Theon Sample Chapter; The Letter sent to Jon (Spoilers)

[Gogossos]

Hah. RW instigators killed by their own sons

[sentence]

I don´t buy the whole benjen-mance agreement & hooked man at WF and so..

Mance is older than Benjen. He has been around north of the wall for years before becoming king-beyond-the-wall (rallying allies, setting truces, fighting Thennites, etc.) ... He left the NW even before Benjen was born

Benjen... we do know so little about him. In fact, we do not know where he was during the rebellion (well, maybe at WF, the stark-in-WF and all that...). We know about Baratheons brothers (Storm End siege, Renly as a child..) but we do know little and less about Benjen, who at this moment was supposedly a grown man (at least, for westerosi standards)

[fassreiter]

Mance is older than Benjen. He has been around north of the wall for years before becoming king-beyond-the-wall (rallying allies, setting truces, fighting Thennites, etc.) ... He left the NW even before Benjen was born

Where did you hear that? Mance was still with the NW when Jon was a child of about five years or more. This was after the rebellion.

[CKPS63]

Exactly.....It doesn't fit any other character. Maybe Stannis tricked him, maybe Ramsay was defeated and survived and was just trying to gain leverage, maybe Roose is long dead, idk

Maybe Ramsay is MANCE's prisoner . . . After all -- the only indication that Mance and the remainder of the spearwives were captured by Ramsay comes from the letter itself. And Mance IS a remarkably resourceful fellow, fully capable of turning the tables on Ramsay. Now . . . WHY would Mance write (or force Ramsay to writes) the letter to Jon? That's a tougher question.

[Gogossos]

Now . . . WHY would Mance write (or force Ramsay to writes) the letter to Jon? That's a tougher question.

To provoke Jon. Mance writing the letter himself wouldn't move Jon one bit, since the letter admits that Arya escaped. A threat from Ramsay isn't going to be ignored, however (it should, it really should but at this point Jon is sliding into politics more and more). But Mance is too outnumbered to make Ramsay a prisoner, subterfuge is his only friend here.

[Myk Lonmouth]

Now . . . WHY would Mance write (or force Ramsay to writes) the letter to Jon? That's a tougher question.

He wouldn't.

[GoldenVale]

To provoke Jon. Mance writing the letter himself wouldn't move Jon one bit, since the letter admits that Arya escaped. A threat from Ramsay isn't going to be ignored, however (it should, it really should but at this point Jon is sliding into politics more and more).

To be fair the threat wasn't really something he could ignore that easily. If it was legitimate, and Jon and no reason really to suspect it wasn't, then he couldn't afford to ignore the threat of an armed force out for the NW.

But Mance is too outnumbered to make Ramsay a prisoner, subterfuge is his only friend here.

He wouldn't.

If it is Mance (and I'm not even convinced it is) then he probably would use Ramsay. The North would never follow his lead so using Ramsay is ideal. And Mance would probably guess that Jon would rise to the bait if it was Ramsay dangling on the hook.

[Nymeria Blackfyre]

I definitely think the letter was written by either Stannis or Mance. For me, they're the only two who seem to have all the information possible to be able to construct the letter.

[Thucydides]

The purpose of the letter seems to me to be exposing (or threatening to expose) Jon Snow as an oath breaker to gain leverage over him. Whether Jon Snow reads the letter aloud (as he did) or he keeps it to himself and Ramsey shows up with an army, Ramsey will expose the fact that Jon Snow gave Mance to Stannis and collaborated with Stannis unless Jon Snow comes out to fight him. The only person who would have a strong motivation to expose Jon Snow as an oath breaker is Ramsey, and the reason is that he really wants to get his hostages and is happy to kill Jon Snow to get them.

Stannis will not want to blackmail Jon with being exposed as an oath breaker, because that will make Stannis the King who corrupted the Night's Watch. He's much better off if the extent of their collaboration remains unknown (or at least, if it is left to speculation). Besides, Stannis would be much more direct with his threats.

Mance is in a tenuous position. He's an oath breaker among a set of nobility who will gladly send his head to the wall. He has just as much to lose from the letter as Jon does, even if he's not locked in a cage. My guess is that Roose has put Mance in a cell after he brutalized Ramsey, and Ramsey is venting his humiliation by exaggerating Mance's condition -- seriously, this is Mance we're talking about. There's no way that the Northerners would let Ramsey flail the spearwives.

The letter does expose Jon Snow as an oath breaker. But even if this is accidental, it's not a mistake that Stannis or Mance is likely to make. They both have a thorough knowledge of the Nights Watch.

[Nic.]

Honestly i doubt it's either Ramsay or Stannis. I tend to believe it's either Mance or one of the Northern Lords that sent the letter forcing the King of the North by right to come back to Winterfell.

[MtnLion]

It could be Roose, with false information from a raven that he believes is from Karstarks. I do like that thought that it was edited by Aliser Thorne, though. ;)

[Amris1]

I have read through this whole thread and am impressed by the creativity of the posters and throroughly enjoyed the various theories as to the authorship of the pink letter. My compliments to everyone!

Nevertheless the theories that attribute the letter to someone else than Ramsay require the proponents of the respective theories to jump through quite a lot of logic loopholes. Not impossible in most cases but - less than likely shall we say.

Whereas if one assumes that Ramsay really did write the letter no loophole-jumping is needed at all. In fact it makes a lot of sense if Ramsay wrote it.

Let me explain:

Ramsay's hold on Winterfell is precarious and in large part rests on his marriage to the fake Arya Stark. But now 'Arya' is gone and the very real danger exists that she will expose the Bolton lies for all the north to see and in the process destroy any credibility the Boltons still may have had.

If that transpired it may well cost Ramsay everything.

So I think we all are sure Ramsay is frantically trying to get Jeyne Pool back before someone else - like Jon - can get his fingers on her.

Ramsay cannot know whether he will succeed in that though.

In fact with the bad weather and all the rivals he has, the Umbers in the woods, Stannis nearby and whatnot - it is quite likely that he will not.

Conclusion: from Ramsay Boltons point of view 'Arya' may very well actually arrive at The Wall - or an (for him) equally unpleasant location!

Ouch! Maximum credible accident for the Boltons!

So what can - what has - Ramsay to do in addition to searching for Jeyne?

He has to consolidate his position as Lord of Winterfell as quickly and thoroughly as possible!

And the most important step on that way is to immediately get rid of any Stark! Because any existing Stark provides a natural rallying point for the discontents in the north (meaning practically for everyone).

Now the only Stark Ramsay knows about is - Jon.

So with 'Arya' about to go nuclear Jon suddenly is a deathly threat to Ramsay. A threat which has to be terminated immediately.

Unfortunately (or fortunately) there are some practical problems with that for Ramsay:

One is the distance. Castle Black is many leagues distant from Winterfell.

The other is time: Jon has to be taken out before the Jeyne situation blows up completely.

The third is: the blame for Jons death has to be shifted away from Ramsay because otherwise he provides another bone of discontent to the northern houses who are restless enough already.

So there is no time for fancy manoevering and long-term planning and intrigue (if Ramsay was the type to do that in the first place which he probably isn't anyway). Ramsay has to act fast and directly!

Now: The pink letter is exactly what Ramsay should have done.

Instead of Ramsay attacking the Night Watch - which would look very bad - it goads Jon into deserting his post and attacking Ramsay. Now Ramsay does not attack or assassinate a Stark and Lord Commander of the Watch - he only kills a deserter - and in self defense to boot!

And he can hope to get Jon away from the wall pronto and in the process maybe have Jon miss Jeyne Poole altogether.

And while the pink letter is very provocative for Jon (as it obviously is meant to be) it's content actually is pretty reasonable if viewed objectively:

Ramsay's only actual demands are the return of his bride, his Reek and the provision of hostages to make sure that Jon and the Night Watch and any possible remaining Stannis supporters really stay neutral.

If we didn't know Ramsay is a psycho and if the letter was worded in a more diplomatic way and stem from - say - someone like Ned or Robb Stark instead of Ramsay - these demands would make total sense!

The Night Watch under Jon's leadership has supported Stannis and contrary to their oath dabbled in the inner politics of the North and let the wildlings through the wall!

Naturally the Lord of Winterfell has to make sure things stop there and don't get out of hand even further. Make sure that the Night Watch goes back to its real business and the wildlings and the Stannis supporters don't cause more trouble than they already have. Hence hostages. Perfectly civilized and normal.

So Ramsay can always claim the letter was reasonable and it was actually Jon who caused the trouble by ignoring it, deserting his post and unwarrantedly attacking Winterfell.

