Jump to content
Alyn Oakenfist

Why didn't Tyrion consummate his marriage with Sansa?

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Nagini's Neville said:

I only ever had a big problem with how he behaves on their wedding night. 

 

You are a harsh and unreasonable judge. Tyrion wanted to consummate the marriage at first, but for obvious reasons, which included the discomfort of his young wife, he didn't. Yet still you condemn him for it. Have you yourself never physically or even materialistically wanted something but, since you try to be a good person as best you can, denied yourself that thing? Sometimes I don't feel like playing a game with my brother or watching cartoons with him since neither of those things is very stimulating for me. However I often still do it for his sake. Now obviously I'm not marrying him or sleeping with him, this isn't King's Landing, but you get the point.

By wanting Sansa or wanting her to love him he isn't doing wrong. I name you a liar if you deny that you have ever wanted something you shouldn't or enjoyed something you shouldn't. The test is, whether you have the self control and empathy to recognize when you would be crossing the line and stopped yourself. 

Also, something that has come up before and should be addressed again here: there is nothing abnormal about Tyrion's physical attraction to Sansa. She is far enough into puberty that she can apparently safely bear children. Male physiology has evolved to recognize this. Marriage to young women who have reached the point in their physical development that they can bear children, and the subsequent bearing of those children has been the norm for most of human history and still practiced throughout the world to this day. Even modern day Europe has the age of consent in many countries at 14 or 15, which is not much older than Sansa is. It is absolutely the norm in Tyrion's culture and experience. The biology says it is a fully functional way to do things. Wasn't even that long ago in the West that people were marrying that young and raising families that way. If you think Tyrion is a pedophile then you are using a very liberal and imprecise definition of that term, which is unwise. 

Have you ever noticed how our culture, even to this day, always shows teenage women as sex objects? Why do so many horror movies center around high school kids? Why do we make musicals or raunchy comedies about them? Why are Ariel in the Little Mermaid, or Snow White, or Cinderella, or Sophie Turner as Sansa Stark in the TV show, presented as desirable or created to be attractive or desirable in their respective stories? The reason is because it works and its instinctual and speaks to our biology and our own experience of puberty and subsequent sexual awakening. 

...and no, if Ser Loras was replacing Tyrion and he was also understanding and gentle with her I don't think Sansa would mind as much if at all. In fact, she was quite eager to marry him or even Willas Tyrell. It is a well known fact that people are generally much more forgiving and much more eager to spend time with attractive people as opposed to ugly ones. Even another Lannister would probably be a lot more bearable for Sansa if he was handsome and charming. One thing we can say about Sansa is that she is a, somewhat, shallow person in how she judges others. At least in her first impressions she looks down her nose or assumes the worst about ugly people or people of lower status. Probably a running theme in her story that she meets ugly people, is afraid of or hates them, and then learns they are more complex than she thought and might even be more virtuous than the beautiful devils she is so often tormented by. 

Ins't it notable that in Sansa's chapter about the wedding night the text says that pity is the death of desire? That implies things. Uncomfortable things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I'm in agreement that it is not the norm. I said it seems to be on the young side of acceptable. I went through the Stark lineage in aWoIaF & looked up the ages at which these women were married, there's very little information on most of them but of note:

Gilliane Glover born approx 96 A.C. died approx 109 A.C. (at 13) and gave birth to 2 sons before that so had to be married at approximately 11-12 years old depending on when exactly she was born.

The actual birth year and year of death of Gilliane Glover is unknown. The wiki states "in or before 96 AC" as well as "in or after 109 AC", which is entirely different from "approximately 96 AC" and "approximately 109 AC". So, Gillian may have been born in 92 AC just as well, or earlier.

Here's the "motivational choice" of those years: https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Years_after_Aegon's_Conquest/Calculations_Ages_(Continued)#Gilliane_Glover

All they have on Gilliane is that her eldest son was born in 108 AC and that she had 2 sons. They have no birth year for Gilliane nor a date of death. The wiki simply backtracked to the latest possible birth date of Gilliane based on the wiki's general policy that any parent named must have at least been 12 when birthing their first child. So, using Gilliane's hypothesised dates of birth and death to prove that child brides are not uncommon is circular evidence. The wiki uses the lowest age denominator on the rare examples when a girl is wed at such a young age for anyone's minimal age estimation (boy or girl).

Since Gilliane had two sons, and they weren't twins (eldest son, implies the second is younger), Gilliane must have birthed the second son at the very earliest in 109 AC. But she may have lived for 50 years more for all we know.

Quote

Marna Locke born approximately 236 A.C. with the birth of her first child approximately 249 A.C. at age 13 so presumably married at approximately 12 years old. 

Same thing as with Gilliane Glover:

https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Years_after_Aegon's_Conquest/Calculations_Ages_(Continued2)#Marna_Locke

So, not "approximately" but "in or before" and "in or after". Intentionally or not, you are posting misinformation about these two women.

Quote

This is only two examples but it was only out of 4 that I could find any info on in the Stark Lineage (barring Catelyn) so I just don't think we can say it's outside of acceptable. 

They are not examples, as it's not stated whatsoever that they were in fact 13.

Quote

I would be interested in reading where it says being married requires the consent of an adult party to the marriage if thats what you mean. I'm under the impression that the adult giving consent would be the father or guardian of the person being married, since Tywin didn't give his for Tyrion, the marriage was able to be removed. 

No, I meant that those who say the vows must be of consenting age.

  • a vow given under swordpoint is not considered to be a valid vow as the consent cannot be consent.
  • the vows require a pledge to be said by each person before they are proclaimed married. In order to pledge one must be able to consent, and thus be in a legal position and age to consent. It's not a pledge between a bride's father and the groom, but the bride and groom. Considering a flowered girl a grown woman is the loophole used in Westeros to circumvent it.
  • Yes, Tywin uses his son being underage to argue the marriage with Tysha null and void. Even if he argued that his underage son required his guardian's consent, then he's using the fact that Tyrion was not an adult as an argument that even if Tyrion willingly and voluntarily pledged, he was not in the ability to do so.
  • So, combine the vows having to be said by bride and groom, making it a contract between them alone, but if they are under age requiring a guardian, we thus require a legal guardian who is used to indicate the bride or groom is adult enough to give their consent. If it counts for boys, this also counts for girls. With Sansa, they try to get around this by having Joffrey as Sansa's guardian, but Joffrey himself was not of legal age either, since he had a regent. Sansa thus has many venues to call for her marriage to be annulled - she was under age, she had no legal adult guardian who could attest for her ability to pledge and consent, the "guardian" who gave her away himself was under age, she was a hostage surrounded by enemies and there was no consummation, her husband had proven himself false by swearing before gods and court he would return her to her mother only to wed her instead with the wedding being performed by Tyrion's own appointed high septon (whom Cersei later had killed).
Quote

I don't disagree that the marriage & consummation practices are horrific & barbaric, what I disagree with is that only the Targ's & Tywin do it. I believe there is precedence set for a girl who is flowered, regardless of her age, to be married & that marriage to be consummated. It certainly doesn't seem to be illegal by westerosi standards & law.

Here's George's SSM of 1999 on the rarity of it: https://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Age_of_Sexual_Relations_in_Westeros

Basically it comes down to girls being in a grey-area of adulthood after they've flowered, and amongst highborn they may end up being wedded while under age, but many men will wait until they are 15 and 16, for survival reasons. And of course, because most marriages, even if ordained by duty to family for political and estate reasons, are performed between families who wish to form an alliance and thus the groom better not make his in-laws his enemies. Only rarely are girls forced to wed their enemy, let alone without their family consenting to it.

Edited by sweetsunray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Sourjapes said:

She is far enough into puberty that she can apparently safely bear children. Male physiology has evolved to recognize this. Marriage to young women who have reached the point in their physical development that they can bear children, and the subsequent bearing of those children has been the norm for most of human history and still practiced throughout the world to this day. Even modern day Europe has the age of consent in many countries at 14 or 15, which is not much older than Sansa is. It is absolutely the norm in Tyrion's culture and experience. The biology says it is a fully functional way to do things. Wasn't even that long ago in the West that people were marrying that young and raising families that way. If you think Tyrion is a pedophile then you are using a very liberal and imprecise definition of that term, which is unwise.

Just have gotten your period is not well into puberty. And even today getting pregnant with 12-13 is not healthy and dangerous for mother and child. In the Middle Ages they did not marry that early. Because of the many deaths in childbed also not because they hit puberty on average 2 years later.

@sweetsunray has provided an excellent link, where GRRM said himself that it wasn't normal to bed a child so young and that the husband would usually wait until the girl was 15-16

https://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Age_of_Sexual_Relations_in_Westeros

26 minutes ago, Sourjapes said:

Have you ever noticed how our culture, even to this day, always shows teenage women as sex objects? Why do so many horror movies center around high school kids? Why do we make musicals or raunchy comedies about them? Why are Ariel in the Little Mermaid, or Snow White, or Cinderella, or Sophie Turner as Sansa Stark in the TV show, presented as desirable or created to be attractive or desirable in their respective stories? The reason is because it works and its instinctual and speaks to our biology and our own experience of puberty and subsequent sexual awakening. 

Well maybe because those movies are for other teenagers or even children Ariel in the Little Mermaid, or Snow White, or Cinderella? And if you feel mostly attacked to teenagers I really can't do anything about that. I guess that's your thing to figure out, but Sansa is not even a teenager yet. She is just 12.

30 minutes ago, Sourjapes said:

...and no, if Ser Loras was replacing Tyrion and he was also understanding and gentle with her I don't think Sansa would mind as much if at all. In fact, she was quite eager to marry him or even Willas Tyrell. It is a well known fact that people are generally much more forgiving and much more eager to spend time with attractive people as opposed to ugly ones. Even another Lannister would probably be a lot more bearable for Sansa if he was handsome and charming. One thing we can say about Sansa is that she is a, somewhat, shallow person in how she judges others. At least in her first impressions she looks down her nose or assumes the worst about ugly people or people of lower status. Probably a running theme in her story that she meets ugly people, is afraid of or hates them, and then learns they are more complex than she thought and might even be more virtuous than the beautiful devils she is so often tormented by. 

GRRM has written her very age appropriate. She is a normal 12 year old girl, the most she has done, when it comes to sex is imagining kissing Loras. She hasn't even kissed a boy. That is a very normal little girl thing to do. Most 12-13 year olds are not ready for sex yet. So no, I don't think she would have been ready to sleep with any boy or man not even Loras. 

37 minutes ago, Sourjapes said:

ns't it notable that in Sansa's chapter about the wedding night the text says that pity is the death of desire? That implies things. Uncomfortable things. 

In the Middle Ages people perceived the outside to be reflective of the inside. That is not Sansa specifically, but just the mindset of the society back then. That's why Tyrion is so hated by everyone. The gods must hate him, if they created him like that. therefore he must be evil on the inside. GRRM speaks about it himself at 8:19

 

That's why she is afraid to look at Sandor, because his scary outside is reflection of his inside in this society and to her credit his inside is actually dangerous too. But she never thought badly of Tyrion, she always thought him kind. And when Tyrion offered to her to marry Lancel, who is attractive, she declined, because the main reason she doesn't want to marry Tyrion is not because he is a dwarf, but because he is a Lannister. 

"If I had refused you, however, they would have wed you to my cousin Lancel. Perhaps you would prefer that. He is nearer your age, and fairer to look upon. If that is your wish, say so, and I will end this farce.” I don’t want any Lannister,"

I mean it is not unusual, that you don't want to marry into the family, that murdered yours and want to use your body to inherit their lands and estate. 

"pity is the death of desire" just means she isn't attracted to him, as is her right and probably never will be. I'm sure there are a lot of people you aren't attracted to as well and never will be. It's a human thing, I've heard :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

The actual birth year and year of death of Gilliane Glover is unknown. The wiki states "in or before 96 AC" as well as "in or after 109 AC", which is entirely different from "approximately 96 AC" and "approximately 109 AC". So, Gillian may have been born in 92 AC just as well, or earlier

Sure, it could have been 92 A.C. but given the information of the time it is calculated to be about 96 A.C. Whether that was the actual date or not doesn't matter much because the date presented as such is based on the fact that women flower around 12 years of age (just like Sansa) and are married & able to start having children shortly after. That's representing this as an acceptable thing in universe. 

59 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

So, not "approximately" but "in or before" and "in or after". Intentionally or not, you are posting misinformation about these two women

I don't see a whole lot of difference between "approximately" & "in or after" in this context. The calculations are based on things known about the universe & the norms of society. That these women are approximately 12 when married are educated guesses & as close to the truth as can be done so approximately fits IMO.

Again, my claim is that a 12, going on 13 year old being married & having that marriage consummated within that time is not unacceptable or unheard of. If there is a range of ages that is considered the "norm" Sansas age may fall on the young side of that but I've seen nothing presented to back the claims that this is outside of what is acceptable or that it's only done by Tywin & the Targs. 

59 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

No, I meant that those who say the vows must be of consenting age.

But they don't, we have seen people younger than 15 married legally in Westeros. Possibly because their parent or guardian are of age & consenting for them. But those saying the vows clearly do not have to be an adult (16 in universe)

59 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

the vows require a pledge to be said by each person before they are proclaimed married. In order to pledge one must be able to consent, and thus be in a legal position and age to consent. It's not a pledge between a bride's father and the groom, but the bride and groom. Considering a flowered girl a grown woman is the loophole used in Westeros to circumvent it

It isn't a loop hole it's just what they think. They think a flowered girl is a 'woman' irt marriage & consummation. 

I'm right there with you irt these laws & practices being abhorrent, I'm just saying it's done & not once or twice but enough times for it to not be considered outside of acceptable. 

59 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Yes, Tywin uses his son being underage to argue the marriage with Tysha null and void. Even if he argued that his underage son required his guardian's consent, then he's using the fact that Tyrion was not an adult as an argument that even if Tyrion willingly and voluntarily pledged, he was not in the ability to do so.

Is this stated? I mean I think it's likely but I don't remember the grounds being said on which Tywin had the marriage annulled. I'll look for it after I type this. 

Anyway, that's what I'm saying. If someone under the age of 16 can be legally married (and they can because we see it happen) but it is also true that someone under the age of 16 cannot consent to the marriage (I'm unsure about this but it's possible) then the only way around it is to say that the persons parent or guardian is giving consent for the minor to be married right?

59 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

So, combine the vows having to be said by bride and groom, making it a contract between them alone, but if they are under age requiring a guardian, we thus require a legal guardian who is used to indicate the bride or groom is adult enough to give their consent. If it counts for boys, this also counts for girls

I'm following you so far. Makes sense. 

The only thing I would note is it isn't always the case that what is true for boys is also true for girls. It's a very misogynistic society & they likely wouldn't take much issue with making separate rules for the both of them. I don't know that is the case, I'm just speculating. 

59 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

With Sansa, they try to get around this by having Joffrey as Sansa's guardian, but Joffrey himself was not of legal age either, since he had a regent. Sansa thus has many venues to call for her marriage to be annulled

I don't know if it matters that Joff is underage because he is the King, but yeah Sansa likely has numerous avenues by which to get this marriage annulled when/if someone other than a Lannister is in power, first & foremost being she was given absolutely no choice in the matter & threatened with violence to go along with it. 

59 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

she was under age, she had no legal adult guardian who could attest for her ability to pledge and consent, the "guardian" who gave her away himself was under age, she was a hostage surrounded by enemies and there was no consummation

The King is her 'legal' guardian according to the powers that be currently & I doubt any of the Lannisters or anyone other than a Stark supporter or Stark themself sitting on the throne are going to care much that Joff wasn't of legal age himself, he is the King. His word is law. But it's certainly done by deceit & anyone that looked objectively at the situation, with the power to do so, would likely annul the marriage. At least I would hope so. 

1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

her husband had proven himself false by swearing before gods and court he would return her to her mother only to wed her instead with the wedding being performed by Tyrion's own appointed high septon (whom Cersei later had killed

Why would her husband breaking a vow be grounds for an annulment? I wouldn't think that would have much to do with it. She is, for all intents & purposes, a hostage, regardless of how the Lannisters paint it & they are likely the only ones to think this way (if they really even do) she was forced by threat of violence to take these marriage vows (although I'm not sure how that works, is you father allowed to force you to marry? I think so, so operating under the assumption she is a ward of the court, Joffrey can force her to marry too) the wedding wasn't consummated, the King is not actually the previous Kings heir but a bastard born of incest, her husband is a convicted kinslayer & kingslayer. She has ample ground to get an annulment under a fair crown - she just doesn't have a fair crown at the moment. 

1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

Basically it comes down to girls being in a grey-area of adulthood after they've flowered, and amongst highborn they may end up being wedded while under age, but many men will wait until they are 15 and 16, for survival reasons. And of course, because most marriages, even if ordained by duty to family for political and estate reasons, are performed between families who wish to form an alliance and thus the groom better not make his in-laws his enemies. Only rarely are girls forced to wed their enemy, let alone without their family consenting to it

I don't disagree with any of this. The assertion I disagree with is that it's not done or it's not legal (wedding & bedding a 12-13 year old) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Maidens may be wedded and bedded... however, even there, many husbands will wait until the bride is fifteen or sixteen before sleeping with them. Very young mothers tend to have significantly higher rates of death in childbirth, which the maesters will have noted.

 that's from SSM from @sweetsunray's link. It was probably not illegal, since the minimum legal marriage age in the Middle Ages was 12. But it was not the norm to marry a girl so early and if it happened usually the husbands would wait with the consummation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Yeah I agree mostly. The only place I would differ is in that it is definitely selfish & self-centered to put your own needs above a helpless abuse victim but to me "cruel" implies there is some intent to harm the person & I don't think he had that. 

Oh absolutely. It's not Sansa's fault he is hurt by this in the slightest. He set himself up for failure here. It's a pattern of his in a way. He does take care to avoid being hurt by Shae initially but then later allows him self to entertain the idea that Shae isn't just his "whore" & that she may actually care for him, effectively setting himself up to be hurt again.

