{ADWD Spoilers} Sansa Stark

[Wouter]

Ok, I don't remember, but if the marriage was unconsummated, and the husband's gone missing, isn't Sansa of the hook after LF has a friendly chat with some Septon?

Apparently it needs to be either the High Septon himself, or a "council of faith" (not sure what exactly that is, but I doubt 2 village septons sitting together would qualify) who can declare a marriage null and void.

And Sansa's identity needs to be known for this, obviously. The High Septon also does not seem to like girls and women too much as they are "wicked creatures" and Sansa stands accused of regicide, which he probably will have a few things to say about. Then again, he's also politically astute and maybe he would like having a northern girl of high birth who is grateful to him. What with R'Hlorr becoming a hit in the north and those pesky trees still being worshipped as well. Then again, Sansa has that reputation of praying to trees which may not help her with the High Septon.

And of course Tyrion could die, but he has a tendendy in those books not to do so.

[rashtrakut]

I thought it was a regular Septon who annulled Tyrion's marriage to Tysha (which was consummated)

[Seerow]

I thought it was a regular Septon who annulled Tyrion's marriage to Tysha (which was consummated)

I thought the same. I was under the impression at this point the only reason Sansa's wedding hasn't been annulled is because both of them have been in hiding. If Sansa comes forward, still a maid having never consumated her marriage, with her Lord Husband on the run after being proven guilty of regicide and sentenced to death, it should be pitifully easy to get the annulment.

Now getting Sansa proven innocent of harboring the Imp and playing any part in the regicide is quite another matter.

[Wouter]

I thought it was a regular Septon who annulled Tyrion's marriage to Tysha (which was consummated)

To my recollection (could be wrong though, going from memory here!) it was a drunk septon who married Tyrion and Tysha, and he confessed this to Tywin when he was back sober. I don't think this marriage was ever annulled, per se; Tywin did what he did and after that the whole thing was simply ignored. In ADWD, Tyrion even thinks in his first chapter "I have 2 wives already, why not 3?". This seems to indicate he technically still is married to Tysha (but that drunk septon no doubt has kept his mouth shut so it isn't exactly common knowledge all over the realm, unlike Sansa's well-publicised marriage).

Tywin Lannister was also planning to ignore Jaime being in the Kingsguard, and let him inherit anyway. He is like that, and able to get away with it, too.

Of couse, ignoring the marriage with Tyrion is also an option for Sansa, should she really want to remarry at some point (clearly not as of AFFC though). But she would have to forsake the 7 then, and marry for the old gods or R'Hlorr instead. I doubt that is in her character.

[Alexia]

Tyrion also said that the septons told him that it was as though the marriage never happened. I think there was an annulment, though I could be wrong. I'd love to be wrong. And the situation with Jaime is an excellent reason why I could be wrong.

As for Sansa, she is extremely religious and as much, if not more, for the old gods as for the Seven. I don't think its outside the realm that she turns to one or the other and I'd guess that her arc will bring religion into play more, given Stannis/Mel, the Red God in the Riverlands, and her current status as the heir to Winterfell.

[corbaekin]

Sansa is not Tyrion's heir, Cersei is (in lieu of a trueborn child). However, the hilarious suggestion was once made that if Sansa were to have a bastard she could say Tyrion was the father and claim Casterly Rock in her child's name.

Anyway, IIRC Cersei bargained with the High Septon to attaint Tyrion.

Man, the heritage/line of succession in ASOIAF is /so/ frakking wacky. I just checked AFFC, and apparently after Tywin's death, Cersei is referred to as the Lady of Casterly Rock, so apparently it doesn't go just to the next male heir. Widows hold for their children in some cases, then hold the territory anyway in other cases (Lady Dustin). I'm not sure if GRRM just doesn't have a coherent system in mind for it, or if he wants to emphasize the arbitrariness of it all.

[Faint]

Anyone else think Sansa might end up inheriting Bran's direwolf? I mean, he really has no purpose for it anymore and I would hope that at least Meera Reed would make it back across the Wall with Summer.

[Wouter]

Man, the heritage/line of succession in ASOIAF is /so/ frakking wacky. I just checked AFFC, and apparently after Tywin's death, Cersei is referred to as the Lady of Casterly Rock, so apparently it doesn't go just to the next male heir. Widows hold for their children in some cases, then hold the territory anyway in other cases (Lady Dustin). I'm not sure if GRRM just doesn't have a coherent system in mind for it, or if he wants to emphasize the arbitrariness of it all.

