Strange marriages

[Loose Bolt]

Branda Stark wed Harrold Rogers. Only reason why House Rogers even exist seems to be that GRRM wanted to honor memory of late Roger Zelazny.

[The Bard of Banefort]

3 hours ago, Loose Bolt said:

Branda Stark wed Harrold Rogers. Only reason why House Rogers even exist seems to be that GRRM wanted to honor memory of late Roger Zelazny.

According to @Ran, there’s a story behind their marriage, but it sounds like GRRM is saving it for sometime down the line.

Edited November 19, 2023 by The Bard of Banefort

[Hippocras]

On 11/19/2023 at 8:57 PM, The Bard of Banefort said:

According to @Ran, there’s a story behind their marriage, but it sounds like GRRM is saving it for sometime down the line.

Look forward to hearing it.

I do in general think that GRRM peppers his family trees every once in a while with marriages that seem odd just because the families are based so very far apart. House Rogers of the Stormlands and House Stark would be one of those matches of course. How did they meet? Why was this alliance wanted at that point in time?

One also needs to wonder about the Swann etc. matches for Walder Frey. How and why did that happen?

[KingMaekarWasHere]

On 11/16/2023 at 8:14 PM, Frey family reunion said:

I’m not suggesting he married anyone, I’m suggesting he may have impregnated Lord Dondarrion’s wife.

Hopefully we will be getting Blood and Fire by next Christmas!!! That's what I have to say! 

[Loraq]

On 10/24/2023 at 11:27 AM, The hairy bear said:

It seems that the rules of succession of Winterfell disregards female claimants (George has confirmed that there has never been a Lady of Winterfell or Queen of Winter, and with a lineage extending for several millennia, that can only happen if women are barred from inheriting). So, presumably, if Edwyle and Rickard had suddenly died, Winterfell would have gone to the closest male available.

To the closest male available who may be from a female line of House Stark.

GRRM said that there has never been a ruling Lady of Winterfell or a Queen in the North, but he never said that the male descendants from a female line can't inherit Winterfell and change their name to Stark. Even husbands can do that, as happened with Joffrey Lydden (Lannister).

It's almost impossible for a lineage extending for several millennia to always have a male descendant from a male line available to rule. Some of these males most probably are descendants from female lines.

Also, when Robb is talking about his succession, Catelyn suggests Jocelyn Stark's own descendants as Robb's heirs, and even though her suggestion is dismissed, it has nothing to do with the fact that they are descendants from a female line but because they are Vale lordlings with supposedly no knowledge of the North.

So, I think if something happened to Edwyle and Rickard, although Jocelyn would not have been considered as a potential Lady of Winterfell, her hypothetical male descendants surely would be the best candidates to the Lordship.

[Loraq]

On 11/13/2023 at 4:59 PM, KingMaekarWasHere said:

3. Daemon Blackfyre and Rohanne of Tyrosh (May have been for love as well or lust. But weren't there Plumm or Penrose cousins that he could have married?)

Daemon's marriage was planned by his father and concluded by his half-brother, the king. So it seems that it was a political match.

On 11/14/2023 at 11:42 PM, Daendrew said:

There is magic in Royce blood. One of the oldest Houses in Westeros. There is cache, prestige and the ability of getting magic blood in line.

 

On 11/15/2023 at 3:25 PM, Daendrew said:

They wear bronze armor which won't shatter in the cold like steel. And they have runes on their armor which tell ancient secrets from before alphabets.

All this to say... will you unMarry me? 

Well, Ysilla Royce marrying Mychel Redfort makes perfect sense. On the other hand, Jocelyn Stark and Benedict Royce (a younger son from a minor branch) not so much.

[Hippocras]

6 minutes ago, Loraq said:

Daemon's marriage was planned by his father and concluded by his half-brother, the king. So it seems that it was a political match.

If my theory is correct then it was Viserys II who started this chain. I think Viserys paid the Tyroshi to take Daena after Daemon's birth to get her away from KL (where she was a threat to Viserys's rule) and from Aegon. I think it was worth it to Tyrosh because Daena was of proven fertility, and because Viserys gave them favourable trade terms and gold. 

Then Aegon IV arranged the marriage to Rohanne, Daena's daughter so that Daemon, his favourite son, could marry his half-sister and strengthen his claim.

Then Daeron honoured the betrothal agreement, but made a counter-agreement with Tyrosh to neutralize the growing Blackfyre threat. This resulted in Kiera of Tyrosh (a sister or niece of Rohanne) marrying the heir of Daeron's heir.

[astarkchoice]

It doesnt have to be a marriage of equals in terms of power , it can be of advantage in terms of money, strategic positions, a once great houses name/bloodline.

Sometimes outside of that the heads of 2 great houses may get along extremely well, could be a rare marriage based on love 1st.

A final factor may be  house having a very impressive warrior impressing a prospective father in law  , never hurts to have a elite warrior in your family , hel also be training with  you and your sons, your men ,grandsons ......iron sharpens iron!

 

In jorahs case he has both an old and honourable name and has just made a name for himself pyke  then at the tourney after. Robert himself with the high septon knighted him...dude was a big deal.for a.short time

[Hippocras]

Can't find the post here right now but I know Jocelyn Stark's marriage to a minor Royce was singled out above as odd.

IMO this marriage is a glaring hint we should be looking more carefully at the female line.

Jocelyn Stark was the only daughter of Melantha Blackwood. Melantha Blackwood was either the sister or the niece of Queen Betha Blackwood.

I am absolutely convinced (for reasons discussed elsewhere) that a marriage alliance between children of Benjicot Blackwood and Alyn Velaryon was arranged in 138 AC, and that the name Jocelyn popping up in the female Blackwood line (Melantha's daughter) is a reference to her ancestor Jocelyn Baratheon.

Jocelyn Stark was therefore a key, perhaps uninterrupted, female line descendant of the female royal line that was passed over.

For those families who cared about the female line, Jocelyn's match would have been about reinforcing that aspect of her lineage, rather than being about wealth, power or status in the post-Dance patriarchy. So she married a Royce who was also a key female line descendant, regardless of how much they stood to inherrit.

Benedict Royce would also have had some relationship to Jocelyn Stark’s grandmother Lorra Royce, probably a nephew or great-nephew of hers.

Edited January 25 by Hippocras

[The hairy bear]

3 hours ago, Loraq said:

It's almost impossible for a lineage extending for several millennia to always have a male descendant from a male line available to rule. Some of these males most probably are descendants from female lines.

There's at least one instance when we know for a fact that this happened with the Starks, if we are to believe the wildling's legend about Bael.

It's perfectly possible that the Stark line passed through female lines in many other occasions.

3 hours ago, Loraq said:

So, I think if something happened to Edwyle and Rickard, although Jocelyn would not have been considered as a potential Lady of Winterfell, her hypothetical male descendants surely would be the best candidates to the Lordship.

I'm not sure about that.

Lord Edwyle had three male uncles (Artos, Errold and Rodrik) that would be closer kin than Jocelyn's grandsons. If Rickard and Edwyle died while they were alive, I'd say they'd have a much better chance of inheriting Winterfell.

Even if the uncles were all dead, I'm not entirely sure I'd be a clear cut matter. The potential grandsons of Artos the implacable would be grandnephews of a Lord Willam, through a male line. Meanwhile, Jocelyn's grandsons would be grand-grandsons of Lord Willam, through the female line. With the later being born and raised away from the North, I'm honestly not sure how it'd turn out.

[maesternewton]

On 10/24/2023 at 1:27 PM, The hairy bear said:

It seems that the rules of succession of Winterfell disregards female claimants (George has confirmed that there has never been a Lady of Winterfell or Queen of Winter, and with a lineage extending for several millennia, that can only happen if women are barred from inheriting). So, presumably, if Edwyle and Rickard had suddenly died, Winterfell would have gone to the closest male available.

George answered that because someone asked if there was ever a Lady of Winterfell.

I don't think that shows women are barred from inheriting. 

Just because there has never been a Lady of Highgarden, doesn't mean women are barred from inheriting. 

[The hairy bear]

32 minutes ago, maesternewton said:

George answered that because someone asked if there was ever a Lady of Winterfell.

I don't think that shows women are barred from inheriting.

George confirms that there has never been a ruling Lady of Winterfell or Queen of Winter. That means that in the eight thousand years that the Starks have supposedly been ruling Winterfell, there has not been a single king or lord with only daughters. That's just statistically inconceivable.

Besides that, in the family tree we have an actual example of both women and males from female lines being barred from inheriting: when Cregan firstborn Rickon died, his daughter (Serena) and his grandson (Cregard) were disregarded, and Winterfell went to his second son Jonnel.

[maesternewton]

41 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

George confirms that there has never been a ruling Lady of Winterfell or Queen of Winter. That means that in the eight thousand years that the Starks have supposedly been ruling Winterfell, there has not been a single king or lord with only daughters. That's just statistically inconceivable.

Again. Has there ever been a ruling Lady of Storm's End or a Storm Queen? No. Just because there hasn't ever been one, doesn't mean they are barred from ruling.

If that was the case, George would have literally pointed it out, literally. Such an important detail would have been shared already, like the fact that no women can be the ruler of the Iron Islands. 

41 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

Besides that, in the family tree we have an actual example of both women and males from female lines being barred from inheriting: when Cregan firstborn Rickon died, his daughter (Serena) and his grandson (Cregard) were disregarded, and Winterfell went to his second son Jonnel.

We don't know what exactly happened, Jonnel Stark could have usurped the rulership from Sansa Stark.

Mind you, that idea doesn't make sense. Why would Winterfell have a different succession from the rest of the North exactly?

We know in the North women can rule, and women like Jonelle Cerwyn, Lyessa Flint, Eddara Tallhart rule in the North. Donella Hornwood and Barbery also rule because they married into the houses and are the last remaning members. 

Most importantly, the fact that Cregard Stark was passed, and Winterfell went to Bathorgan Stark shows that they were some funny businesses taking place, because Winterfell was supposed to go to Cregard Stark after Jonnel Stark died childless, going by normal succession.

Whatever occurred, is what would have happened to Cregan Stark, had he not imprisoned his Uncle Bennard Stark when he was slow to relinquish his power as his regent. 

Edited January 25 by maesternewton

[The hairy bear]

50 minutes ago, maesternewton said:

Has there ever been a ruling Lady of Storm's End or a Storm Queen? No. Just because there hasn't ever been one, doesn't mean they are barred from ruling.

Argella Durrandon declared herself Storm Queen, and ruled briefly. Besides her, there might have been Ladies of Storm's End or Storm Queens. We just don't know.

It's a completely different situation with the Starks, where we have been explicitly told by Martin that there were any female ruling monarch.

50 minutes ago, maesternewton said:

Just because there hasn't ever been one, doesn't mean they are barred from ruling.

That conclusion would have merit in a succession going back a century or two. But when we are dealing with the Starks, we are talking of eight thousand years. That would be, on average, more than three hundred generations.

If you throw a six-sided dice three hundred times and you don't get a "one" even once, wouldn't you agree that the dice is probably rigged?

50 minutes ago, maesternewton said:

Mind you, that idea doesn't make sense. Why would Winterfell have a different succession from the rest of the North exactly?

The Iron Throne has a different succession from the rest of Westeros.

There's no reason to assume that inheritance traditions and rules are the same for every seat. The kingdom of the North itself was formed through the union of other kingdoms, just as with Westeros, where we know that different succession rules are kept. George himself says that also says that "the laws of inheritance in the Seven Kingdoms are modeled on those in real medieval history... which is to say, they were vague, uncodified, subject to varying interpretations, and often contradictory."

50 minutes ago, maesternewton said:

Most importantly, the fact that Cregard Stark was passed, and Winterfell went to Bathorgan Stark shows that they were some funny businesses taking place, because Winterfell was supposed to go to Cregard Stark after Jonnel Stark died childless, going by normal succession.

We don't know what "normal succession" is, and we don't know whether Winterfell was supposed to go to Cregard Stark.

If we have an actual example of females being passed over, and we know that in eight thousand years no female has ever ruled, the most logical assumption is that females are barred from inheriting Winterfell. Assuming that there were "funny businesses taking place" every time a female had to inherit to justify why it didn't happen doesn't seem a reasonable approach to me.

