Are there any cases of mariages being annulled in Westeros?

[Lady Blizzardborn]

On 8/17/2017 at 2:26 AM, Ronnel said:

Elmar Frey and Arya Stark

They were never married. Just betrothed.

Per GRRM, you have to personally request an annulment, and it can only be granted by a council of the faith (whatever that means) or the High Septon himself. Example: if Sansa wants to get her marriage to Tyrion annulled, she has to either find a way to get a council of the faith to convene nearby or go to King's Landing and ask the High Septon. 

What we don't know: what constitutes grounds in storyworld. Non-consummation is a no-brainer. Failure or inability to perform wifely/husbandly duties may or may not be grounds. Coercion should be grounds (vows made at swordpoint and all that). Fraud or deception maybe.

We don't know if Tyrion and Tysha's marriage was actually annulled or not. Tyrion is under the impression that it was. It's possible that since both the bride and groom were underage, Tywin was able to get away with requesting the annulment for his son. It's also possible that Tywin didn't bother getting the annulment because he didn't figure Tysha would ever show up again, he wouldn't want the High Septon to know about his son marrying a peasant in a ceremony performed by a drunk septon and with pigs present, and he'd already had Jaime lie to Tyrion about the bride. Really who was going to contest any marriage he set up for Tyrion? 

 

On 8/20/2017 at 1:35 PM, Daena the Defiant said:

There was reference to a process in The Rogue Prince in which Prince Daemon wanted to set aside his Royce wife, which included a petition that required the king's permission (which he denied).

So, it seems that there is a system in place, but it's very rarely used?

We don't know if Daemon was required to petition the king, or if he was supposed to do that before or after petitioning the Faith. Could be he thought it would be smart to get his brother on his side, and get it in writing, in which case that massively backfired on him.

[Pikachu101]

On 16/08/2017 at 6:22 AM, heraldofdragons said:

Rhaegar could've annulled his marriage (it's pretty likely he did somehow)

Doubt it, remember he genuinely believed Aegon was the PTWP so why would he make him a bastard? 

I think only the High Septon can annul a consummated marriage, Tysha/Tyrion doesn't really count because it was never a recognised marriage to begin with. 

[Sasha]

If Aerys agreed to let Rhaegar dissolve his marriage with Elia (Aerys didn't like Elia at all : "too Dornish" he said), The High septon would maybe agree too, and Elia could have been obliged to join the Faith (it happened all the time in IRL history, with widows and abandoned wives), maybe with the promise from Rhaegar their children would still be legitimate. 

[TMIFairy]

13 minutes ago, Sasha said:

If Aerys agreed to let Rhaegar dissolve his marriage with Elia (Aerys didn't like Elia at all : "too Dornish" he said), The High septon would maybe agree too, and Elia could have been obliged to join the Faith (it happened all the time in IRL history, with widows and abandoned wives), maybe with the promise from Rhaegar their children would still be legitimate. 

An annulment does not mean that marriage is "dissolved" - it is proclaimed as "had never been".

So the kids get bastard status.

However, I suppose that - to add to the fun - we can have Aerys legitmise Aegon but not Rheanys

Of course with expediency and all that, if enough Powerful People TM want something to happen, e.g. Faith sanctioned incestuous marriages between Targs, than it happens.

 

[Hiigara129]

The only out and out example would be Baelor the Blessed. He got the High Septon to dissolve his marriage to Daena since "it had been contracted before he had become a king and was never consummated." Later the small council of King Aerys I, urged the king to put Aelinor aside and marry another, hoping that Aerys's behavior was caused by dislike of her. So in theory annulments could and realistically should exist. They were common enough in the actual Medieval era (despite what one may think due to Henry VIII). However, those tended to be granted on grounds of Consanguinity, or too close of blood relation between husband and wife. Considering the Targaryen incest practices that wouldn't be viable for them. There was also non-consummation, the marriage happening when one or both parties were to young to consent to it and I'm sure other grounds that I'm not thinking of. 

One last thing, from Wikipedia: " Although an annulment is thus a declaration that "the marriage never existed", the Church recognizes that the relationship was a putative marriage, which gives rise to "natural obligations". In canon law, children conceived or born of either a valid or a putative marriage are considered legitimate,and illegitimate children are legitimized by a putative marriage of their parents, as by a valid marriage." This was true in the middle ages and is true today. Rarely does an annulment bastardize any children from the marriage. Of course in Westeros it seems as though the only marriages put aside were the ones that failed to produce heirs.