GRRM does have a coherent system (but keep in mind that ambitious siblings and family can always ignore that, see Renly and Stannis). Outside of Dorne, it goes like this:

-first the trueborn sons (and their offspring after them)

-then the trueborn daughters (and their offspring after them)

-then any legitimised bastards, first boys then girls (and their offspring after them)

-then the oldest brother and the younger brothers after him (and their offspring after them)

-then the oldest sisters and younger sisters after her (and their offspring after them)

And so on. Cersei as lady of Casterly Rock is perfectly logical: Tywin is lord, his heir is normally Jaime but he may not hold lands because he's kingsguard. Then it's Tyrion, but he is a traitor and kinslayer and convicted kingslayer as well, and disinherited. So, we go to the only daughter, Cersei. After her, her children, so Tommen. Should Tommen, Myrcella and Cersie all die (as we indeed expect) then Kevan would have been next in line as oldest brother of Tywin, and then his (living children). That would be Lancel I suppose, and if he refuses as well I think he has a brother still, and Kevan also has a daughter.

Sualk; maybe eventually Sansa will inherit Summer - if Bran stays where he is, but it's early days yet. If Sansa may be destined to stay in a southern court though, as I half the time think she is, then she has no use for a direwolf I fear.

[rashtrakut]

Man, the heritage/line of succession in ASOIAF is /so/ frakking wacky. I just checked AFFC, and apparently after Tywin's death, Cersei is referred to as the Lady of Casterly Rock, so apparently it doesn't go just to the next male heir. Widows hold for their children in some cases, then hold the territory anyway in other cases (Lady Dustin). I'm not sure if GRRM just doesn't have a coherent system in mind for it, or if he wants to emphasize the arbitrariness of it all.

The successions laws in Westeros vary, I don't think they are inconsistent. Dorne is like the current Scandinavian monarchies, with Absolute cognactic primogeniture the oldest child inherits regardless of gender.

The Iron Islands appear to have some sort of Salic law type succession where a woman cannot rule (Asha tries by claiming she is Balon's son), though it is not clear whether the woman's children can succeed. An example in history would be the Empress Matilda - the English were very reluctant to recognize her as queen, but her son (once he proved he had military ability) was much more successful in garnering support (helped by the fact that Stephen's designated heir Eustace died and the other son was not interested).

Everyone else appears to have male preference cognactic primogeniture like the UK - the sons and their progeny come first followed by their daughters. The flight of Alys Karstark highlights this. If her brother is dead, her uncle can legally succeed by marrying her.

Cersei is the lady of Casterly Rock because her two brothers are ineligible - Jaime because he is in the Kingsguard and Tyrion because he is a convicted regicide. Tyrion should have been the heir before his conviction, and actually made a claim to Tywin - but Tywin was hoping he could get Jaime out of the Kingsguard.

Am not sure about Lady Dustin, she may hold the property as the heir remainder because all the other heirs are dead...though typically in that scenario the land should revert pack to the paramount overlord - in this case the Starks. Ned may have let her hold on to the lands in gratitude for her husband's service and early death.

[Alexia]

I don't know enough about Lady Dustin to say why there is an exception for her (I'm not far along enough yet) but I'd guess there was a deficit of contenders for her husband's lands? Like with Lady Hornwood (who wasn't the heir, either!)? So she was left holding it by default and since no one challenged her, it made sense to let her stand?

But Wouter has the right of it with the line of descent, except that I believe legitimized bastards can claim by birth order, or at least put in a claim. That's why they get so dangerous -- that can be really tricky and cause a lot of problems. This was Catelyn's concern when she said there was no way to turn Jon bastard again -- say Sansa inherited and her son was the new lord. Jon's son, or some nobody claiming to be Jon's son, could say that he was the rightful lord because Jon should have inherited before a woman and then a war opens between Eddard Jr. and Jon's son. Or if Rickon were to inherit, that same son of Jon's could claim that Jon was the elder brother and thus should have gone first, making said son the legitimate heir rather than Rickon's son.

I actually find this whole succession thing pretty interesting when it comes down to it. It can really get chaotic.

[Alexia]

Anyone else think Sansa might end up inheriting Bran's direwolf? I mean, he really has no purpose for it anymore and I would hope that at least Meera Reed would make it back across the Wall with Summer.

I don't see Sansa ever getting a wolf again. I rather think that aspect of her story is done, although I'd like to see her warg powers come into play at some point.

Incidentally, further evidence that Sansa was a child and the marriage between her and Tyrion was abusive by all the standards of the Seven Kingdoms (as though there isn't enough evidence already, but some refuse to believe). Jon thinks to himself, when dealing with the wildlings, that twelve year old boys are squires and pages and fighters, but twelve year old girls are children (he originally gave them an age limit of sixteen of girls he would accept, which is the legal age of majority in Westeros).

I loved that. It is almost like GRRM decided to go ahead and make it absolutely clear that Tyrion did something very, very abnormal and abusive in marrying Sansa.

[Wouter]

I wonder what Jon thinks of Tyrion right now. We never saw his reaction to this news (unless it came up in ADWD or he thinks about Tyrion in it? I have only read a small part of it yet).

Having said that, girls being married underage isn't that unheard of in the 7 kingdoms, I think. The most recent lady Frey for example, or the bride in the last Dunk & Egg story. And even some examples within ADWD.

[Alexia]

I wonder what Jon thinks of Tyrion right now. We never saw his reaction to this news (unless it came up in ADWD or he thinks about Tyrion in it? I have only read a small part of it yet).

Having said that, girls being married underage isn't that unheard of in the 7 kingdoms, I think. The most recent lady Frey for example, or the bride in the last Dunk & Egg story. And even some examples within ADWD.

Wasn't the most recent Lady Frey 15? And Viserys asked if Dothraki like their women so young, and then compared it to having sex with boys, sheep, or horses. Its not unheard of but it isn't the norm, and it certainly is not the norm to consummate it. Tyrek Lannister was mocked by half the city for marrying a baby.

Also, Walder Frey is kind of disgusting and perverted, so she wouldn't be a good example even if she was twelve years old.

[zuziako]

Incidentally, further evidence that Sansa was a child and the marriage between her and Tyrion was abusive by all the standards of the Seven Kingdoms (as though there isn't enough evidence already, but some refuse to believe). Jon thinks to himself, when dealing with the wildlings, that twelve year old boys are squires and pages and fighters, but twelve year old girls are children (he originally gave them an age limit of sixteen of girls he would accept, which is the legal age of majority in Westeros).I loved that. It is almost like GRRM decided to go ahead and make it absolutely clear that Tyrion did something very, very abnormal and abusive in marrying Sansa.

I didn't catch that. I rather thought that since she "flowered", she was at appropriate age to marry, just not necessarily to be bedded every other night. Even Tywin says to Tyrion that he simply has to deflower her and then he can wait for another year or so. Which emphasizes the importance of marriage consumption.

I don't think Tyrion did anything abnormal or abusive in terms of marrying Sansa - she might have been only 12 (nearly 13), but being 12 in that era (medieval setting) meant something completely different, not to mention Sansa was always described as tall and mature in looks (the breasts etc.). Of course it would have been better if she was 15, but desperate time called for desperate measures. Having her unmarried with strong Winterfell claim was dangerous to both Lannisters and Tyrrels.

[Alexia]

I didn't catch that. I rather thought that since she "flowered", she was at appropriate age to marry, just not necessarily to be bedded every other night. Even Tywin says to Tyrion that he simply has to deflower her and then he can wait for another year or so. Which emphasizes the importance of marriage consumption.

I don't think Tyrion did anything abnormal or abusive in terms of marrying Sansa - she might have been only 12 (nearly 13), but being 12 in that era (medieval setting) meant something completely different, not to mention Sansa was always described as tall and mature in looks (the breasts etc.). Of course it would have been better if she was 15, but desperate time called for desperate measures. Having her unmarried with strong Winterfell claim was dangerous to both Lannisters and Tyrrels.

Nope, if she was appropriate age to marry, Viserys wouldn't have compared it to bedding sheep, Tyrion wouldn't have walked around calling her a child and saying that she was too young, and Jon wouldn't say that twelve is a child. He was also upset that eleven year old Arya was supposed to marry Ramsey.

