"Until Sansa's safely widowed": Littlefinger's Annulment Dilemma

[Iona]

Hardly! There was a room full of guests to witness the wedding and a dinner afterwards. Do you really think the fact that Starks and Tullys were not there makes the marriage invalid? The couple was viewed by the entire court and all the guests at Joff's wedding! Of course if you're not convinced, that's up to you.

I still argue that Sansa did not need a permission from other Starks to marry, as she was a maiden flowered and thus an adult in Westeros.

[Elaena Targaryen]

I still need convincing I'm afraid. The Starks evidently opposed the marriage, and nobody from either the Starks or Tullys either witnessed the wedding or gave Sansa away. The only one who did was a king whose legitimacy will soon be under question.

How about the fact that Robb disinherited Sansa? If there was any way for Robb to get Sansa out of that marriage he would have done it. Like given the fact that Robb was named King in the North and opposed Joffery's rule, so if it was so easy Robb as a king could have claimed the marriage as invalid, proclaim a Stark did not approve and was not present, proclaimed Sansa a political hostage and call any sexual relations and children from the "mock" marriage to be invalid and the result of rape that he would plan on punishing Tyrion for, so if it was so easy Robb would have tried that instead of disinheriting her.

[complexphoenix]

How about the fact that Robb disinherited Sansa? If there was any way for Robb to get Sansa out of that marriage he would have done it. Like given the fact that Robb was named King in the North and opposed Joffery's rule, so if it was so easy Robb as a king could have claimed the marriage as invalid, proclaim a Stark did not approve and was not present, proclaimed Sansa a political hostage and call any sexual relations and children from the "mock" marriage to be invalid and the result of rape that he would plan on punishing Tyrion for, so if it was so easy Robb would have tried that instead of disinheriting her.

This. I'm afraid the only grounds on which Tyrion and Sansa's marriage could be invalidated are 1) proof that Tyrion's marriage to Tysha was not properly annulled and 2) the fact that the marriage wasn't consummated. Robb didn't know about either of these, so his only recourse to prevent the Lannisters using this marriage to take control of Winterfell and the North was to disinherit Sansa.

[Roose The Weddingcrasher]

How about the fact that Robb disinherited Sansa? If there was any way for Robb to get Sansa out of that marriage he would have done it. Like given the fact that Robb was named King in the North and opposed Joffery's rule, so if it was so easy Robb as a king could have claimed the marriage as invalid, proclaim a Stark did not approve and was not present, proclaimed Sansa a political hostage and call any sexual relations and children from the "mock" marriage to be invalid and the result of rape that he would plan on punishing Tyrion for, so if it was so easy Robb would have tried that instead of disinheriting her.

I think that neither does Robb recognize the validity of anything done in the name of Joffrey, since he does not recognize his authority over him and his family members, nor would the Lannisters recognize the will of Robb Stark, because to them he's a traitor. He does not declare Sansa's marriage invalid because it wouldn't matter, since it is obvious for the Northerners and meaningless for the Lannisters.

Therefore I would assume that to those who oppose Joffrey and his line, Sansas marriage is as invalid as is any declaration by Robb for those loyal to the IT.

Do (female) adults need their parents' (or their replacement's, like Joffrey's in this case) permission to marry? Even if not, the other side can always argue that Sansa was threatened into the marriage, making it invalid.

[Elaena Targaryen]

I think that neither does Robb recognize the validity of anything done in the name of Joffrey, since he does not recognize his authority over him and his family members, nor would the Lannisters recognize the will of Robb Stark, because to them he's a traitor. He does not declare Sansa's marriage invalid because it wouldn't matter, since it is obvious for the Northerners and meaningless for the Lannisters.

Therefore I would assume that to those who oppose Joffrey and his line, Sansas marriage is as invalid as is any declaration by Robb for those loyal to the IT.

What!?

That's a silly argument, nothing is "obvious" and it has nothing to do with Joffery. Sansa was married in the church by a Septon and if that fact could change than Robb would have changed it but instead he accepted the marriage as valid and disinherited Sansa because of it... so I'm not sure what you don't understand there? That is the law set in writing by their king that the Northerners will follow and that was what Robb decreed as their king.

[Ser Pounce FTW]

I think that neither does Robb recognize the validity of anything done in the name of Joffrey, since he does not recognize his authority over him and his family members, nor would the Lannisters recognize the will of Robb Stark, because to them he's a traitor. He does not declare Sansa's marriage invalid because it wouldn't matter, since it is obvious for the Northerners and meaningless for the Lannisters.

Therefore I would assume that to those who oppose Joffrey and his line, Sansas marriage is as invalid as is any declaration by Robb for those loyal to the IT.