Yet the letter is worded in a way which is provocative and goads Jon into doing just that. That is because Jon leaving the walls and attacking is actually the best thing that can happen from Ramsay's point of view! It brings Jon into Ramsays reach, away from Jeyne and provides the neatest excuse for doing away with Jon! Well and also Ramsay is a vindictive bastard of course and just loves writing in this style. But that is just icing on the cake from his point of view.

All this doesn't change the fact that the demands presented in the letter are actually reasonable and Jon is guilty of desertion and oathbreaking if he attacks Ramsay. The blame rests firmly with Jon.

In a way Bowen Marsh et al have actually done Jon a favor by stabbing him.

Simply put the letter is a piece of genius on Ramsay's part. It's the totally logical reaction to Jeyne's flight. It is exactly what he ought to have done.

Yeah, and if all goes wrong Ramsay still has the option to disavow the letter altogether. It's not like he has signed it in his own hand, is it? (At least we cannot be sure). It has not even been sealed with his seal!

He can always say it is a forgery by someone who wanted to discredit Ramsay. Too bad the Lord Commander fell for it.

***

Now as many posters already have said: another question is how much of the letter's contents are true.

Mainly: Is Stannis dead and defeated or is he alive?

And if Stannis is alive: has he duped Ramsay into believing he is dead (through false messages via the Karstark ravens)?

I really am not sure. It could be either.

What I do think though is that Stannis' winning the battle of the ice is far less sure than many posters seem to think.

In my opinion Stannis may very well lose that battle (and his life) which would make Ramsay's letter actually saying the truth.

Think about it: Even with the ice traps Stannis' army is in a very difficult position: cold, starving, without cavalry and not all that numerous to begin with. Even if the Karstarks stay loyal their morale and will to fight is questionable with their lords imprisoned or dead.

The Manderlys - if they manage to arrive at all - aren't all that numerous either (unless Manderly has his real main host stashed away somewhere nearby which is possible but which we don't know.)

The Boltons and Freys know that the Manderlys aren't trustworthy. They will be careful and it is in no way sure the Manderlys will manage to surprise the Freys.

Indeed I find it highly likely that Roose and Ramsay are betting on the Manderlys switching sides and are planning accordingly.

I wouldn't be surprised if a Bolton host showed up on the battlefield suddenly, finishing off whatever remains of Stannis' host is left standing when Stannis just thinks he is finally finished dealing with the Freys. That would rid the Boltons of the Freys, the Manderlys and Stannis all in one fell swoop. Perfect.

***

From a storytelling point of view - while I understand and share the feeling that payback time for the Starks and against the Freys and Boltons is highly desirable - I think it is still too early for that.

Think about it: There are still 2 gigantic books lying ahead of us. And Jon, Arya, Sansa and Rickon (among others) are still in the game and have to be good for something.

Do we really want Stannis to already finish this important task (revenge for the Red Wedding) for them?

Do we?

I think not.

I think Stannis has to go. The supposedly good guys have to endure some more. Before they strike back at the end of book 6 and in book 7.

The end will be the more rewarding.

[aryagonnakill#2]

"

And the most important step on that way is to immediately get rid of any Stark! Because any existing Stark provides a natural rallying point for the discontents in the north (meaning practically for everyone).

Now the only Stark Ramsay knows about is - Jon.

So with 'Arya' about to go nuclear Jon suddenly is a deathly threat to Ramsay. A threat which has to be terminated immediately.

Think about it: Even with the ice traps Stannis' army is in a very difficult position: cold, starving, without cavalry and not all that numerous to begin with. "

While cutting out parts of your post I accidently cut out the quote box itself but I just wanted to make 2 comments. Ramsay knows that both Bran and Rickon escaped, and were I him I would have to assume that at least 1 of the Lords claiming to be loyal to me has them/ 1 of them.

Second is that Stannis has the numerical superiority by at least 2:1.

[ishmael]

Many of the theories concerning the letter's author, require too much convoluted, circular reasoning where the writer is given credit for knowing more than they should.

Stannis cannot know what is going on at the Wall or in WF. He has already offered Jon what he really wants (WF), so crafting a letter of partial truths to motivate Jon to break his vows is not likely.

There is no reason to assume that Ramsey knows what is going on at the wall (i.e. the arrival of the wildlings, Val, the baby, or for him to assume that that is the way that "Arya and Reek" went). He could not have that information, so how does he put it in a letter. He isn't that clever. While we know about LB, Stannis has not really fought any real battles, so knowledge of him possessing a burning sword is not common knowledge. Ramsey has been in the North and not part of any real engagements concerning the war for the Iron Throne, so again, how does he know about LB. Stannis isn't riding through towns waving his sword around claiming the title of AA.