The marriage between Joffrey and Sansa was to take place when she was 16. Myrcella/Trystane, 14. Catelyn married at 18, Lysa at 15, Cersei at 18. Tywin told Tyrion to deflower her because he didn't care about Sansa's health or safety. The fact that he seems fine with waiting a year to make her pregnant just goes to show that Sansa is too young -- and the SSM confirms this, as do numerous characters. Yes, the Lannisters married her for political reasons despite the fact that it is wrong by societal standards. They married an infant, too.

Being twelve in that setting meaning something different is the same shitty excuse I keep hearing to excuse Tyrion. Jon's words prove that this is NOT the case. Twelve is a child.

[Bobbity]

I don't get how this implies anything. As far as Jaime knows, Sansa has been married to Tyrion - although that depends how you define 'just' - and Arya is still out there somewhere.

/edit

Bugger that. Fake Arya's been married, and Sansa is still out there somewhere. No way is he going to tell his hostage the truth. It still doesn't imply anything though.

[zuziako]

Nope, if she was appropriate age to marry, Viserys wouldn't have compared it to bedding sheep, Tyrion wouldn't have walked around calling her a child and saying that she was too young, and Jon wouldn't say that twelve is a child. He was also upset that eleven year old Arya was supposed to marry Ramsey.The marriage between Joffrey and Sansa was to take place when she was 16. Myrcella/Trystane, 14. Catelyn married at 18, Lysa at 15, Cersei at 18. Tywin told Tyrion to deflower her because he didn't care about Sansa's health or safety.

The fact that he seems fine with waiting a year to make her pregnant just goes to show that Sansa is too young -- and the SSM confirms this, as do numerous characters. Yes, the Lannisters married her for political reasons despite the fact that it is wrong by societal standards. They married an infant, too.Being twelve in that setting meaning something different is the same shitty excuse I keep hearing to excuse Tyrion. Jon's words prove that this is NOT the case. Twelve is a child.

I'm not a history scholar but I think there were tons of women getting married at the age of 13/14 (and lets be honest, Sansa just missed 13 by a month). An example of that could be Margaret Beaufort, who not only married at the age of 12 but gave birth at 13 (or 14). Not that she wanted such fate, but it was the war of roses (and as fans all know GRRM inspiration comes from that period) and a heir was needed. She was certainly too young for pregnancy, and almost died in childbirth, but nobody cared. She was a woman and it was her duty,and I'm pretty sure it occurred to nobody that maybe this isn't fair.

I mean, being a woman in middle ages SUCKED, even if you were lucky enough not to be born a peasant girl. All those miscarriages, unfair laws and duties, it must have been a nightmare. And since ASOIAF is a medieval setting, and the political situation looks like it looks, I can only regard the decision to marry Sansa as the most reasonable and logical, NATURAL even. She bleeds, it's time to marry her of. Ad I'm not really sure it was that socially unacceptable, I mean, what Cersai and Jamie have been doing - that's a crime, and what Tyrion did to Tywin. Marring a 12 year old (and mind you, well developed almost 13 year old really) in ASOIAF setting still does not sound as the worst thing to happen for me.

And I don't think Tyrion needs any excuses - it was not his idea and wish, but it REALLY was necessary for the cause, and he was kind enough not to deflower Sansa even with his father constantly nagging him about it.

[Alexia]

An example of that could be Margaret Beaufort, who not only married at the age of 12 but gave birth at 13 (or 14). Not that she wanted such fate, but it was the war of roses (and as fans all know GRRM inspiration comes from that period) and a heir was needed. She was certainly too young for pregnancy, and almost died in childbirth, but nobody cared.

Margaret Beaufort is well known to have nearly died in childbirth and was never able to have another child because of the damage that it caused her body.

Also, Westeros is NOT medieval Europe. If you think that it is normal to marry girls at that age, provide quotes backing it up. I can provide quotes comparing it to sex with sheep, mocking men who do it, saying that it is too young, calling girls that age children. I can provide a lengthy list showing that it is more normal to marry between 14-18 or thereabouts. I can provide an SSM from Martin saying that even men who marry little girls usually wait until a certain age. Do you think it is normal to marry babies in Westeros? The Lannisters, grasping greedy bastards that they are, do that too. Sansa was the daughter of a vanquished enemy and they stripped her, beat her, and married her off as a child. Here's a quote:

"Sansa is too young."

"She is old enough to be Lady of Winterfell."