No, no I agree. Then cruel is not the right word. You are the english speaker :D Tbh I think I've been using cruel a bit wrong. When I translate it, it doesn't really fit anymore. lol So my bad. I guess it's infuriating. At least for me. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I don't see a whole lot of difference between "approximately" & "in or after" in this context. The calculations are based on things known about the universe & the norms of society

We seldom disagree, but this is one such instance. I think there's a very big difference between "approximately" and "in or earlier/later". Because I think the wiki does calculations of this type using what actual info they have to establish which is the earliest/latest year possible in each case. So "in or before" could be a decade earlier, which would make a very big difference. But I could be wrong and that's not how they do it. Maybe @Nittanian or @Rhaenys_Targaryen can clarify the issue for us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

 

A boy is Westeros is considered to be a "man grown" at sixteen years. The same is true for girls. Sixteen is the age of legal majority, as twenty-one is for us.

However, for girls, the first flowering is also very significant... and in older traditions, a girl who has flowered is a woman, fit for both wedding and bedding.

A girl who has flowered, but not yet attained her sixteenth name day, is in a somewhat ambigious position: part child, part woman. A "maid," in other words. Fertile but innocent, beloved of the singers.

In the "general Westerosi view," well, girls may well be wed before their first flowerings, for political reasons, but it would considered perverse to bed them. And such early weddings, even without sex, remain rare. Generally weddings are postponed until the bride has passed from girlhood to maidenhood.

Maidens may be wedded and bedded... however, even there, many husbands will wait until the bride is fifteen or sixteen before sleeping with them. Very young mothers tend to have significantly higher rates of death in childbirth, which the maesters will have noted.

As in the real Middle Ages, highborn girls tend to flower significantly earlier than those of lower birth. Probably a matter of nutrition. As a result, they also tend to marry earlier, and to bear children earlier.

There are plenty of exceptions

 

A couple things to note here I think. First & foremost that there is no age restriction noted. 

A girl who has flowered is fit for wedding & bedding, in older cultures, which Westeros is based on. 

Sansa has flowered, thus is fit for wedding & bedding in universe. 

A girl who is flowered but is not 16 yet is a maid, part woman, part child & beloved of the singers. 

So Sansa is a maid & maids are desirable in this culture. 

Girls may be married before being flowered but it is rare. Bedding them would be considered perverse. 

It follows that bedding them after they have flowered would not be considered perverse. Nothing of what age they may have flowered at. Also, rarely girls are married prior to their flowering making Sansa being married after her flowering not considered too young to be married by any stretch of the imagination. 

Generally, marriage is postponed until after the girl has flowered, putting Sansa's marriage inside the "general" & not outside the norms. 

Maidens may be wedded & bedded. Sansa is a maiden & may be wedded & bedded in this culture. Nothing of it being rare or perverse or outside of what generally happens - HOWEVER many men will wait until they are 15 or 16 to bed them. Many, not all, not most, not generally speaking. 

Also of note the reason why many men choose to wait - not because they become an adult at 16, because they wait until 15 or 16, not because it is perverse to do it sooner, but because it can harm their chances of getting an heir & harm the maid herself. 

High born girls tend to flower significantly younger than low born girls, possibly due to nutrition = highborn girls would tend to be of an age to be wedded & bedded at a significantly younger age than a low born girl. Sansa is indeed highborn. 

There are plenty of exceptions. Plenty, not a few, not rarely, plenty. 

This article seems to back the claim that Sansa is considered old enough to be wedded & bedded & contradict the claim that she is too young or that this is very rare or outside of norms. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

We seldom disagree, but this is one such instance. I think there's a very big difference between "approximately" and "in or earlier/later". Because I think the wiki does calculations of this type using what actual info they have to establish which is the earliest/latest year possible in each case. So "in or before" could be a decade earlier, which would make a very big difference. But I could be wrong and that's not how they do it. Maybe @Nittanian or @Rhaenys_Targaryen can clarify the issue for us. 

You may be right. I wasn't trying to post misleading information though, just noting that it seems to happen. I operated under the assumption that these ages are given to the best of the calculators ability giving the information at hand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Sure, it could have been 92 A.C. but given the information of the time it is calculated to be about 96 A.C. Whether that was the actual date or not doesn't matter much because the date presented as such is based on the fact that women flower around 12 years of age (just like Sansa) and are married & able to start having children shortly after. That's representing this as an acceptable thing in universe.

No, I gave you the link of what is "acceptable in universe" - wait until they're 15-16 to consummate.

The Wiki is using the lowest possible age per example in the books. They explain that very clearly in their general age estimation. It doesn't mean it's an "acceptable thing in universe". We have examples where girls were wed and raped at 12. Nobody disputes that. But it's not the norm or normal or "accepted". It happens. And because it happens, to be safe, the Wiki cannot wit confidence claim that this or that historical character was 15 or 16 when they became a parent. All they can say is that the parent must have been at least 12 or 13.

So, no the wiki definitely does not word their calculation of the birth year of Gilliane to be about 96 AC.

https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Years_after_Aegon's_Conquest/Calculations_Ages_(Continued)#Gilliane_Glover

 

Quote

 

Gilliane Glover

Birth

Gilliane Glover's eldest child, Cregan Stark, was born in 108 AC (See Cregan Stark). Gilliane would have been at least twelve years old at Cregan's birth, placing her birth no later than 96 AC.

No further specifications can be given. Gilliane was thus born in or before 96 AC.

Death

Gilliane Glover had two sons.[29][46] Her eldest son was born in 108 AC, indicating that her second son could not have been born any earlier than 109 AC. As such, Gilliane could not have died any earlier than 109 AC.

No further specifications can be given. Gilliane thus died in or after 109 AC.

 

How the hell you can conclude "approximately" or "about" from those words is utterly beyond me. It should have been very clear in the case of your other example since their estimate is that she was born "before or in 236 AC", and died "in or after 230 AC". So, you're "about" or "approximately" certainly doesn't work with her: "born approximately in 236 AC, died approximately in 230 AC" doesn't really work, does it? I notice that for Rickard Stark's mother you refrained from mentioning the "approximate death year", maybe because it ruined the assertion you tried to make about them? 

Quote

I don't see a whole lot of difference between "approximately" & "in or after" in this context. The calculations are based on things known about the universe & the norms of society. That these women are approximately 12 when married are educated guesses & as close to the truth as can be done so approximately fits IMO.

No, the wiki does not state these women are approximately 12 when married, but that they must at least have been 12.

Quote

Again, my claim is that a 12, going on 13 year old being married & having that marriage consummated within that time is not unacceptable or unheard of.

 

Quote

If there is a range of ages that is considered the "norm" Sansas age may fall on the young side of that but I've seen nothing presented to back the claims that this is outside of what is acceptable or that it's only done by Tywin & the Targs. 

From the link to GRRM's SSM about this subject.

Quote

 

A boy is Westeros is considered to be a "man grown" at sixteen years. The same is true for girls. Sixteen is the age of legal majority, as twenty-one is for us.

However, for girls, the first flowering is also very significant... and in older traditions, a girl who has flowered is a woman, fit for both wedding and bedding.

A girl who has flowered, but not yet attained her sixteenth name day, is in a somewhat ambigious position: part child, part woman. A "maid," in other words. Fertile but innocent, beloved of the singers.

In the "general Westerosi view," well, girls may well be wed before their first flowerings, for political reasons, but it would considered perverse to bed them. And such early weddings, even without sex, remain rare. Generally weddings are postponed until the bride has passed from girlhood to maidenhood.

Maidens may be wedded and bedded... however, even there, many husbands will wait until the bride is fifteen or sixteen before sleeping with them. Very young mothers tend to have significantly higher rates of death in childbirth, which the maesters will have noted.

 

Quote

Why would her husband breaking a vow be grounds for an annulment? I wouldn't think that would have much to do with it.

It shows that his pledges and vows are "wind".

Quote

The assertion I disagree with is that it's not done or it's not legal (wedding & bedding a 12-13 year old) 

I never said it was "not done" but rare, an exception, not the "norm" or "normal" as some people try to argue to defend Tyrion with "it's culture, it's normal...." No, it's not. It's rare, because most families don't want to risk their 12 year old to die in childbirth, nor would their in-laws. Only fathers like Unwyn Peake use their daughters as machiavellan tools in such a callous way.

Pretty certain that church doctrine would have something to say about it, otherwise there would be no need for vows between bride and groom and in case of minors for a guardian to consent to a minor pledging him or herself. Of course, as long as nobody protests, the (corrupt) septons can keep their eyes and ears shut to it.

The only region where a vow between bride and groom is not warranted is with the Ironborn, where someone can be wed to someone else by proxy, which shouldn't be surprising given the fact they take thralls and salt wives.

Edited by sweetsunray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

No, I gave you the link of what is "acceptable in universe" - wait until they're 15-16 to consummate

That is not what the link says. It says many men wait until she is 15-16. It also says when a girl is flowered she is considered fit for bedding. 

1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

The Wiki is using the lowest possible age per example in the books. They explain that very clearly in their general age estimation. It doesn't mean it's an "acceptable thing in universe".

Yeah I didn't read it very closely the first time but the SSM you posted makes it pretty clear if she is flowered she can be bed. 

1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

before or in 236 AC", and died "in or after 230 AC". So, you're "about" or "approximately" certainly doesn't work with her: "born approximately in 236 AC, died approximately in 230 AC" doesn't really work, does it? I notice that for Rickard Stark's mother you refrained from mentioning the "approximate death year", maybe because it ruined the assertion you tried to make about them?

Clearly that's a typo. I went to the calculation page that said the date I put. I don't know what the death date for Rickard Starks mother was, so no I didn't leave it out because it ruined any assertion I was making. It wouldn't ruin it anyway as the assertion I was making is: it is done. Showing an instance where it was not done doesn't do anything to the assertion that it is done. 

What evidence do you have that it is rare? Your own link says otherwise. 

1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

a girl who has flowered is a woman, fit for both wedding and bedding.

Why did you not highlight this part? Because it didn't fit your assertion? 

1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

In the "general Westerosi view," well, girls may well be wed before their first flowerings, for political reasons, but it would considered perverse to bed them. And such early weddings, even without sex, remain rare. Generally weddings are postponed until the bride has passed from girlhood to maidenhood.

Again you highlighted the portion that fits your assertion but some of this has  nothing to do with Sansa. It would be considered perverse to bed them before their first flowering = it isn't perverse to bed them after. Generally the wedding waits until the girl passes into maidenhood. How/when does that happen? According to George: 

A girl who has flowered but not yet attained her 16th name day... A maid in other words. 

1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

It shows that his pledges and vows are "wind

& Where does it say his pledges & vows being "wind" is grounds for annulment? 

1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

never said it was "not done" but rare, an exception, not the "norm" or "normal" as some people try to argue to defend Tyrion with "it's culture, it's normal...." No, it's not.

Except the SSM you posted said it is normal. There is nothing in Sansa's wedding & bedding outside of normal irt her age. The things you quoted from it either don't pertain because they are talking about before a girl has flowered or they state that after the flowering she is fit to wed & bed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kissdbyfire said:

We seldom disagree, but this is one such instance. I think there's a very big difference between "approximately" and "in or earlier/later". Because I think the wiki does calculations of this type using what actual info they have to establish which is the earliest/latest year possible in each case. So "in or before" could be a decade earlier, which would make a very big difference. But I could be wrong and that's not how they do it. Maybe @Nittanian or @Rhaenys_Targaryen can clarify the issue for us. 

 

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

You may be right. I wasn't trying to post misleading information though, just noting that it seems to happen. I operated under the assumption that these ages are given to the best of the calculators ability giving the information at hand. 

 

1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

No, I gave you the link of what is "acceptable in universe" - wait until they're 15-16 to consummate.

The Wiki is using the lowest possible age per example in the books. They explain that very clearly in their general age estimation. It doesn't mean it's an "acceptable thing in universe". We have examples where girls were wed and raped at 12. Nobody disputes that. But it's not the norm or normal or "accepted". It happens. And because it happens, to be safe, the Wiki cannot wit confidence claim that this or that historical character was 15 or 16 when they became a parent. All they can say is that the parent must have been at least 12 or 13.

So, no the wiki definitely does not word their calculation of the birth year of Gilliane to be about 96 AC.

https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Years_after_Aegon's_Conquest/Calculations_Ages_(Continued)#Gilliane_Glover

Absolutely, the calculation of Gilliane Glover only demonstrates that she could not have been born any later than 96 AC. But there's nothing "approximately" about it. She would have been at least twelve years old at the birth of her eldest son, who was born in 108 AC. But she could have been much older than that at Cregan's birth - 16, 20, 24 etc. There's no way to tell. The only thing we can say with quite a bit of certainty is that she could not have been younger than 12 at the birth of Cregan, as Martin has stated that most highborn girls have their first flowering (i.e. start of their fertile period) at the age of "twelve or thirteen".