 

 

[norwaywolf123]

On 15.8.2017 at 8:13 PM, Lord Varys said:

We don't know whether that's the same as an annulment. For instance, there is a king who puts aside the mother of his children for a new bride yet we don't know whether that affects the legitimacy of the children from the former wife.

Within the framework of the Faith it seems likely that it would, but the First Men kings wouldn't have cared all that much about that. It is the Andals that enforce their view of marriage basically on everybody else as is attested by the way the Andals see rock and salt marriages on the Iron Islands. For them the children of salt wives are bastards when things are actually somewhat more complicated from the point of view of the Ironborn.

An annulment means that a marriage is erased, a king - and only kings can/did set aside their wives - setting aside his wife might effectively be more or less a divorce.

What we do know is that marriages can be annulled if they are not consummated (because a marriage is only a proper marriage when there is vaginal intercourse involved), and perhaps a couple of other reasons. Barrenness might spring to mind, as well as a spouse being forced into a marriage against his or her will.

But this would all be open to interpretation. The word of a king or prince against the word of the wife would, most likely, always convince any representative of the Faith. In fact, the Targaryens only had to ask for annulment or the Faith's permission to set aside a wife back when the Faith still had teeth - before the Faith Militant Uprising. And even then the Faith would have gladly dissolved the incestuous marriages of Aegon the Conqueror if the man had asked for that. But the only Targaryen in those days who wanted to get rid of his wife was Prince Maegor, and he was married to the one woman he could not got rid of - a Hightower who also happened to be the niece of the High Septon. Such a marriage would never be annulled because both the High Septon and the Hightowers would be humiliated by that. That's why Maegor took a second wife instead of asking for an annulment or the permission to set aside Ceryse Hightower. Considering that Ceryse apparently was barren it is not that unlikely he would have gotten permission to set her aside if she had been any other woman.

In the Targaryen sphere bigamy or polygamy is actually more likely considering that there is precedent for this in Aegon and Maegor. The only Targaryen king who set aside his wife was Baelor the Blessed and he supposedly never consummated his marriage so he never was actually marriage. I guess the whole thing could count as an annulment but it wasn't something he asked about it was something he basically decided by his own authority and the Faith could only comply.

I do not think any monarch want ot be associated with Maegor the Cruel.

[Lord Varys]

8 hours ago, norwaywolf123 said:

I do not think any monarch want ot be associated with Maegor the Cruel.

Sure, but Maegor is the only Targaryen prince who took a second wife. He is the only precedent Rhaegar could cite to justify his actions. And even that case doesn't really work since Maegor's wife Ceryse Hightower failed to give him any children in fourteen years of marriage while Elia gave Rhaegar a healthy girl and a healthy boy.

It seems as if a barren wife/a childless marriage could also give a man the pretext to rid himself of his wife but whether that's truly a reason for an annulment the Faith accepts is not clear. The only confirmed reason to annul a marriage is if it non consummated but barrenness and a forced marriage could be accepted reason, too. 

[heraldofdragons]

On 8/23/2017 at 1:19 AM, Pikachu101 said:

Doubt it, remember he genuinely believed Aegon was the PTWP so why would he make him a bastard? 

This was one of my objections to the idea too, at first. After reading more about annulment, it seems that (at least IRL) children legitimately born to a married couple remain legitimate even after an annulment. Catholic Canon Law even says so explicitly (Canon 1137, linked below) where Rhaegar and Elia's marriage prior to annulment would be considered a putative marriage

I don't like the idea of annulment but it seems like it's likely that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married somehow. It's not inconceivable that Rhaegar wrote away to the High Septon and had his marriage annulled (since GRRM has hinted that only one party would have to request it) although it's anybody's guess under what pretense he would've done so. Aegon was still an infant at the time, so it's not like "my wife is barren" is very convincing at all
 
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P43.HTM 

 

[Pikachu101]

@heraldofdragons 

But why would he even need to annul the marriage? The third head was meant to be Visenya so her legitimacy doesn't really matter because it was the original Rhaenys' line who continued the dynasty so as far as Rhaegar's concerned this time around wouldn't be any different. 

As for OP I think there's certain rules and regulations for an annulment:

1. The marriage was never consumated
2. The High Septon grants an annulment 

[Lord Varys]

Rhaegar would have never gotten an annulment in the books without the king's permission. And chances are about zero that Aerys would have supported his son in this considering that the king was essentially fearing that his son was preparing to betray and depose him.

We know from Ran/George that the Targaryen king ruled to the Faith from the days of Jaehaerys I, meaning that the High Septon would never have done anything to provoke or anger the the king. Even more so in light of the fact that the High Septon resides in the Great Sept of Baelor in KL, close to the Red Keep. Rhaegar was living on Dragonstone and did never return to the city after he had taken Lyanna.

