In episode 9 of season 6 of Game of Thrones

When Ramsay was in the captivity of the Stark's, he said to Sansa that Sansa is a part of him. What did he actually mean by this? Did he mean that Sansa is carrying the baby of Ramsay or is it just random words?

  • 3
    Actually, he didn't say Sansa is a part of him. He said that there is a part of him in Sansa. In other words: he is part of Sansa
    – slebetman
    Jun 23, 2016 at 5:35

5 Answers 5


In this interview the actor who plays Ramsay (Iwan Rheon) refers to that line as meaning the lasting psychological damage that he's caused Sansa:

I think [the final scene with Ramsay and Sansa] was great. It’s a good scene. It leaves Sansa in an interesting place as a character, because he’s saying, “I’m inside you now.” [Rheon shudders] It’s horrible, and I think he probably has done some damage. He’s gotten in her head. But I think it’s nice too, because it’s such a great scene to go out on.

Of course, it's possible it means something more - the showrunners don't tell the actors about every twist that's coming up. For example, Iwan didn't know Ramsay was going to die this season until he'd already worked through the first five scripts:

I had received half the scripts, five episodes, then I got the call. They joked, “Isn’t it great Ramsay ends up on the Iron Throne?” As soon as they said that I said, “He’s dead isn’t he?”

...but there's a big problem with the idea that it might mean she was pregnant: how would Ramsay know, if Sansa doesn't? Biologically speaking, it doesn't make much sense. Sansa will probably be aware and afraid that it's possibile, but Ramsay couldn't know beyond guessing. At most, he's sadistically alluding to the possibility - not imparting factual information.

More likely, this line is Ramsay twisting the knife, using the most unsettling choice of words he can to taunt Sansa with the fact he's changed her for the worse. This matches how Iwan describes it.

In another interview, Sophie Turner (Sansa) doesn't mention that line directly but echoes this interpretation of the scene overall:

...with Ramsay... He just gets under her skin, and he violated her in such a terrible way. He’s imprinted on her, mentally and physically. She can never get that part of her back again.

Off-topic random fact - while finding these quotes I discovered that Iwan Rheon auditioned to play Jon Snow and got down to the final two. That would have been a very different show!


This is most likely just Ramsay saying that he has changed Sansa. She's no longer the same person she was before marrying Ramsay, and so he 'is a part of her'.

Iwan Rheon (Ramsay Bolton) supports this explanation in the quote below:

"What he's saying to her," he says, "is that his mind, his mark, will be on her. Very much like if you look at Theon now, he's not the same man as he was. He's been broken, mentally and physically. So I think what Ramsay's saying is, 'You'll never be able to shake me off. No matter if I die, I'm always gonna be a part of you, because of what I've done to you.'"

As for the baby theory, Jason Concepcion of The Ringer (an HBO property) does a good job of dispelling it:

Ben asks, “Is Sansa pregnant?”

(Jason) Nah. If Sansa were pregnant, she would be showing by now. Though Thrones has played fast and loose in its compression of time and distance, we can still use the travels and activities of various characters since Sansa’s escape as a calendar of sorts. To help us cement that time frame, here’s a probably incomplete list of people going places and doing things since Sansa and Theon fled Winterfell: Sansa and Jon crisscrossed the North and assembled an army; Yara and Theon sailed from the Iron Islands to Meereen (a journey of months) with a stopover in Volantis; the knights of the Vale mustered and rode to Winterfell; Dany freaking walked to Vaes Dothrak, joined the dosh khaleen, killed all the khals, returned to Meereen (by dragon, so that probably didn’t take too long), and broke the army of the Wise Masters; and Brienne and Podrick rode down to Riverrun from Castle Black where they found themselves involved in a castle siege.

Moreover, there’s been none of the requisite plot setup that one would expect to see in a pregnancy arc. No Sansa inexplicably feeling unwell, no mysteriously baggy dresses and no whisper sessions with Melisandre.

The only “evidence” supporting the “Sansa is preggers” theory is Ramsay telling Sansa that he’s “part of” her now right before he became part of his dogs. How the hell would he know she’s pregnant?

Say it with me: “Sansa is not pregnant!”


This is purely based on my observation of what going on the scene, not based on the book since I haven't read it.

Usually, if someone have been traumatized, at some point that person might grow hatred inside and do it into someone else, and eventually possibly become another "mean person" too.

Letting someone to be eaten by a dog is mean at some degree. If Jon is the decision maker, I believe he will choose to hang / chop of Ramsay's head instead.

This is what I think Ramsay means.

  • To further add to this, Jon is very much Ned Stark's son, regardless of any theories or speculation. He believes that the man who calls the sentence should swing the sword. If Jon was in charge, he would have condemned then executed Ramsey himself, not allowed some dogs to do it for him. If Sansa had only her Stark heritage affecting her mind, then she would have let Jon do this. But the Ramsey/Littlefinger in her makes her seek a more poetic vengeance.
    – SGR
    Jun 22, 2016 at 10:09
  • 3
    Don't worry, nobody has read the book where Ramsay dies, because its not yet been published, if that ever happens.
    – user25738
    Jun 22, 2016 at 19:55
  • While Sansa opting to kill him that way might prove him right, when he uttered the words, he didn't seem to have any inkling the dogs were going to be unleashed like that. Aug 23, 2017 at 15:31

Sansa executes Ramsay like a Bolton would—feeding him to his own dogs—instead of the way a Stark (like her father) would. Her time with Ramsay changed her into someone who will give into the temptation of making someone suffer a horrible death.

  • See my comment above - he doesn't utter the phrase while being torn apart by the dogs. When he says it he doesn't even know the dogs are going to be used. Aug 23, 2017 at 15:32

Clearly Ramsay said that sansa is a part of him and not the other way round where ramsay says that he is a part of sansa(which would have clearly implied that sansa is carrying his child), which means he implies that maybe she has turned into a little bold and cruel sansa(considering how she feels happy when she turns away from the cage when the dogs start eating ramsay and how she takes the help of little finger in the battle of bastards) rather than the naive sansa of the previous seasons.

We can also see from the preview of the next episode that there are some loyalty issues between Jon snow and Sansa(we see Jon snow quoting that they have to trust each other)which also partially supports the theory that Sansa may plan something in the future. [ Just my point of view ]

[ OR ]

Maybe Sansa is just carrying a baby of Ramsay.

  • 6
    "Clearly Ramsay said that sansa is a part of him and not the other way round" Well, no, he didn't. Jun 22, 2016 at 16:46
  • I was not quoting what he said or what he clearly meant.It was a just an expression which goes with the the explanation i was going to give.@LightnessRacesinOrbit
    – ethan_hunt
    Jun 23, 2016 at 13:04
  • 2
    But it's the polar opposite of what actually happened... Jun 23, 2016 at 13:12

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .