he is or thinks he was with stannis (and the letter claims stannis is defeated). So this line makes jon question the veracity of the letter or has no effect.

It doesn't make Jon question the veracity of the letter nor should it. Whether it was Ramsay or Stannis that wrote the letter neither of them would want Jon questioning it was Ramsay writing? I don't even know where you are going with this honestly. Ok the line was useless? That doesn't make it point towards Ramsay. Why would Ramsay assume Theon went to the wall? 

1 hour ago, divica said:

And neither jon nor anyone close to him knows that ramsay would want is reek back

Nope, but Stannis knows. Ramsay wouldn't ask Jon for Reek. He has no reason to think Theon would go to the wall & he also knows Jon has no idea who Reek is. Stannis, however, could use that line for validity, to make it realistic. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

am saying that if someone wants to convince jon that the Boltons are threatning the Wall this person should have signed the letter as roose Bolton because he is the leader of the Bolton forces

Except no one - Stannis nor Ramsay are trying to convince him "the Bolton's" are threatening the wall. They are telling him Ramsay is threatening the wall. This honestly is just a non-point. Ramsay signs all the letters he sent with his own name, not Roose's & no one writing pretending to be Ramsay would have any reason to sign Roose. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

He says that to inspire the wildlings to join him. What was he going to do riding alone winterfell? How would that acomplish anything

Who says? Jon doesn't. Jon says he will ride alone. Are you saying he is lying? If so what evidence do you have of this? 

You said yourself it would be easy for Jon to infiltrate WF. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

Exactly! If he was deserting the NW he wouldn t have any doubt that he was breaking his vows

Right so I'm not saying he is deserting but to some it will definitely look this way. There would be no question in Stannis's eyes that riding forth to engage a northern Lord in battle would be deserting. I personally think it's a little more complicated than that but surely when people are insistent he deserted when he rode away for one night there will be many more to insist this is desertion right? 

Jon doesn't plan to desert. I think he probably plans to take care of Ramsay & return to the watch but considering how many negative opinions there are already in regards to Jon's decisions, you can be certain not everyone will see it that way. 

Jon is aware he is on a slippery slope though & that's why he says if I am forsaken my vows I will not ask my brothers to do the same. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

He doesn t do this because 3 days earlier tormund arrived with 3K wildlings

Again, this isn't true because Jon was marching with or without that army. He says so himself & he is typically pretty honest. There is no reason to doubt him. 

1 hour ago, divica said:

Doesn t know? The NW killed its last comander quite recently

Does Ramsay know this?

1 hour ago, divica said:

They are a bunch of criminals without honor.

Does he know this? He probably does but he is taking a helluva gamble hoping that the NW being full of criminals = they have no honor = the letter will cause chaos at the wall. Besides that chaos at the wall isn't going to get him fArya or Reek back. 

2 hours ago, divica said:

isn t needed much brain power to know that it will create chaos in the NW. That some people will either desert or try to meet his demands. That there will be plenty of chaos

Ok let's say Ramsay wrote it to cause chaos because he knows the watch is full of criminals without honor. He knows that people will desert or meet his demands. (Which is silly btw because there is no reason for them to desert over the PL) ok so they can't meet his demands because they don't have the people he asked for. So, now what? They desert? Ok some people desert. Now what? Ramsay has effectively accomplished nothing. Not one single thing. 

2 hours ago, divica said:

The first time ramsey asks for his bride it isn t even verbatin. And the second time is just how ramsay speeks. The whole sentence is "I want…" theon saying that ramsay wants his reek and bride isn t weird...

Yes but we specifically hear those words said by Theon to Stannis & then read them in the letter. It's not the main selling point but it adds credence to the theory. It doesn't mean Ramsay couldn't have written the letter but it is coincidental. 

2 hours ago, divica said:

Jon deserted? Where does jon say he deserted? Nobody thinks this! Not even jon that isn t sure he is breaking his vows by marching to winterfell. And now you are saying he deserted

You are out of your mind if you think no one thinks this. Probably the entirety of the mutineers thinks it. Also, again, the important part is that Stannis believes this is desertion. 