Edited January 25 by The hairy bear

[maesternewton]

45 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

Argella Durrandon declared herself Storm Queen, and ruled briefly. Besides her, there might have been Ladies of Storm's End or Storm Queens. We just don't know.

It's a completely different situation with the Starks, where we have been explicitly told by Martin that there were any female ruling monarch.

My point is that, just because there has never been a ruling Queen of the Reach or a ruling Queen of the Vale, doesn't mean they are barred from succession.

GRRM said that there has never been a ruling female monarch, he didn't say women are barred from ruling as Ladies of Winterfell. To conclude that women are barred from ruling based on that point is a reach.

45 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

That conclusion would have merit in a succession going back a century or two. But when we are dealing with the Starks, we are talking of eight thousand years. That would be, on average, more than three hundred generations.

If you throw a six-sided dice three hundred times and you don't get a "one" even once, wouldn't you agree that the dice is probably rigged?

Characters in-universe don't even agree with that time frame of 8000 years to begin with. Learned men like Samwell Tarly and Hoster Blackwood openly recognize the implausibility of that. Jon is the 998th Lord Commander of the Night's Watch, but the most complete list in Castle Black only lists 667 Lord Commanders. Masters think the history is only about 2000 years.

45 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

The Iron Throne has a different succession from the rest of Westeros.

There's no reason to assume that inheritance traditions and rules are the same for every seat. The kingdom of the North itself was formed through the union of other kingdoms, just as with Westeros, where we know that different succession rules are kept. George himself says that also says that "the laws of inheritance in the Seven Kingdoms are modeled on those in real medieval history... which is to say, they were vague, uncodified, subject to varying interpretations, and often contradictory."

The Iron Throne had the same succession as the rest of Westeros until after the Dance, mind you the succession you put forward of the North is the same for the Iron Throne, but we are never told explicitily that Winterfell bares women from inheriting. Not in F&B or even in the main books when the topic of succession comes up concerning the North.

45 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

We don't know what "normal succession" is, and we don't know whether Winterfell was supposed to go to Cregard Stark.

If we have an actual example of females being passed over, and we know that in eight thousand years no female has ever ruled, the most logical assumption is that females are barred from inheriting Winterfell. Assuming that there were "funny businesses taking place" every time a female had to inherit to justify why it didn't happen doesn't seem a reasonable approach to me.

Normal succession, as in the succession that most of Westeros follows, andal succession that even most of the North follows. Wherein sons inherit before daughters, and daughters inherit before uncles. That's the succession the rest of the North follows, we know this from Alys Karstark.

Quote

Alys Karstark: "My brother Harry is the rightful lord, and by law I am his heir. A daughter comes before an uncle." 

And your logical assumption ends up being flawed because we know that the 8000 year timeline is not even remotely accurate nor is it a fact in-universe. 

Edited January 25 by maesternewton

[Thomaerys Velaryon]

As far as strange marriages not discussed here yet, we can talk of the Frey marriages.

In a feudal system like Westeros a lot more is to gain/lose with a good/bad marriage for the heir or second child than for a 7th or 8th child. Big families put gradually less and less effort in marriages/betrothals as we climb down the family tree but Walder Frey seems to go against the flow and still manages some good marriages for his kin after all this time.

While examining the Frey family tree, I think I have identified the reason for Walder's matchmaker success: Since he doesn't manage to get match with the topdog of the riverlands (exceptions: his Blackwood fourth wife, his Whent fifth wife and a Vance marriage for his eldest daughter), he either goes for

1) minor riverlands Houses who gain from marrying up (Vypren, Hawick, Blanetree, ...)

or 2) important Houses from other regions where House Frey's origin is less stigmatized (Swann, Royce, Lydden, ...).

Overall Walder did really well for his family in the marriage department and even achieved his ultimate goal by having his daughter marrying a Tully.

One thing I'd like to know more about is Walder's first wife Perra Royce. We don't know Perra's relation compare to the Lord of Runestone at the time but regardless it is a pretty good match especially if his father's reputation was a bit tarnished after the Second Blackfyre Rebellion's debacle. It seems Walder married a bit late for an heir as he was 25 or 26 when his first child was born (Stevron).