Of the three most common suspects, Mance has the most knowledge about all situations, except for what is going on with Stannis, but given his talent for blending and gathering information, he could catch some news. Stannis' death is the only thing Mance may not have any information about and would be a small lie/miss information to pass along. The question then becomes, what is his motive. It isn't to get Jon off the Wall. That won't help him or Jon or Stannis. Jon not being at the Wall is the worst thing for the Wildlings. Mance would not want to upset everything Jon has done for the Wildlings for some short-term meaningless gain. Mance is a planner, and like Jon gets the big picture, so Jon leaving the Wall doesn't appear to be something Mance would want.

The Brothers of the NW would not have enough information about Mance, Stannis, or what is going on at WF, so any of them writting the letter is unlikely.

The only other person that could possible gather enough bits and pieces of the what was in the letter is Mel, but I don't know what her end game would be. What did she want from Jon? Did she want the attack on Jon to free him from his vows? If so, for what reason.

Given what we know, it is really hard to attribute the letter to anyone with any degree of certainty. We know alot of information, but each candidate lacks at least some significant piece of information contained in the letter. We maybe able to attribute a motivation to each suspect, but really from what we have in the text that is complete speculation. I think that the shuffling of chapters between ADWD and WOW really messes with this part of the story. The story is out of order and the sequence of events is off enough that we cannot really determine who it was until we get more from WOW. However, it is a lot of fun to theorize and discuss it.

[aryagonnakill#2]

Many of the theories concerning the letter's author, require too much convoluted, circular reasoning where the writer is given credit for knowing more than they should.

Stannis cannot know what is going on at the Wall or in WF. He has already offered Jon what he really wants (WF), so crafting a letter of partial truths to motivate Jon to break his vows is not likely.

There is no reason to assume that Ramsey knows what is going on at the wall (i.e. the arrival of the wildlings, Val, the baby, or for him to assume that that is the way that "Arya and Reek" went). He could not have that information, so how does he put it in a letter. He isn't that clever. While we know about LB, Stannis has not really fought any real battles, so knowledge of him possessing a burning sword is not common knowledge. Ramsey has been in the North and not part of any real engagements concerning the war for the Iron Throne, so again, how does he know about LB. Stannis isn't riding through towns waving his sword around claiming the title of AA.

Of the three most common suspects, Mance has the most knowledge about all situations, except for what is going on with Stannis, but given his talent for blending and gathering information, he could catch some news. Stannis' death is the only thing Mance may not have any information about and would be a small lie/miss information to pass along. The question then becomes, what is his motive. It isn't to get Jon off the Wall. That won't help him or Jon or Stannis. Jon not being at the Wall is the worst thing for the Wildlings. Mance would not want to upset everything Jon has done for the Wildlings for some short-term meaningless gain. Mance is a planner, and like Jon gets the big picture, so Jon leaving the Wall doesn't appear to be something Mance would want.

The Brothers of the NW would not have enough information about Mance, Stannis, or what is going on at WF, so any of them writting the letter is unlikely.

The only other person that could possible gather enough bits and pieces of the what was in the letter is Mel, but I don't know what her end game would be. What did she want from Jon? Did she want the attack on Jon to free him from his vows? If so, for what reason.

Given what we know, it is really hard to attribute the letter to anyone with any degree of certainty. We know alot of information, but each candidate lacks at least some significant piece of information contained in the letter. We maybe able to attribute a motivation to each suspect, but really from what we have in the text that is complete speculation. I think that the shuffling of chapters between ADWD and WOW really messes with this part of the story. The story is out of order and the sequence of events is off enough that we cannot really determine who it was until we get more from WOW. However, it is a lot of fun to theorize and discuss it.

Ramsay knowing all the info/ thinking he knows all the info is not convoluted. The spear wives mostly died in the escape, but not all of them. Mance came into WF with them and he was still in the castle, it is completely reasonable to assume that Ramsay started flaying any of the spear wives left and Mance and got the info he wanted. Combine this with Stannis' ruse of his death and Ramsay has all the info in the letter. The only reason there is any controversy is because Mance is such a badass and people don't want to think he could have gotten captured and tortured, and fair enough Mance is a badass of the highest order in the series on par with any of the other top badasses, but he was still trapped in a castle filled with thousands of soldiers.