2 hours ago, divica said:

Members of the NW can ride south if the LC allows it. Look at the NW brothers that rode with tycho, at benjen that visited winterfell… If jon thinks he must ride south on the NW business how is he deserting? At most he is breaking the "vow" of not taking part in the wars of the 7 kingdoms

Well he isn't riding south on NW business. That can be argued of course but some will see it that way. And what is the punishment for breaking the vow of not taking part in the matters of the realm? I'm not positive but I would imagine a LC that breaks this vow could be subject to death. 

2 hours ago, divica said:

Then the whole reason jon is marching to winterfell is because he has an army supporting him. You using the words he said in a speech to inspire the wildlings to join him don t prove he would ride alone to winterfell. I ask you again, what would jon acomplish by riding alone to winterfell? Why would stannis think jon would do this?

I'm not using the speech to the wildlings, I'm using one portion. The part where he specifically says he will ride alone. According to you Jon could infiltrate WF. From there he might be able to accomplish any number of things. Stannis doesn't have to believe this but if he does it seems he is right because, again, Jon says he will. Stannis may believe Jon will bring the NW with him, or the other wildlings with him, &/or the King & Queens men. All of the above maybe. Or maybe he knows regardless of who will or won't come with him Jon cannot & will not let that letter go unanswered. 

2 hours ago, divica said:

Again, how is jon deserting when he is riding south to handle the mater of the lord of winterfell threatning the NW? How is jon deserting if he thinks he might not be breaking his vows?

I agree with you, that he has no intentions of deserting & that he is riding south to handle the threat to the NW. But others will not see it this way. Likely many men of the watch. If you ride south to deal with matters of the realm (what some people will say) then you are forsaken your vows. Does this not typically end your service? Depending on the vow forsaken, I would say so. 

Stannis is a hard, rigid man. He will see this action as no less than desertion & I'm sure he knows there are members of the watch that will see it this way too. 

2 hours ago, divica said:

Who in the NW will kill jon? He is the LC. He is the one who makes this decisions!

Come on. Who will kill him really?? Oh, I don't know. Maybe the people that killed him?! That would be my first guess but they certainly wouldn't be the only ones that would want to. 

 

[kissdbyfire]

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

The letter did not just threaten Jon without reason. It accused Jon of crimes, some of which in themselves could be described as oathbreaking, such as secretly saving an oathbreaker from lawful execution and conspiring with that oathbreaker to act against the Lord of Winterfell. The letter also offers a peaceful resolution, if Jon would only comply.

Jon didn’t secretly save anyone, Stannis and/or Mel did. And once Jon leaned “Rattleshirt” was really Mance, there wasn’t much he could do w/o risking completely alienating Stannis; something we, readers, know is against the NW best interest at the mo. 

But even leaving all of that aside for argument’s sake, so what if it’s oathbreaking? Some oaths should be broken, and all I can say is good riddance.

Jon himself ponders... is this oathbreaking? (Paraphrasing). And the answer is, it doesn’t matter. What matters is doing the right thing, and not only Jon is, but Stannis knows he is. 

Quote

Nor was Jon responding in his capacity as Lord Commander. Jon did not ask his sworn brothers to respond with him because he would not ask them to forswear their vows too. The Watch take no part.

I have no idea why you say that. Jon was very much responding as the LC of NW. That’s why he wants to protect his men, yeah? Also, in the PL Ramsay threatens not only several individuals but the Watch itself and its LC. So, yeah, Jon is very much responding as the man in charge. 

Quote

For me, it's straight up oathbreaking. Perhaps there is room for legal debate here, but I think this could at least by construed as oathbreaking .

I won’t dispute this. Not that I am sure it is; I think there’s a whole lotta grey there, and I believe this is a very deliberate choice Martin made. But the point for me, the core issue is not whether it is oathbreaking bur rather, aren’t there oaths and vows that should be broken (b/c they’re just plain bollocks?)?

 

Quote

It's all a skin o' lies.

There is truth there, because the author knows about Mance. We know Stannis knows Mance is alive, are we really so sure Ramsay does?

I am sure Ramsay knows Mance or at least knows of Mance. Also, since you brought it up, am I right in assuming you think Stannis is in on the Mance/Rattleshirt switcheroo? I do, btw. And I still think Ramsay wrote the letter.