Sansa's marriage is hardly invalid to anyone. It is highly undesired by many but not invalid.

Robb does recognize the validity of what Joffrey does. He doesn't raise arms because he thinks Joff has no validity over him but because he thinks Joff has imprisoned his father unlawfully. Hardly the same thing. And even with a king of the North, Sansa's marriage is valid. Robb clearly thinks the marriage is legal and binding and so does Cat. What does she say when she learns of it? Not, but he has no right! She says Tyrion gave her his word that Sansa would be returned. Very different.

[Roose The Weddingcrasher]

What!?

That's a silly argument, nothing is "obvious" and it has nothing to do with Joffery. Sansa was married in the church by a Septon and if that fact could change than Robb would have changed it but instead he accepted the marriage as valid and disinherited Sansa because of it... so I'm not sure what you don't understand there? That is the law set in writing by their king that the Northerners will follow and that was what Robb decreed as their king.

Sansa's marriage is hardly invalid to anyone. It is highly undesired by many but not invalid.

Robb does recognize the validity of what Joffrey does. He doesn't raise arms because he thinks Joff has no validity over him but because he thinks Joff has imprisoned his father unlawfully. Hardly the same thing. And even with a king of the North, Sansa's marriage is valid. Robb clearly thinks the marriage is legal and binding and so does Cat. What does she say when she learns of it? Not, but he has no right! She says Tyrion gave her his word that Sansa would be returned. Very different.

I thought that Joffrey was "replacing" Sansa's relatives at the wedding, as he said something along those lines of "I am the father to the realm including you, so now I wed you to my uncle". Jon does something similar at the wedding of Alys with the Thenn, "giving" her away to him. So it seems that there has to be some authority over the bride present at the wedding, that has to be recognized by both parties.

But Robb declared himself independent from Joffrey, and he did it before Sansa's wedding, so I assume that he does not recognize his authority over his relatives either and by extension, the validity the wedding.

I don't remember the exact wording of their thoughts, but could it meant that they thought of the marriage as "legal and binding" from the point of view of the Lannisters and other subjects of Joffrey?

Just as Joffrey-loyalists are of the opinion that Robb has lost his rights to be Lord Paramount due to his rebellion, Robb-loyalists and other separatists could argue that Joffrey had no right to wed Sansa to his uncle, because he was not the rightful king, or that he had no legal authority over Sansa since she was not his subject, even if admitting he was rightful king of his own lands .

If my interpretation of Westerosi law is wrong however, I don't see a reason not to argue that Sansa was threatened into the marriage and declaring it invalid this way.

[Ser Pounce FTW]

I thought that Joffrey was "replacing" Sansa's relatives at the wedding, as he said something along those lines of "I am the father to the realm including you, so now I wed you to my uncle". Jon does something similar at the wedding of Alys with the Thenn, "giving" her away to him. So it seems that there has to be some authority over the bride present at the wedding, that has to be recognized by both parties.

But Robb declared himself independent from Joffrey, and he did it before Sansa's wedding, so I assume that he does not recognize his authority over his relatives either and by extension, the validity the wedding.

I don't remember the exact wording of their thoughts, but could it meant that they thought of the marriage as "legal and binding" from the point of view of the Lannisters and other subjects of Joffrey?

Just as Joffrey-loyalists are of the opinion that Robb has lost his rights to be Lord Paramount due to his rebellion, Robb-loyalists and other separatists could argue that Joffrey had no right to wed Sansa to his uncle, because he was not the rightful king, or that he had no legal authority over Sansa since she was not his subject, even if admitting he was rightful king of his own lands .

If my interpretation of Westerosi law is wrong however, I don't see a reason not to argue that Sansa was threatened into the marriage and declaring it invalid this way.

Again, if any of the scenarios you describe were true, Robb and Cat would have reacted differently to the news of Sansa's wedding and discussed the validity of it rather than how to block Tyrion. They never once discuss how they can free her after they win against the Lannisters because that was not an option.

[Elaena Targaryen]

Wow I really must not be explaining this right?

But Robb declared himself independent from Joffrey, and he did it before Sansa's wedding, so it is only logical to assume that since he does not recognize his authority over his relatives either and by extension, the validity the wedding.

That is my argument:

If it was so easy for Robb to not recognize the wedding as valid - especially on the grounds of a family member not consenting or being present or otherwise - than that IS what Robb would have done and decreed. But instead Robb recognized the wedding as valid and then went on to decree by law that Sansa could never inherit because of.

If my interpretation of Westerosi law is wrong however, I don't see a reason not to argue that Sansa was threatened into the marriage and declaring it invalid this way.

That was my original argument... Robb could have made it law by a royal decree if it was so easy.