[ishmael]

Stannis took no ravens with him ..no maester. That's why Tycho had to go after Stannis in person. The one letter Jon recieved from Stannis was sent from Deepwood Motte where he had access to Ravens. He couldn't appropriate Deepwood Motte's maester or ravens to travel with him . ...

And here is where your theory has real problems. He didn't have any ravens, other than the ones the Karstarks had, which he suspects went to WF, so he writes a coded message to Jon, ties it to a raven trained to go to WF, and hopes/wills it to go to the Wall. If he had not ravens trained to the wall, then he didn't send a coded letter to Jon at the wall. Why would Stannis believe that Ramsey would demand the hostages named in the letter, when ramsey doesn't know about those people being at the wall.

So, we have magical appearing ravens going to destinations that they are not trained to travel to and we have Stannis fearing that Ramsey will demand the NW turn over individuals that Ramsey has no idea are at the wall. You need to work out how Stannis with no ravens got a raven to Jon at the wall and how Ramsey "knows" all those potential hostages are at the wall, then we can discuss motivations for each possible sender of the letter.

[ishmael]

Ramsay knowing all the info/ thinking he knows all the info is not convoluted. The spear wives mostly died in the escape, but not all of them. Mance came into WF with them and he was still in the castle, it is completely reasonable to assume that Ramsay started flaying any of the spear wives left and Mance and got the info he wanted. Combine this with Stannis' ruse of his death and Ramsay has all the info in the letter. The only reason there is any controversy is because Mance is such a badass and people don't want to think he could have gotten captured and tortured, and fair enough Mance is a badass of the highest order in the series on par with any of the other top badasses, but he was still trapped in a castle filled with thousands of soldiers.

I believe that either Mel, Mance, or Ramsey wrote the letter (in that order of likelihood).

Stannis being dead is the easiest lie/piece of misleading information for each to pass along. After that, you have to rely on Ramsey gathering the most information off screen, and then still explaining away some information in the letter as "he just knows". Mance and Mel don't have that kind of issue. They can lie about Stannis' death, but they both know about the sword and the extra people at the wall (Val, the Queen, the baby,...). Yes, Mance could have been captured, but just because we assume it doesn't make it so. Getting some of the information from Mance is the only way Ramsey would have some of the information in the letter. However, you then have to further assume that Ramsey would be bright enough to ask all the right questions to gather all the information in the letter. Or that Mance could not give him enough truth to convince him that he had all the information he wanted/needed. The Queen, Stannis's daughter, Val, and the baby have no power for Ramsey if Stannis is dead and he has Mance. He wouldn't know they were there if he didn't have the information from Mance. Val and the baby are meaningless to Ramsey regardless of whether he has Mance or Stannis is dead.

Yes, Ramsey really wants his "bride and his Reek", but everyone else is meaningless. The Northerns outside are not going to just play nice because Ramsey has a few wildlings and Stannis' wife and daughter. The North's issue with the Boltons goes beyond the struggle for the Iron Throne. If Stannis is dead and he has the Flaming sword, then what use is the Queen? Stannis' men are either dead or prisoners and probably not really a threat anymore. So, it really doesn't make much sense for him to ask for someone he doesn't know is at the wall or if he does know they are there that has no value to him.

[Thucydides]

My personal (crackpot) theory is that Robbet Glover (who we hear was raising an anti-Bolton forces from Davos's POV when he's listening to sailors at The Lazy Eel in Whiteharbor) has taken the Dreadfort, and Roose and Ramsey have received a raven informing them this, and that they've learned of Stannis's victory in the Battle of the Ice. This, combined with the loss of fArya, prompts Ramsey to take it upon himself to write a letter to Jon trying to get him to turnover every hostage Jon could possibly have. Sure, it's a bonehead move by Ramsey, but it would also be signature rogue Ramsey.

I think that it's quite telling the that Reek is mentioned last. "And I want Reek" says the author of the Pink letter after he's named every other hostage. It's in a sentence of it's own. It's as though this is an afterthought, and what he really wants is fArya (as leverage against the Northern Lords), the queen, the witch, the princess -- in that order. Then he adds, "Oh, and the baby." and only after that, "Yeah, and Theon, too."