In addition, she must have lived at least until 109 AC, in order to give birth to her second child (as her eldest was born in 108 AC). However, this does not eliminate the possibility that she lived until the age of sixty, seventy, or even beyond. It's just that we cannot say anything about that, other than that she must have lived long enough to give birth to all of her children.

 

Important to note is this:

In the "general Westerosi view," well, girls may well be wed before their first flowerings, for political reasons, but it would considered perverse to bed them. And such early weddings, even without sex, remain rare. Generally weddings are postponed until the bride has passed from girlhood to maidenhood.

Maidens may be wedded and bedded... however, even there, many husbands will wait until the bride is fifteen or sixteen before sleeping with them. Very young mothers tend to have significantly higher rates of death in childbirth, which the maesters will have noted.

 

Even if a girl is married at an earlier age, often, the husband will wait until his bride is a bit older than her minimal fertile age. The younger the mother, the higher the rates in death in childbed.

Sansa's case, however, is a bit more difficult. A marriage that has not yet been consummated is easier to set aside, and that is the one thing that Tywin wishes to prevent. In order to make the marriage as legally binding that no one can end it (without killing Tyrion), Tyrion and Sansa have to consummate their marriage. But even Tywin shows that it would not be out of the ordinary for Tyrion not to sleep with Sansa again until she is a few years older.

 

"Your sister swears she's flowered. If so, she is a woman, fit to be wed. You must needs take her maidenhead, so no man can say the marriage was not consummated. After that, if you prefer to wait a year or two before bedding her again, you would be within your rights as her husband."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Except the SSM you posted said it is normal. There is nothing in Sansa's wedding & bedding outside of normal irt her age. The things you quoted from it either don't pertain because they are talking about before a girl has flowered or they state that after the flowering she is fit to wed & bed. 

THe SSM I posted says that many men will wait until their flowered wives are 15-16, as well as the reason why: maesters would have long noted that bearing children at a younger age is deadlier.

I don't highlight what I don't contest. I did not say that wedding minors amongst nobility and flowered maids is necessarily rare, though not necessarily common either. I said that bedding them is rare. When many men will wait until their wives are 15-16, then that implies few men bed their wives at a younger age. George also explicitly stated why that is.

And as far as the examples we have in the books of 12 year olds being wedded AND bedded, we have Targs who are unconcerned about their daughters' well being (forced to wed a brother they don't want and raped by him), this farce of a forced marriage with Sansa who luckily wasn't bedded, one of Unwyn Peake's daughter who did die at 12 from childbirth (and Unwyn Peake is a villain like Tywin), and Jeyne Poole at 13-14 raped by Ramsay (another villain especially towards women and girls).

But sure, it's "accepted" and "normal" and "Westerosi culture"... NOT. Since when are psychopaths the denominator of what's normal?

Edited by sweetsunray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sansa's age - I think it is clear that Sansa is of marriageable age in universe.  Just because something is unusual and/or discouraged does not mean that it is prohibited or unknown, especially if countervailing forces are present, such as financial or political considerations.  For example, irl, Margaret Beaufort became pregnant with the future King Henry VII, whose coronation ended the Wars of the Roses, shortly before she turned 13 (same age as Sansa!).  Her husband needed a child for inheritance purposes, hence the early consummation and pregnancy (not that it did him any good; he died before Henry was born).  Margaret suffered complications resulting in inability to have future children, thus validating the discouragement of such.   In Sansa's case, Tywin needs to get her off the marriage market immediately, hence the early marriage.  Otherwise, I've no doubt he would have waited.

Legality - Sansa is considered a ward of the Crown.  Either Joffrey, as King, or Cersei, as regent, can act in this capacity.   As for Joffrey being illegitimate, nobody believes it, or cares much if they do.

It is possible, I suppose, that she could get the marriage annulled on grounds of force,etc. in the North, though I don't know.  It seems that annulments are the province of the Faith, which can do as it pleases, I suppose.  My guess is that they would likely refuse to annul on those grounds, as she gave apparent assent at the ceremony.

Winterfell - Any claim that Tyrion can make on WF is quite speculative, even without Robb's Will.  If the Northerners refuse to accept Sansa and himself as legitimate claimants, there is little they can really do.  The North is too big, spread out,and obstreperous to rule by pure force.  I think Tywin mentioned it more as a sop to Tyrion's pride than anything else.  Tywin's main concern is ensuring nobody else gets it, at least not through Sansa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

THe SSM I posted says that many men will wait until their flowered wives are 15-16, as well as the reason why: maesters would have long noted that bearing children at a younger age is deadlier.

Which does not equal Sansa being wedded & bedded after her first flowering is rare. Many is not most or all or generally speaking. Many is many. 

There were other quotes stating that a flowered girl is fit to be wed & bed. That does not mean it's rare to bed a girl who has flowered at 12 or 13 or any age. 

5 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

don't highlight what I don't contest. I did not say that wedding minors amongst nobility and flowered maids is necessarily rare, though not necessarily common either. I said that bedding them is rare. When many men will wait until their wives are 15-16, then that implies few men bed their wives at a younger age. George also explicitly stated why that is.

I know what you said & I'm saying that SSM says the opposite. They are fit to be bed if they are flowered, it would be considered perverse to bed them before they are flowered. What, in that indicates to you that bedding a flowered maid is rare?

9 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

And as far as the examples we have in the books of 12 year olds being wedded AND bedded, we have Targs who are unconcerned about their daughters' well being, this farce of a forced marriage with Sansa, one of Unwyn Peake's daughter who did die at 12 from childbirth

And how many do we not know at what age they were wedded & bedded? 

10 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Even if a girl is married at an earlier age, often, the husband will wait until his bride is a bit older than her minimal fertile age. The younger the mother, the higher the rates in death in childbed

That is not what it says. It says many men wait. Not men will wait, not it is the norm to wait, not it is rare to not wait. Coupled with the other parts of the SSM that say explicitly a flowered maiden is fit to be wedded & bedded, it isn't perverse to bed after a girl is flowered, it seems that wedding & bedding a girl who is flowered is an acceptable thing in universe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I hadn't seen it discussed before it was brought up briefly in this thread, but it wouldn't surprise me if it had been discussed a lot. 

yes, there are still a lot of ppl, who question every single thing, that has ever happened in every Sansa chapter, because GRRM said the phrase unreliable narrator. Once one poster was dead set, that Sansa had actually kissed LF herself, just because Lysa said so, Sansa had just described it all untruthfully, because of unreliable ways lol

 

4 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Also, he is likely thinking more of himself than he is of Sansa thus the self-pity.