And this is what it is all about -- it has nothing to do with propriety and the norms. Lady Ermesande was old enough to be Lady of whatever-it-was-again and so they married the chubby, bouncing baby off to a Lannister too. It had nothing to do with whether or not Sansa was old enough to bed, just with ensuring that she couldn't escape the marriage.

Seriously, you think its normal and acceptable behavior? I want quotes to back that up.

[zuziako]

I can provide quotes comparing it to sex with sheep, mocking men who do it, saying that it is too young, calling girls that age children. I can provide a lengthy list showing that it is more normal to marry between 14-18 or thereabouts. I can provide an SSM from Martin saying that even men who marry little girls usually wait until a certain age.

Yes, well, I don't spend THAT much time on backing up my forum discussions. I only write about the impressions that I get from the normal read, and some forum dwelling.

Do you think it is normal to marry babies in Westeros? The Lannisters, grasping greedy bastards that they are, do that too. Sansa was the daughter of a vanquished enemy and they stripped her, beat her, and married her off as a child.

Here's a quote:

"Sansa is too young.""She is old enough to be Lady of Winterfell."

And this is what it is all about -- it has nothing to do with propriety and the norms. Lady Ermesande was old enough to be Lady of whatever-it-was-again and so they married the chubby, bouncing baby off to a Lannister too. It had nothing to do with whether or not Sansa was old enough to bed, just with ensuring that she couldn't escape the marriage.

Seriously, you think its normal and acceptable behavior? I want quotes to back that up.

I wouldn't say that it's normal, but I would say it's acceptable in some situations. And I think it is really important to remember that Sansa, for her age, was tall and well-developed, which may even mean that she would have safely survived childbirth.

And to be clear - I don't think it is nice what happened to her, or fair, or whatever but it's just strikes me as completely natural decision from the Lannisters. And I'm not saying that whole Westeros prizes marriages with 12-year olds, but it seems to me the public accepts them if the situation calls for it. As I said - it's not the worst thing that can happen. What society IS outraged about is kin slaying, king slaying, ignoring the guest right and screwing your own brothers. These seem to be the issues people have problems with, rather than "OMG, someone just married and bedded a 12 year old!". Probably in the next village somebody just RAPED and KILLED a 12 year old. It's a cruel world.

[corbaekin]

GRRM does have a coherent system (but keep in mind that ambitious siblings and family can always ignore that, see Renly and Stannis). Outside of Dorne, it goes like this:

-first the trueborn sons (and their offspring after them)

-then the trueborn daughters (and their offspring after them)

-then any legitimised bastards, first boys then girls (and their offspring after them)

-then the oldest brother and the younger brothers after him (and their offspring after them)

-then the oldest sisters and younger sisters after her (and their offspring after them)

Thanks for the really clear breakdown: I definitely appreciate it.

Am not sure about Lady Dustin, she may hold the property as the heir remainder because all the other heirs are dead...though typically in that scenario the land should revert pack to the paramount overlord - in this case the Starks. Ned may have let her hold on to the lands in gratitude for her husband's service and early death.

This is also very reasonable-and it's not like he couldn't, as her overlord, have had her married off anyway if he needed it, though it seems to suggest he wasn't the type.

I don't know enough about Lady Dustin to say why there is an exception for her (I'm not far along enough yet) but I'd guess there was a deficit of contenders for her husband's lands? Like with Lady Hornwood (who wasn't the heir, either!)? So she was left holding it by default and since no one challenged her, it made sense to let her stand?

But Wouter has the right of it with the line of descent, except that I believe legitimized bastards can claim by birth order, or at least put in a claim. That's why they get so dangerous -- that can be really tricky and cause a lot of problems. This was Catelyn's concern when she said there was no way to turn Jon bastard again -- say Sansa inherited and her son was the new lord. Jon's son, or some nobody claiming to be Jon's son, could say that he was the rightful lord because Jon should have inherited before a woman and then a war opens between Eddard Jr. and Jon's son. Or if Rickon were to inherit, that same son of Jon's could claim that Jon was the elder brother and thus should have gone first, making said son the legitimate heir rather than Rickon's son.

I actually find this whole succession thing pretty interesting when it comes down to it. It can really get chaotic.

Definitely! I'm really into it overall, and puzzling out the threads. Though I'm sure all the Westeros/medieval kids could do this in their sleep without charts. :)