[Hippocras]

@Thomaerys Velaryon

I am reasonably confident that Walder Frey's marriage to Perra Royce and the birth of their son Stevron was related to either the Peake Uprising, the Great Council, or both. It is quite unusual for GRRM to specify dates of birth so precisely for such minor characters (Stevron) unless he is trying to relate the birth to the events of the histories.

In general Walder Frey's lifespan corresponds in very interesting ways to the Blackfyre era.

We already know that Walder Frey's sister's wedding to Ambrose Butterwell doubled as the Second Blackfyre Rebellion in 212. We also can guess that the name Ambrose is connected to House Ambrose, which is connected via the Caltrops (Marq Ambrose) and the First Blackfyre Rebellion (Aubrey Ambrose) to House Peake. So House Frey were Blackfyre supporters at this point, and probably up until the failed Third Rebellion. But by the time of the Fourth Rebellion most families in Westeros had given up on the Blackfyres, probably helped along by marriage alliances between those Houses with Blackfyre leanings and those with loyalist leanings made in the intervening years. Walder Frey's first marriage was likely one of those matches.

[Thomaerys Velaryon]

1 hour ago, Hippocras said:

I am reasonably confident that Walder Frey's marriage to Perra Royce and the birth of their son Stevron was related to either the Peake Uprising, the Great Council, or both. It is quite unusual for GRRM to specify dates of birth so precisely for such minor characters (Stevron) unless he is trying to relate the birth to the events of the histories.

I seriously doubt it. There are two references of Stevron age: first in AGOT he is simply "past sixty" and then in ACOK Big Walder says he was 65 when he dies. GRRM did not have a concret timeline of events like he has now back when he wrote the first two books. In fact the Blackfyres and Peakes stuff all came after those books were published, the Blackfyres were not invented before ASOS and the Peake Uprising and the siege of Starpike were simply "a battle against an outlaw lord" (ACOK, Jon I) at the time.

At best GRRM can make details work in retrospective if he wants to. Otherwise, Stevron being born around the time of Maekar's death is pure coincidence.

[Hippocras]

1 hour ago, Thomaerys Velaryon said:

I seriously doubt it. There are two references of Stevron age: first in AGOT he is simply "past sixty" and then in ACOK Big Walder says he was 65 when he dies. GRRM did not have a concret timeline of events like he has now back when he wrote the first two books. In fact the Blackfyres and Peakes stuff all came after those books were published, the Blackfyres were not invented before ASOS and the Peake Uprising and the siege of Starpike were simply "a battle against an outlaw lord" (ACOK, Jon I) at the time.

At best GRRM can make details work in retrospective if he wants to. Otherwise, Stevron being born around the time of Maekar's death is pure coincidence.

I don’t think it works that way. He didn’t have all of the details of the Blackfyre era worked out when Clash came out, sure, but he did know the broad strokes of what sorts of things happened and when, and the major players he wanted involved, so that they would build up the the current moment in the main series. So he knew he wanted a schism of Westeros families, and he knew which Houses were in which camps. I wouldn’t be surprised if he set the Peake Uprising in 233 precisely so that it would correspond to Walder Frey’s marrage.

[Thomaerys Velaryon]

48 minutes ago, Hippocras said:

I don’t think it works that way.

Actually it does. GRRM has always refer to himself as a "gardener" in his writting process. He planted the seed for a rebellion that lead to Maekar's death in ACOK but it is only a decade later that he fleshed out that idea into the Peake Uprising.

51 minutes ago, Hippocras said:

So he knew he wanted a schism of Westeros families, and he knew which Houses were in which camps. I wouldn’t be surprised if he set the Peake Uprising in 233 precisely so that it would correspond to Walder Frey’s marrage.

That's quite a bold statement when even to this day we don't know which camp (if any) the Royces took during the different Blackfyre Rebellions. So linking Walder Frey's marriage to a Royce to the aftermath of the Peake Uprising (a likely Blackfyre adjacent conflict) without tangible evidence is risky. Might I add that we don't even know when Walder's marriage took place or the year of Stevron's birth (233 and 234 AC are both possible). Walder and Perra could have married in 233 AC like they could have married 3 years earlier.