Yeah, that what annoys me so much tbh. 

4 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Oh, it's perverse to me also. It's very perverse, especially with my modern day mindset but if you put it in universe it's never looked at as such. I don't recall a single instance of anyone calling anyone else out because their bride is too young. If she is flowered she is old enough according to them.

Yeah, I guess all us readers see it as perverse anyway. I kinda agree, with what @sweetsunray has posted about that, since this was from the beginning actually my perception as well. 

4 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Here I think it falls in line with what Corbon said earlier. He knows she is a child mentally, he has acknowledged that from the beginning. Then, seeing her naked he realizes child or not she is sexually attractive, has a womanly body. I don't think he was prepared to view her like that, he expected to continue to see her as a child both physically & mentally. Upon seeing her body he realizes, she is a child mentally but physically, I want her - in contrast to earlier when he thought he only needed Shae, she's a woman.

Yeah, well possible. 

5 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

My point being is that I just don't think Tyrion would view things like this. I don't think he would think that because Joff is Jaime & Cersei's & not Robert's that he is an unlawful King who has given an unlawful order. There are likely Targ supporters that insisted until the day Robert died that he was an unlawful King giving unlawful orders but it didn't lessen the power behind his command or change the fact that, unlawfully or no, he was sitting the throne & ruling as King, just like Joff. 

yeah, but at least Robert has defeated them in a war, he didn't just pretend to be someone he isn't. he is a conquerer.

I think Tyrion knows for sure. He also knows Ned told Cersei, that Jon Arryn found out about the incest. With the rest he can put two and two together.

The very least he knows, they killed her father, who she belonged to, on false claims and therefore stolen her unlawfully from her family. I just can't see Sansa willfully taking of her dress, if she knew, she isn't the the rightful ward of Joffrey.

5 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I disagree here. I think he is fishing for her true feelings on the matter but all she will give him is that she is willing to do her duty. 

But aren't her true feelings obvious? Isn't it also a sign, that she won't give him her true feelings, but will only tell I will do my duty. Isn't it obvious, that she would tell him she did, if she really wanted to. Especially after he asks her to.

 

5 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Yeah but we need to remember this is the 3rd time she has asked if she should take her clothes off.

To me that is only an indication, that she tries to do the right thing and that she doesn't want to get personal. Doesn't indicate she wants it.

5 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

who isn't particularly pleased with being married to him, who is willing to do her duty, & who wants to get on with it & get it over with. Because it's Tyrion's duty as well he is proceeding. Sansa is much more appealing physically & that certainly makes things easier for Tyrion (among other reasons it's easier for Tyrion) but he doesn't really want someone to sleep with him out of duty either. 

But as a good person "willing to do her duty" should not be enough for Tyrion in the context IMO.

5 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Yeah, he should have & could have been much more attentive to her being afraid. He is kind of self-centered. I think he thinks because he is afraid too that her being afraid is similar to his being afraid & that isn't the case. Had he thought more about her & her feelings here he would have realized that

that's where I'm trying to get at.

5 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Not truly, no. It's more a matter of if she doesn't know who/what he is & walks in & sees him & gets embarrassed, expresses shock with facial expressions &/or words it is going to hurt his feelings - so really he is doing it to protect himself from her embarrassment.

agreed

5 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Well we disagree on the unlawfully part but yeah he is probably hoping where there is little to hope for. Maybe not beyond hope though, you stated yourself that if Tyrion had gone about things differently on the wedding night Sansa may have come to at least care for him, respect him, trust him, even if she never loved him.

yeah, I borrowed the beyond from you in that context. It didn't have to be hope beyond hope in general. But tbh if I was in her shoes, I don't think I could ever be happy in this situation, especially not when they would actually one day live in WF. But IMO she is a much more kind-hearted person, than I am. But it was hope beyond hope on the wedding night. That was just way to quickly.

6 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Yeah, he should have & could have been much more attentive to her being afraid. He is kind of self-centered. I think he thinks because he is afraid too that her being afraid is similar to his being afraid & that isn't the case. Had he thought more about her & her feelings here he would have realized that

agreed

6 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I think almost the opposite here. He seems to have sympathy for her but not much empathy. He certainly cannot even begin to put himself in her shoes, nor does he try. Like he tries to sympathize with the situation she is in but it doesn't go to the level that he tries to understand how she must truly feel or try to imagine how he would feel in the same situation.

 

agreed

 

I think we mostly agree on everything now :) don't think we can get any closer in opinions.  I'm bit harder on Tyrion, you have a bit more understanding for him- that's fine I think ;)

Maybe the only thing is the age, there I agree more with what ss is saying, since I believe GRRM has modeled that aspect after the real Middle Ages (at least he always references that himself) and then the unlawful part as well.

But I think we did a good job otherwise :D  :cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Which does not equal Sansa being wedded & bedded after her first flowering is rare. Many is not most or all or generally speaking. Many is many. 

There were other quotes stating that a flowered girl is fit to be wed & bed. That does not mean it's rare to bed a girl who has flowered at 12 or 13 or any age. 

I know what you said & I'm saying that SSM says the opposite. They are fit to be bed if they are flowered, it would be considered perverse to bed them before they are flowered. What, in that indicates to you that bedding a flowered maid is rare?

And how many do we not know at what age they were wedded & bedded? 

That is not what it says. It says many men wait. Not men will wait, not it is the norm to wait, not it is rare to not wait. Coupled with the other parts of the SSM that say explicitly a flowered maiden is fit to be wedded & bedded, it isn't perverse to bed after a girl is flowered, it seems that wedding & bedding a girl who is flowered is an acceptable thing in universe. 