 

Quote

I agree Theon knew what Ramsay wanted, but word for word?

Sure, why not? Ramsay is nothing if not repetitive, and part of it is ?Martin being... well, Martin.

Quote

I agree we don't have enough about Mance to know. Foreshadowing for the crypts is there though and the location of the enterance was information they were fishing for from Theon so I do expect that to happen. But my gut tells me someone was captured, probably Squirrel climbing out of the tower or Frenya taken alive on the drawbridge.

Yeah, this is my general feel for the situation w/ Mance and the SW. I do hope we’re wrong somehow, though... I do like Squirrel very much, and squirrel = CotF and Bran and Arya, so. Fingers crossed she makes it out alive, feisty lil SW that she is.  

Quote

But you're not "most readers".

I’ll take that as a compliment? Maybe?

Quote

Stannis wants Jon to be Lord of Winterfell... Jon is torn... he refuses the offer because of his vows...

No, Jon doesn’t refuse because of his vows. Jon refuses Stannis because of Wintefell itself, its heart tree, and the Old Gods. And we get the whole thought process on this, so there is really no doubt. 

ASoS, Jon XII

“He left the armory by the back, descending a steep flight of stone steps to the wormways, the tunnels that linked the castle’s keeps and towers below the earth. It was short walk to the bathhouse, where he took a cold plunge to wash the sweat off and soaked in a hot stone tub. The warmth took some of the ache from his muscles and made him think of Winterfell’s muddy pools, steaming and bubbling in the godswood. Winterfell, he thought. Theon left it burned and broken, but I could restore it. Surely his father would have wanted that, and Robb as well. They would never have wanted the castle left in ruins.
You can’t be the Lord of Winterfell, you’re bastard-born, he heard Robb say again. And the stone kings were growling at him with granite tongues. You do not belong here. This is not your place. When Jon closed his eyes he saw the heart tree, with its pale limbs, red leaves, and solemn face. The weirwood was the heart of Winterfell, Lord Eddard always said . . . but to save the castle Jon would have to tear that heart up by its ancient roots, and feed it to the red woman’s hungry fire god. I have no right, he thought. Winterfell belongs to the old gods.”

<snip>

“Ygritte wanted me to be a wildling. Stannis wants me to be the Lord of Winterfell. But what do I want? The sun crept down the sky to dip behind the Wall where it curved through the western hills. Jon watched as that towering expanse of ice took on the reds and pinks of sunset. Would I sooner be hanged for a turncloak by Lord Janos, or forswear my vows, marry Val, and become the Lord of Winterfell? It seemed an easy choice when he thought of it in those terms . . . though if Ygritte had still been alive, it might have been even easier. Val was a stranger to him. She was not hard on the eyes, certainly, and she had been sister to Mance Rayder’s queen, but still . . .”

<snip>

“He wanted it, Jon knew then. He wanted it as much as he had ever wanted anything. I have always wanted it, he thought, guiltily. May the gods forgive me. It was a hunger inside him, sharp as a dragonglass blade. A hunger . . . he could feel it. It was food he needed, prey, a red deer that stank of fear or a great elk proud and defiant. He needed to kill and fill his belly with fresh meat and hot dark blood. His mouth began to water with the thought.
It was a long moment before he understood what was happening. When he did, he bolted to his feet. “Ghost?” He turned toward the wood, and there he came, padding silently out of the green dusk, the breath coming warm and white from his open jaws. “Ghost!” he shouted, and the direwolf broke into a run. He was leaner than he had been, but bigger as well, and the only sound he made was the soft crunch of dead leaves beneath his paws. When he reached Jon he leapt, and they wrestled amidst brown grass and long shadows as the stars came out above them. “Gods, wolf, where have you been? “Jon said when Ghost stopped worrying at his forearm. “I thought you’d died on me, like Robb and Ygritte and all the rest. I’ve had no sense of you, not since I climbed the Wall, not even in dreams.” The direwolf had no answer, but he licked Jon’s face with a tongue like a wet rasp, and his eyes caught the last light and shone like two great red suns.
Red eyes, Jon realized, but not like Melisandre’s. He had a weirwood’s eyes. Red eyes, red mouth, white fur. Blood and bone, like a heart tree. He belongs to the old gods, this one. And he alone of all the direwolves was white. Six pups they’d found in the late summer snows, him and Robb; five that were grey and black and brown, for the five Starks, and one white, as white as Snow.
He had his answer then.”