Chances that he got an annulment by letter are about zero if you ask me. Especially since there must be a reason why Rhaegar and Lyanna never went to court together after Rhaegar took Lyanna - the best explanation for this is that King Aerys and the High Septon/Faith along with the entire court condemned Rhaegar for his actions.

[TMIFairy]

8 hours ago, heraldofdragons said:

1 - This was one of my objections to the idea too, at first. After reading more about annulment, it seems that (at least IRL) children legitimately born to a married couple remain legitimate even after an annulment. Catholic Canon Law even says so explicitly (Canon 1137, linked below) where Rhaegar and Elia's marriage prior to annulment would be considered a putative marriage

2 - I don't like the idea of annulment but it seems like it's likely that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married somehow. It's not inconceivable that Rhaegar wrote away to the High Septon and had his marriage annulled (since GRRM has hinted that only one party would have to request it) although it's anybody's guess under what pretense he would've done so. Aegon was still an infant at the time, so it's not like "my wife is barren" is very convincing at all
 
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P43.HTM 

 

1 - this is what RC Canon Law states today. What did it say in the High Medieval Ages which are the main inspiration for GRRM?

Also, that linked to Canon legitimises bastards by subsequent marriage of their parents. I am fairly sure that English Law/Usage did not see things that way - it was "once a bastard, always a bastard".

2 - clutching at straws, eh?

But as no kittens were harmed in the writing of our posts - all's good and well

You believe your shit and I believe my shit

[heraldofdragons]

12 hours ago, TMIFairy said:

16 hours ago, Pikachu101 said:

@heraldofdragons 

But why would he even need to annul the marriage? The third head was meant to be Visenya so her legitimacy doesn't really matter because it was the original Rhaenys' line who continued the dynasty so as far as Rhaegar's concerned this time around wouldn't be any different. 

As for OP I think there's certain rules and regulations for an annulment:

1. The marriage was never consumated
2. The High Septon grants an annulment 

2 - clutching at straws, eh?

But as no kittens were harmed in the writing of our posts - all's good and well

You believe your shit and I believe my shit

tbh annulment isn't a hill i'm willing to die on. this is just me trying to prepare myself for disappointment

[Lady Blizzardborn]

Don't know for sure about Westeros but in general annulment does not remove the legitimacy of children born during the marriage.

[The Sleeper]

I think Martin has made it pretty clear that issues of lawfulness are more or less like arguments in this board.

That said even if Rhaegar and Lyanna were married there are more than a couple of issues. There are no living witnesses, for one thing and testimony via weirwood is unlikely to count. Neither had the permission of their fathers. Also while other Targaryens took multiple wives, they were kings when they did it. Rhaegar was heir apparent, which is not quite the same thing.

[TMIFairy]

5 minutes ago, The Sleeper said:

That said even if Rhaegar and Lyanna were married there are more than a couple of issues. There are no living witnesses, for one thing and testimony via weirwood is unlikely to count.

LOL!

You made my day, dude!

[returns to work giggling like a loon]

[Pikachu101]

20 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Rhaegar would have never gotten an annulment in the books without the king's permission. And chances are about zero that Aerys would have supported his son in this considering that the king was essentially fearing that his son was preparing to betray and depose him.

Exactly, one of the reasons why Aerys married him off to Elia was because Dorne wasn't as powerful as other kingdoms. Lyanna on the other hand would have the North, the Riverlands, and possibly the Vale behind her; if Rhaegar ever wanted to overthrow Aerys he'd be in the perfect position to do so. 

 

[TMIFairy]

On 29.08.2017 at 11:05 AM, Pikachu101 said:

Exactly, one of the reasons why Aerys married him off to Elia was because Dorne wasn't as powerful as other kingdoms. Lyanna on the other hand would have the North, the Riverlands, and possibly the Vale behind her; if Rhaegar ever wanted to overthrow Aerys he'd be in the perfect position to do so.

Stormlands too. Bob was BFF with Ned.

[Ice Walker]

I guess that's what Renly tried when he attempted to get Robert married to Margaery.

[Pikachu101]

4 hours ago, TMIFairy said:

Stormlands too. Bob was BFF with Ned.

idk Rhaegar did marry Robert's fiancee 

[TMIFairy]

12 minutes ago, Pikachu101 said:

idk Rhaegar did marry Robert's fiancee 

I was thinking about a "Lyanna gets betrothed to Rheagar instead of Elia and before she got betrothed to the Randy Stag" scenario.

But never mind