Many is "many". You'd be over the moon if George said "many girls of 12 & 13 are bedded". You cannot just pick one statement and ignore all the extra clarifications and stipulations and addendums of George's statements. He added a "however" and then said "many men wait" and why they wait. What he says is a built argument

  • boys and girls are of age at 16.
  • but girls have this in-between grey zone where their bodies have flowered and so they're in this "in besteen stage" of being a child and woman, and these are "maidens". George referred to it as ambiguous, not somethign that is clear-cut.
  • when George uses the phrase "when flowered fit for wedding and bedding" he uses it together with "in older traditions".
  • then he speaks of Westerosi "general" wedding culture. Here he talks that girls can be made to wed before they flowered specifically.
    • It is considered perverse to bed girls before they flowered.
    • These marriages are rare, even if not consummated.
    • Then he stipulates that such matches are generally postponed until the girl has flowered. So his "in general" stipulation applies to the betrothals made for girls so young they haven't flowered yet.
    • He then adds that maidens "may" be wedded and bedded
      • HOWEVER EVEN THERE many men wait until their wives are 15 to 16 before bedding them.

Nothing what he says in that SSM should be looked at separately, and the conclusion that many men will wait is the significant declaration and conclusion of what George says here. Nope, to interprete George's answer here as "it's Westerosi common culture to wed and bed a girl of 12 who flowered" is imo pure denial of what George tries to say here.

Now you can go another round of this, but you have failed to provide evidence it's the norm or common, both with actual examples, whereas we can provide Tyrion's own opinion (it's perverse), Tywin's own recommendation to wait several more years as well as stipulating why he wants Sansa basically raped only at her wedding night (because this is a swordpoint marriage where the risk of annullment is sky high if Sansa ever manages to escape), any of the actual examples where men didn't wait are rapists or the fathers are so warped they want to wed their daughter to her brother (often sickos who don't care for their sisters).  

If you fail to see this we should end with agree to disagree. But you don't have a leg to stand on to make the claim it's normal Westerosi culture.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nevets said:

For example, irl, Margaret Beaufort became pregnant with the future King Henry VII, whose coronation ended the Wars of the Roses, shortly before she turned 13 (same age as Sansa!).  Her husband needed a child for inheritance purposes, hence the early consummation and pregnancy (not that it did him any good; he died before Henry was born).  Margaret suffered complications resulting in inability to have future children, thus validating the discouragement of such. 

Yes, Margaret Beaufort is a famous example, but she also was an exception. There are also many more examples of royal weddings between child brides and grooms where the consummation was delayed until 16-17 and the bride had her first child at 18. Amongst lesser nobility is wasn't a norm, at least not in northern and western Europe. Amongst smallfolk the average age of marriage was early 20s. One of the few exceptions where brides were commonly 14-16 were Italian city states, and this was because of their "dowery" system. The older the bride, the higher the dowery. In fact, Italians would tend to claim their daughters were younger than their actual age to circumvent this. So many of these 14 year olds in Italy during the middle ages, were actually older... their fathers just lied about their age. It's the "in Itally they marry their daughters off very young" that made Shakespeare write Juliette as a 13 year old.

Edited by sweetsunray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nagini's Neville said:

yes, there are still a lot of ppl, who question every single thing, that has ever happened in every Sansa chapter, because GRRM said the phrase unreliable narrator. Once one poster was dead set, that Sansa had actually kissed LF herself, just because Lysa said so, Sansa had just described it all untruthfully, because of unreliable ways lol

Oh my! Lol poor Sansa :(

George did not now the can of worms he opened with the Un-kiss I would imagine. 

2 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said:

yeah, but at least Robert has defeated them in a war, he didn't just pretend to be someone he isn't. he is a conquerer

Oh yeah, it would be seen as more honorable to conquer the throne rather than sneak it by deceit. More bloody too though.

3 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said:

think Tyrion knows for sure. He also knows Ned told Cersei, that Jon Arryn found out about the incest. With the rest he can put two and two together.

He might, I just can't remember if it's explicitly stated or not. 

4 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said:

The very least he knows, they killed her father, who she belonged to, on false claims and therefore stolen her unlawfully from her family. I just can't see Sansa willfully taking of her dress, if she knew, she isn't the the rightful ward of Joffrey

We agree here. Sansa's outlook would have been incredibly different had she known. 

5 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said:

But aren't her true feelings obvious? Isn't it also a sign, that she won't give him her true feelings, but will only tell I will do my duty. Isn't it obvious, that she would tell him she did, if she really wanted to. Especially after he asks her to

Well they are obvious to us because we know her as a "person" and have her inner thoughts. We have spent much more time with Sansa than Tyrion has. 

Yeah I think it's a sign, I think he was getting some mixed signs from her at that point though. He knew she was only doing it out of duty & that she would tell him she wanted to if she did, he was initially trying to win her over or convince her & then decided if it's going to be for duty then duty it is. Not his first choice but one he was willing to accept. 

8 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said:

To me that is only an indication, that she tries to do the right thing and that she doesn't want to get personal. Doesn't indicate she wants it

No, I don't think it indicates she wants it, just that she is assenting to it. 

9 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said:

But as a good person "willing to do her duty" should not be enough for Tyrion in the context IMO

It's enough but it's not what he prefers. It's not what he really wants, but it's what he is willing to accept. Likely with the idea that later it will be something more than duty 

10 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said:

yeah, I borrowed the beyond from you in that context. It didn't have to be hope beyond hope in general. But tbh if I was in her shoes, I don't think I could ever be happy in this situation, especially not when they would actually one day live in WF. But IMO she is a much more kind-hearted person, than I am. But it was hope beyond hope on the wedding night. That was just way to quickly

Agreed. 

11 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said:

I think we mostly agree on everything now :) don't think we can get any closer in opinions.  I'm bit harder on Tyrion, you have a bit more understanding for him- that's fine I think ;)

Maybe the only thing is the age, there I agree more with what ss is saying, since I believe GRRM has modeled that aspect after the real Middle Ages (at least he always references that himself) and then the unlawful part as well.

But I think we did a good job otherwise :D  :cheers:

:cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:
    • He then adds that maidens "may" be wedded and bedded
      • HOWEVER EVEN THERE many men wait until their wives are 15 to 16 before bedding them.

@Lyanna<3Rhaegar We have to consider here, when he says "maidens", that does not necessarily mean "as soon as a girl is a maiden", a 16 year old is also a maiden, Brienne is also still a maiden. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×