 

It’s not Jon’s vows to a corrupt NW that keep him from accepting Stannis’s offer. It’s Witnerfell, and the Old Gods. 

 

Quote

Stannis persists... Jon holds out... Stannis has to settle for a Karstark... Stannis sees Jon is unhappy about that because the Karstarks abandoned Robb in the south (although not as treacherously as the Boltons did)... Jon sends Stannis a letter that outs the Karstark as a turncloak... so who does Stannis turn to now? Stannis warns Massey about rumors of his death... then Jon gets a letter that informs him Stannis is dead and provokes him into getting involved in the conflict at Winterfell and thus forswearing his vows.

Yes, exactly! And that’s Stannis’s plan working just as he intended. When he has his convo w/ Massey, he already has a plan. And Ramsay buys it hook, line and sinker and writes the PL. 

Quote

It all spells free booze to me.

Indeed it does. You pay, I get hammered!

 

[divica]

2 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Earlier in the thread you ask what will Stannis do for the month he is waiting for Jon to get to Winterfell, but now you have Jeyne making it in 18 days or better. You can't have it both ways, my friend, but I guess you have to if you are definitely decided on Ramsay as the author rather than looking at what makes sense.

I'm not sure how long the journey will take. It could be anything from 2-4 weeks given the conditions. Jeyne is frail and badly hurt so she will not be riding fast, and the speed of her party will be dictated by her unless they plan on leaving her behind. But however long it takes Jeyne, I would think Jon and the wildlings could have made the journey in faster time.

And you would be wrong. First farya's group all have horses. Then they are riding to get to the Wall as fast as possible.

Jon and the wildlings would probably need to march (not everyone woudl be mounted) and travel with a food storage. They will take much more time than farya's group.

That is why I said that jon would take a long time reaching winterfell. If farya's pushes their horses I can see them making a similar or faster time than jon depending on the weather.

2 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Yes I do, and I think it is far more plausible than your assumption that it lasted seven days.

We know nearly nothing of stannis and the bolton's/frey's plans for their battles. We don t even know what exactly ramsay is doing… How can it be unlikely that stannis is only defeated after several days of battle? 

It might even be one batle in CV and another where ramsay ambushes him near winterfell… There are a lot of plausible ways that ramsay only defeats stannis and gets his prisoners several days after farya escapes.

2 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Then he would have learned that Reek was not with that party and asking Jon for him back would be pointless.

That is why something realy weird must have happened at theon's trial to convince the people around stannis that he is going to the Wall...

2 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

It's all a skin o' lies.

No. There is truth in there.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Why would he need to tell them that? 

You are presuming too much to make it fit. 1st that he would have told people, 2nd that those people would have survived the battle 3rd that Ramsay would have allowed them to live & 4th that they would have told what they know. 

Are you saying he won t tell the clansmen that want to save ned's little girl that he is sending her to safety? Why alysanne is leaving? That there is hope because the IB is now supporting him and massey is going to get more troops?

All this information will become public knowledge because it is good for stannis that it does...

And don t you think that when ramsay doesn t find his bride and reek there he will torture the survivors to know where they are? And everybody talks under torture...

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Yes & the person that knows that is Stannis.

And ramsay after defeating stannis and interrogating his men.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

We don't know that Stannis's men know this or that they told Ramsay. Ramsay probably thought she ran South not North. Possibly to the Ironmen if he believes she is with Theon. 

Thankfully there are some of mors men around winterfell to torture and point him in the right directon =)

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

It doesn't make Jon question the veracity of the letter nor should it. Whether it was Ramsay or Stannis that wrote the letter neither of them would want Jon questioning it was Ramsay writing? I don't even know where you are going with this honestly. Ok the line was useless? That doesn't make it point towards Ramsay. Why would Ramsay assume Theon went to the wall? 

