Jump to content

The Legality of Marriages


Mithras

Recommended Posts

I'm more interested in Asha's marriage. Euron had a seal marry in her place. Is that legal? Plus, if it is I wonder about Arya. Can someone else or something else marry in your place and it still be legal? Also, if it's not I wonder why Euron would bother. This was clearly to punish and neutralize her although he might want to kill her anyways.

Tyrek married a baby. As the baby was very unlikely to say her vows (she still had a wet nurse), someone had to take her place and represent her, probably her legal guardians/parents. In Asha's case, Euron was representing his niece as the closest thing to a father rather than her King/Lord.

For Arya is trickier. Ramsay is married to the girl we know as "Arya", not to Arya Stark. As that girl is passing as Arya, then Ramsay is married to "Arya". Once Arya reappears, she's not legally married to him and he's stuck with a fake girl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, I am no expert of British history, but are there some monarchs who were declared illegitimate because the relationship between their parents was declared illegitimate? There was a little confusing story about John of Gaunt and his long-time mistress who gave birth to Beaufort surnamed children of John. Their children were born long before they were married but they were legitimized by both the pope and the king. However, some people claimed that they were illegitimate.

Henry VIII declare both of his daughters illegitimate after finding excuses to annul his marriages to each of their mothers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Euron the head of House Greyjoy? The kingsmoot didnot choose him for that position. I think Asha is (or should be) the Lady of House Greyjoy as long as Theon is assumed to be dead. Therefore, Asha marriage is problematic too.



It looks like in most of the cases, power comes first and the laws follow as they suit the powerful.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Euron the head of House Greyjoy? The kingsmoot didnot choose him for that position. I think Asha is (or should be) the Lady of House Greyjoy as long as Theon is assumed to be dead. Therefore, Asha marriage is problematic too.

It looks like in most of the cases, power comes first and the laws follow as they suit the powerful.

I dunno if he's the head of the Greyjoys but he's the only relative with power Asha has. Victarion and Aeron are younger, so Euron is in charge as she's a single female that is part of his family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Euron the head of House Greyjoy? The kingsmoot didnot choose him for that position. I think Asha is (or should be) the Lady of House Greyjoy as long as Theon is assumed to be dead. Therefore, Asha marriage is problematic too.

It looks like in most of the cases, power comes first and the laws follow as they suit the powerful.

But wouldn't he get the final say as king?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno if he's the head of the Greyjoys but he's the only relative with power Asha has. Victarion and Aeron are younger, so Euron is in charge as she's a single female that is part of his family.

She is a woman grown and she can assume the title of Lady in her own name. So, she does not need a relative. In House Targaryen, any males come before the females (according to several conventions). In other Houses, a daughter always comes before uncles.

But wouldn't he get the final say as king?

Perhaps since kingship outweighs lordship, Euron is the head of House Greyjoy and he has the final say in Asha wedding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps since kingship outweighs lordship, Euron is the head of House Greyjoy and he has the final say in Asha wedding.

I don't think there is a head of House Greyjoy separate from the kingship now. They don't appear to have any lands other than Pyke.

Tyrek married a baby. As the baby was very unlikely to say her vows (she still had a wet nurse), someone had to take her place and represent her, probably her legal guardians/parents. In Asha's case, Euron was representing his niece as the closest thing to a father rather than her King/Lord.

For Arya is trickier. Ramsay is married to the girl we know as "Arya", not to Arya Stark. As that girl is passing as Arya, then Ramsay is married to "Arya". Once Arya reappears, she's not legally married to him and he's stuck with a fake girl.

Regarding Asha's marriage, she was married under the faith of the Drowned God, which very likely has different rites and rules than the other marriage systems (incidentally, like so many other aspects of the faith of the Old Gods, their marriage rites seem totally unworkable to me on a societal level).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding Asha's marriage, she was married under the faith of the Drowned God, which very likely has different rites and rules than the other marriage systems (incidentally, like so many other aspects of the faith of the Old Gods, their marriage rites seem totally unworkable to me on a societal level).

Why that? It's just like any other marriage. Groom puts his cloak on the bride in front of a Septon/Heart Tree/Drowned Man/Red Priest/other religious figure of choice and some witnesses, done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why that? It's just like any other marriage. Groom puts his cloak on the bride in front of a Septon/Heart Tree/Drowned Man/Red Priest/other religious figure of choice and some witnesses, done.

It's not, though. Anybody can get married just by saying the vows in front of a tree. You don't need a priest (indeed, there are no priests) or witnesses. It's totally unverifiable, and if you wanted to retroactively claim you had married somebody else years before in secret, there's nothing anybody can say to show otherwise. What if a lord's wife later claimed she was already married, and thus all her children by that lord were bastards?

Stuff like this can also happen in a system with more of a system behind it, but under the Old Gods there are no controls whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why that? It's just like any other marriage. Groom puts his cloak on the bride in front of a Septon/Heart Tree/Drowned Man/Red Priest/other religious figure of choice and some witnesses, done.

It's not, though. Anybody can get married just by saying the vows in front of a tree. You don't need a priest (indeed, there are no priests) or witnesses. It's totally unverifiable, and if you wanted to retroactively claim you had married somebody else years before in secret, there's nothing anybody can say to show otherwise. What if a lord's wife later claimed she was already married, and thus all her children by that lord were bastards?

Stuff like this can also happen in a system with more of a system behind it, but under the Old Gods there are no controls whatsoever.

I didn't wrote the bolded part for laughs, Witnesses are an important factor in every wedding described in the books.

Case in point: Ramsay going on about having a girl, a tree, a cloak and witnesses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Cersi looses her trial, Joffery becomes illigetimate so his claim to the throne goes bye bye. So He had no claim to the throne so did he leagually have any right to marry Sansa to Tyrion. If he is not the true King, he cannot make decisions in place of her closest relative right?



So if Cersi looses her trial Sansa will theoretically be freed from her marrige because it was unlawful and unconsumated and will be free to marry whomever she likes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't wrote the bolded part for laughs, Witnesses are an important factor in every wedding described in the books.

Yes, they have witnesses in practice because they're useful, but they're not necessary. All you need is the tree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, I am no expert of British history, but are there some monarchs who were declared illegitimate because the relationship between their parents was declared illegitimate? There was a little confusing story about John of Gaunt and his long-time mistress who gave birth to Beaufort surnamed children of John. Their children were born long before they were married but they were legitimized by both the pope and the king. However, some people claimed that they were illegitimate.

There were many!

The Beauforts, were rather special case. John of Gaunt's third wife was his longtime mistress Katherine Swynford, who he already had several illegitimate children with when they married. It was John's nephew King Richard II (along with the pope) who declared the children born before their marriage legitimate by royal and papal decree. Years later, when John's eldest legitimate son overthrew his cousin Richard II and became King Henry IV, he inserted a clause into that decree declaring the Beaufort's legitimate, but barring them from inheriting the throne.

There was also this famous example:

Henry VIII declare both of his daughters illegitimate after finding excuses to annul his marriages to each of their mothers

Another great political example was the legitimacy of Edward IV's marriage to Elizabeth Woodville and the status of their 10 children. When Edward died, his eldest son was still a minor and his uncle Richard, Duke of Gloucester was named regent until the boy reached his majority. Richard decided he would rather be king himself than regent and produced a priest who claimed to have secretly betrothed Edward IV to another woman before his marriage to Elizabeth (who Edward also married secretly). Richard had an act of Parliament declare their marriage invalid almost twenty years after the fact and all of their children bastards and then he got to become King Richard III.

After Richard III was killed by Henry Tudor, the new Tudor king thought it would be politically advantageous to marry Edward IV eldest daughter but he could not of course, marry a bastard. He issued a new act of Parliament declaring Edward IV & Elizabeth's marriage valid, and their daughter's went from being bastards to being princesses again.

There was a great SSM that I wish I could find that really sums up all of this legitimacy flip flopping. GRRM basically said something to the effect that both Westeros and the medieval world were governed by men, not laws. There may have been precedents and traditions, but if they were not working in the best interest of the most powerful person involved, they were shuttled aside. He even pointed out that kings and the nobility liked the 'rules' to be vague and murky so they could change or disregard them if they become inconvenient. In a way, it's very tied into what Varys tells Tyrion about power; it's an illusion. If enough powerful people believe (or its in their interest to 'believe') something or someone is legitimate or illegitimate, they will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The legality of marriages most certainly was judged by the people in power. If an adult heir dared to defy his father's wishes by choosing his wife/husband without his father's consent, the marriage may have 'technically' been legal, but the father in question could then disinherit said heir, or throw him out of his house/castle. In many cases it could also suffice to not allow the husband/wife to move into the castle.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a great SSM that I wish I could find that really sums up all of this legitimacy flip flopping. GRRM basically said something to the effect that both Westeros and the medieval world were governed by men, not laws. There may have been precedents and traditions, but if they were not working in the best interest of the most powerful person involved, they were shuttled aside. He even pointed out that kings and the nobility liked the 'rules' to be vague and murky so they could change or disregard them if they become inconvenient. In a way, it's very tied into what Varys tells Tyrion about power; it's an illusion. If enough powerful people believe (or its in their interest to 'believe') something or someone is legitimate or illegitimate, they will.

I think this is the one:

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/The_Hornwood_Inheritance_and_the_Whents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Henry VIII declare both of his daughters illegitimate after finding excuses to annul his marriages to each of their mothers

Of course, we know that they both became Queens of England eventually (one being perhaps the most famous queen in world history), so we cannot be certain how "effective" those decrees were really found to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This also brings up another question. I too believe that Lyanna and Rhaegar were married in front of a heart tree and/or by a wandering septon.

If Aerys gave his consent to Rhaegar in marrying Lyanna, there is no problem for him. But if Rhaegar married Lyanna without his leave/knowledge, then the question is, did Rhaegar have the right to marry whoever he liked as a man grown? Same goes for Lyanna. I am 99.9% sure that Rickard never gave his consent to Lyanna in regards to marrying Rhaegar but she was a woman grown by that time.

Rhaegar was the Prince of Dragonstone, a lord in his own right. Although, as the kings heir, the king would be expected to decide who he marries (I would expect this to be done before he is granted Dragonstone itself), for a second marriage (either as a widower or otherwise) I don't find it surprising the Rhaegar makes his own decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for bringing that. It is an important SSM, a must-read for everyone.

Of course, we know that they both became Queens of England eventually (one being perhaps the most famous queen in world history), so we cannot be certain how "effective" those decrees were really found to be.

In ASOIAF laws, the king is the superior authority and he has a right to undo whatever another king did before him. So, the decrees of legitimacy are even less effective in ASOIAF.

I was expecting Joffrey to undo Robert's decision to give Dragonstone to Stannis and Storm's End to Renly, if the war had not happened and his succession was not contested. Joffrey would claim them both in his own name as the king and the head of the primary branch of House Baratheon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rhaegar was the Prince of Dragonstone, a lord in his own right. Although, as the kings heir, the king would be expected to decide who he marries (I would expect this to be done before he is granted Dragonstone itself), for a second marriage (either as a widower or otherwise) I don't find it surprising the Rhaegar makes his own decision.

While it might be viewed as treason for the crown prince to marry against the King's wishes and the King might arrange to have the marriage annulled, I don't think the marriage itself would be illegal or not recognized if the marriage actually occurs. I believe the main reason (prior to the war breaking out) that R&L remained hidden was that R did not want to return to KL with L until L gave birth to a child. I think R believed that it would be harder to annul the marriage--and Aerys would be more likely to relent and accept the marriage--if R&L already had a child before Aerys became aware of the marriage. Of course, R was taking some risk that Aerys would punish R in some way for taking this action, but given his view of the prophesy, it was a risk he had to take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...