To me, that's the only possible reason why he could want Selyse Florent Baratheon, Shireen Baratheon, Melisandre, and the Wilding Princes Val, and the fake wilding prince infant: Stannis is coming and Ramsey is unusually desperate to get leverage, because they've lost the Battle of Ice and the Dreadfort has fallen to Robbet Glover.

[Big Daddy]

I can't see the letter being written by anyone other than Mance or Ramsay (at this point, my opinion could change I suppose). Mel just makes no sense to me, especially with the bit about Reek and his bride.

I'm leaning towards it being Mance. Storywise, the letter is a bit off, and what's the point of it really being Ramsay when the added twist of it coming from Mance would make the story more interesting? We're already dealing with not knowing as the reader what is transpiring in various places, a twist like that would make perfect sense.

The motive for Mance to write it is what I can't figure out. It would have to be something big. I'm talking big like he plans on doublecrossing Jon, the Watch, the wildlings...all of them. If he was in league with the Others and wanted to bring down the wall? That would make sense. What would he get out of it? To become the new Night's King? The Horn of Joramun has got to play into this and we know Mance has been looking for it.

I don't know. I might be off on Mance's motivation, but I'm smelling a total doublecross that would dwarf the Red Wedding. The Wall crumbling would make an awesome cliffhanger ending to TWOW.

[ishmael]

My personal (crackpot) theory is that Robbet Glover (who we hear was raising an anti-Bolton forces from Davos's POV when he's listening to sailors at The Lazy Eel in Whiteharbor) has taken the Dreadfort, and Roose and Ramsey have received a raven informing them this, and that they've learned of Stannis's victory in the Battle of the Ice. This, combined with the loss of fArya, prompts Ramsey to take it upon himself to write a letter to Jon trying to get him to turnover every hostage Jon could possibly have. Sure, it's a bonehead move by Ramsey, but it would also be signature rogue Ramsey.

I think that it's quite telling the that Reek is mentioned last. "And I want Reek" says the author of the Pink letter after he's named every other hostage. It's in a sentence of it's own. It's as though this is an afterthought, and what he really wants is fArya (as leverage against the Northern Lords), the queen, the witch, the princess -- in that order. Then he adds, "Oh, and the baby." and only after that, "Yeah, and Theon, too."

To me, that's the only possible reason why he could want Selyse Florent Baratheon, Shireen Baratheon, Melisandre, and the Wilding Princes Val, and the fake wilding prince infant: Stannis is coming and Ramsey is unusually desperate to get leverage, because they've lost the Battle of Ice and the Dreadfort has fallen to Robbet Glover.

I agree that this would be a solid reason why he asked for those individuals, and I like the theory overall.

I waffle on whether I believe Ramsay would have/did write the letter. Him getting from where we are in the books to where he could have written the letter is a rather large jump. We have to assume several things to get to him writting the letter, and I'm not sold on us being able to jump to those conclusions. First, he has to know that Val, the baby, and company are even at the wall. Granted, he has someone with that information in WF, but that does not mean he has that person or is really interested in who is at the wall. If he has Mance, what good is Val and a baby to him? I can see no advantage of having them as a hostage. Then you have to back up a few steps and ask yourself why he would even concern himself with what wildlings are at the wall. Second, the letter says that Stannis is dead, so what would it benefit him to have the Queen and Shireen? If Stannis is dead, he is not going to use them to protect himself, nor is Jon likely to turn them over since they really have no strategic value anymore. The letter clearly indicates that "Arya" is no longer with Ramsay, so any bargining chip he has to get Jon to agree to his demands for hostages is not there. He is demanding alot without much to back him up.

The biggest strike against Ramsay as the writer of the letter is that he asks for specific people from the wall. There are ways that he could get that information, but we as readers have to jump through a few hoops fro him to have that information.

I think that if we can figure out the purpose of the letter, then determining who wrote it will be much easier. Manipulating Jon into doing something appears to be the simplest answer, but that just seems wrong. Jon seems to have understood the point of the letter and made off-page plans accordingly. It appears that he deciding to act upon the letter spurred some of the NW brothers to attack him, but that would mean that they had a plan in place prior to his called meeting, and thus knew of the letter. I could see someone at the wall letting information about Mance being alive slip, but that does not account for them knowing that "Arya" and Reek escaped. It is all really confusing, because several people have varying amounts of information found in the letter, but noone has it all.

I'm still undecided on who wrote it and can see argument both for and against everyone that has been proposed so far.