What? I am sayin that line about reek is useless or makes jon question the veracity of the letter because farya would tell him that reek was with stannis that the letter claims stanniswas defeated therefore ramsay should know that reek was there...

If Stannis was the one that wrote the letter he has zero reasons to write this line. It is either useless or makes jon question the veracity of the letter. Therefore stannis didn t write the letter...

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Nope, but Stannis knows. Ramsay wouldn't ask Jon for Reek. He has no reason to think Theon would go to the wall & he also knows Jon has no idea who Reek is. Stannis, however, could use that line for validity, to make it realistic. 

I already answered this 3 or 4 times. Stannis isn t convincing you (the reader) that the PL is written by ramsay. He would be convincing jon.

And jons know nothing about reek or ramsay obecession with him. What he might know if farya is there, and who wrote the letter thinks she is, is that reek was with stannis who the letter claims was defeated. How can the contents of the letter be true but be so wrong about reek? It would make jon think that there are lies in the letter. 

This goes against stannis goals! Stannis would want him to think the letter was as true as possible...

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Right so I'm not saying he is deserting but to some it will definitely look this way. There would be no question in Stannis's eyes that riding forth to engage a northern Lord in battle would be deserting. I personally think it's a little more complicated than that but surely when people are insistent he deserted when he rode away for one night there will be many more to insist this is desertion right? 

Jon doesn't plan to desert. I think he probably plans to take care of Ramsay & return to the watch but considering how many negative opinions there are already in regards to Jon's decisions, you can be certain not everyone will see it that way. 

Jon is aware he is on a slippery slope though & that's why he says if I am forsaken my vows I will not ask my brothers to do the same. 

They are 2 very diferent situations.

when jon rode away he was going to live as jon snow.

Now he is riding south on NW business. He is riding as a member of the NW to deal with a lord that threatned to kill him.

In order to desert the least a person has do is renounce the NW... Given that jon is acting as LC while riding south it doesn t make sense to say he is deserting. What stannis and everybody can acuse him of is interfering in the politcs of the 7 kingdoms. And I don t think we know exactly if this should lead to jon's death or some other kind of punishment...

Another important thing to take into account is that we are talking about stannis who punishes any crime (look at davos). The idea he would manipulate an ally/friend to break his vows and then pardon him without punishment is kind of insane… IT goes against everything we know of stannis...

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Again, this isn't true because Jon was marching with or without that army. He says so himself & he is typically pretty honest. There is no reason to doubt him. 

He says it in a very specific situation to inspire the wildlings. He was romaticizing the war to win the wildlings....

And the fact you can t find a logical way for him to actualy ride alone to winterfell shows you also know it doesn t make sense.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Does Ramsay know this?

Should be common knowledge. People know that jon is the new LC and that the old one died. After so much time at least the people in the north should know how the previous LC died.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Does he know this? He probably does but he is taking a helluva gamble hoping that the NW being full of criminals = they have no honor = the letter will cause chaos at the wall. Besides that chaos at the wall isn't going to get him fArya or Reek back. 

 

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Ok let's say Ramsay wrote it to cause chaos because he knows the watch is full of criminals without honor. He knows that people will desert or meet his demands. (Which is silly btw because there is no reason for them to desert over the PL) ok so they can't meet his demands because they don't have the people he asked for. So, now what? They desert? Ok some people desert. Now what? Ramsay has effectively accomplished nothing. Not one single thing. 

First it is known that the NW is full of criminals and that usually criminals don t have honnor. For some reason there aren t women in the NW...

And ramsay probably thinks all people he asked for are with the NW so they can meet his demands if they want.

Second, it is obvious criminals don t want to fight a losing war and die (like sellswords). So their only choice is to run away from CB and weaken the NW against ramsay's attack.

Third, if they don t run then they would try to turn against jon (maybe kill him in the process) so that they can meet ramsay's demands and survive.

The PL is highly helpfull for ramsay...

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Yes but we specifically hear those words said by Theon to Stannis & then read them in the letter. It's not the main selling point but it adds credence to the theory. It doesn't mean Ramsay couldn't have written the letter but it is coincidental.

As I said above. Using those expressions has zero effect in convincing jon that ramsay wrote the PL because jon doesn t know how ramsay talks nor his relation with reek.