This it not something that we as readers have the benefit of knowing but the characters are ignorant of - everyone knows Sansa was a political hostage and still could not do anything about it or they would have.

[Ser Pounce FTW]

Wow I really must not be explaining this right?

No, it's not you. Just as Ned loyalists and Syrion loyalists refuse to believe they are really dead, Sansa loyalists refuse to believe she's really married to Tyrion. Ironically, it would probably be ok if she had eloped with the Hound when he left even though there wouldn't have been any family members present either.

[Roose The Weddingcrasher]

No, it's not you. Just as Ned loyalists and Syrion loyalists refuse to believe they are really dead, Sansa loyalists refuse to believe she's really married to Tyrion. Ironically, it would probably be ok if she had eloped with the Hound when he left even though there wouldn't have been any family members present either.

glad to know that I am a "Sansa loyalist". I've heard worse things on the internet.

[Atroksia]

(...) if she had eloped with the Hound when he left even though there wouldn't have been any family members present either.

If she had done that, Sansa probably would have met Arya (again), no?

[Big Daddy Dave]

I think all of this setup by LF involving Sansa, Sweetrobin, and Harry the Heir is going to be a moot point. The whole thing reeks (no pun intended) of a literary slight of hand where the plot looks like it's going to go one way, then unforeseen events force it another. By the end of TWOW, I think Sansa and Littlefinger's status quo will be dramatically changed again. Martin does this all the time; shake up the pieces on the board at the end of the book and reset them in different positions to be ready for the next book.

[Elaena Targaryen]

No, it's not you. Just as Ned loyalists and Syrion loyalists refuse to believe they are really dead, Sansa loyalists refuse to believe she's really married to Tyrion. Ironically, it would probably be ok if she had eloped with the Hound when he left even though there wouldn't have been any family members present either.

Well they must really believe Robb and Cat are complete assholes then for leaving Sansa in that situation right?

(Ok not trading the Kingslayer for the girls is one of those things that is split and there is no right or wrong answer to because both sides have equally valid arguments so this will never be resolved one way or the other.)

But this, wow, to think that Robb and Cat could have saved or spared Sansa the validity of the marriage but they just didn't feel like it, well that's some cold blooded Lannister type shit and out of character of the Stark family... wow!?

[Roose The Weddingcrasher]

Again, if any of the scenarios you describe were true, Robb and Cat would have reacted differently to the news of Sansa's wedding and discussed the validity of it rather than how to block Tyrion. They never once discuss how they can free her after they win against the Lannisters because that was not an option.

Or they didn't discuss the validity of it or how they could free her because there was nothing to discuss. They both could know that the wedding's validity is based on the authority of a monarch they don't recognize.

If it was so easy for Robb to not recognize the wedding as valid - especially on the grounds of a family member not consenting or being present or otherwise - than that IS what Robb would have done and decreed. But instead Robb recognized the wedding as valid and then went on to decree by law that Sansa could never inherit because of.

I thought that it goes without saying that Robb does not recognize anything Joffrey declares about his family. I the recognition is explicitly stated in the text, correct me if it is.

That was my original argument... Robb could have made it law by a royal decree if it was so easy.

There is already a law that marriages held at swordpoint are not legally binding. He does not need a decree for it.

everyone knows Sansa was a political hostage and still could not do anything about it or they would have.

I don't understand what you mean by that, sorry.

[Ser Pounce FTW]

glad to know that I am a "Sansa loyalist". I've heard worse things on the internet.

Not sure that's meant to be an insult. I'm clearly a Throner.

I think all of this setup by LF involving Sansa, Sweetrobin, and Harry the Heir is going to be a moot point. The whole thing reeks (no pun intended) of a literary slight of hand where the plot looks like it's going to go one way, then unforeseen events force it another. By the end of TWOW, I think Sansa and Littlefinger's status quo will be dramatically changed again. Martin does this all the time; shake up the pieces on the board at the end of the book and reset them in different positions to be ready for the next book.

I agree. Someone else mentioned it might be more of a move to block Harry from marrying than for him to marry Sansa.

[Roose The Weddingcrasher]

Not sure that's meant to be an insult. I'm clearly a Throner.

Not really, and is Sansa-loyalist an insult?

[Ser Pounce FTW]

Not really, and is Sansa-loyalist an insult?

No, I really am a Throner. And it shouldn't be a problem to like a character so no, it's not an insult.

[Roose The Weddingcrasher]

I think I understand your point now. If things would or could be as I said, there would be no need to name Jon heir, right?

[Ser Pounce FTW]

I think I understand your point now. If things would or could be as I said, there would be no need to name Jon heir, right?

Yes! Things would have proceeded differently and there would have been much more discussion about what to do about Sansa rather than just how to keep Tyrion out of the North.