The only people that might read those words and be convinced that stannis is impersonating ramsay are the readers. 

And ramsay refers to farya as his bride and theon as his reek… Are you really saying that using the word want before these words proves anything? 

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

You are out of your mind if you think no one thinks this. Probably the entirety of the mutineers thinks it. Also, again, the important part is that Stannis believes this is desertion. 

Again. It can t be desertion if he is riding south on NW business and keeps identifying himself as a NW member. Lots of NW brothers ride south...

At most people can think he is interfering with the wars of the 7 kingdoms. And the mutinners think he is dooming the NW by siding against ramsay in adition to this...

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Well he isn't riding south on NW business. That can be argued of course but some will see it that way. And what is the punishment for breaking the vow of not taking part in the matters of the realm? I'm not positive but I would imagine a LC that breaks this vow could be subject to death. 

Actually by reading the PL outloud jon make it pretty clear that he is riding south because of ramsay threatning the NW. Dozens of people heard him and will spred it to hundreds/thousands. I don t think this is arguable. People might not agree with his motivations, but he has proof that his action are for the NW.

On the other hand, wether he is interfering with the wars of the 7 kingdoms or not depends on each person… The problem is that even if stannis is victorious he has no power to enforce his judgement on jon. Don t Forget that by that time he will have less than 300 Southern soldiers. If jon lives or dies doesn t depend on stannis but on the northern lords that have all the power. IT would be a dick move to manipulate jon to break his vows (the ones about not interfering) when he doesn t have the power to forgive him… And again not stannis style.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I'm not using the speech to the wildlings, I'm using one portion. The part where he specifically says he will ride alone. According to you Jon could infiltrate WF. From there he might be able to accomplish any number of things. Stannis doesn't have to believe this but if he does it seems he is right because, again, Jon says he will. Stannis may believe Jon will bring the NW with him, or the other wildlings with him, &/or the King & Queens men. All of the above maybe. Or maybe he knows regardless of who will or won't come with him Jon cannot & will not let that letter go unanswered. 

Do you honestly imagine jon infiltrating winterfell and acting behind the scenes orchestrating a revolt? wether he might do it or not it certainly doesn t look like his style… And he is LC of the NW... He can t act as spy indefinetly… his job is to lead the NW.

And any of your other options simply don t provide jon enough men to do anything...

On the other hand preparing CB for an attack seems much smarter...

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I agree with you, that he has no intentions of deserting & that he is riding south to handle the threat to the NW. But others will not see it this way. Likely many men of the watch. If you ride south to deal with matters of the realm (what some people will say) then you are forsaken your vows. Does this not typically end your service? Depending on the vow forsaken, I would say so. 

Stannis is a hard, rigid man. He will see this action as no less than desertion & I'm sure he knows there are members of the watch that will see it this way too. 

He just told all the people in the shieldhall that he is going south because ramsay threatned the NW. A side effect of his actions is interfering with the matters of the realm, but no one can acuse him of acting because he wanted to affect the realm.

And acusing the LC of interfering with the affairs of the realm is very diferent from desertion. Would you say the 13th LC deserted? No, he led the NW into the dark side… If people want to acuse jon of something is leading the NW to affect the realm. Never desertion. He keeps refering to himself as LC, doesn t hide his uniform nor that he is a member of the NW and has a reason regarding the NW that justifies him riding south.

And given your characterization of stannis. Do you think he will manipulate an ally/friend into breaking his vows for false reasons? That he will do it when he knows he can t give him a pardon (he can t do it without the support of the Northern lords)? That he won t demand some kind of punishment regardless?

[divica]

I think this must be said.

If stannis wrote the PL just to bring jon to winterfell wouldn t it be much better to write something like this

"I spoke with the northern lords and they will only accept a stark as warden of the north. As Ned's last remaining son they will accept you if you renounce your NW vows. You know who the true enemy is and that we need the north United to defeat him. 

Come to winterfell and become jon stark. Bring all the people in the PL"

He would know that the northern lords actually acepted jon, his familly would come to winterfel, would pressure jon to break his vows for the right reasons and for necessity...

@three-eyed monkey, @Lyanna<3Rhaegar why write the PL instead of something similar to this?