From Pawn to Player: Rethinking Sansa XVI

[Raksha the Demon]

I hope he is shipped off to have a nice little meeting with Lady Stoneheart.

Works for me! :cheers:

[brashcandy]

Long overdue, but finally my sources for this essay. (excuse the messy format) I've also provided some links to 3 essays at the bottom. Spoilering for space.

Lau, Kimberly J. "Erotic Infidelities: Angela Carter’s Wolf Trilogy." Marvels & Tales 22.1 (2008). Web.

http://digitalcommon...s/vol22/iss1/6/

Jorgensen, Jeana. "Innocent Initiations: Female Agency in Eroticized Fairy Tales." Marvels & Tales22.1 (2008). Web. http://digitalcommon...s/vol22/iss1/2/

Propst, Lisa G. "Bloody Chambers and Labyrinths of Desire: Sexual Violence in Marina Warner’s Fairy Tales and Myths." Marvels & Tales 22.1 (2008). Web.

http://digitalcommon...s/vol22/iss1/8/

Catherine Lappas (1996): “Seeing is believing, but touching is the truth”: Female spectatorship and sexuality in the company of wolves, Women's Studies: An interdisciplinary journal, 25:2, 115-135

Manley, Kathleen E. B. "The Woman in Process in Angela Carter’s “The Bloody Chamber”."Marvels & Tales 12.1 (1998). Web. http://digitalcommon...s/vol12/iss1/4/

Martine Hennard Dutheil de la Rochère, « Updating the Politics of Experience: Angela Carter’s Translation of Charles Perrault’s “Le Petit Chaperon rouge” », Palimpsestes [En ligne], 22 | 2009

Johnson, Sharon P. "The Toleration and Eroticization of Rape: Interpreting Charles Perrault's "Le Petit Chaperon Rouge within Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century French Jurisprudence." Women's Studies 32: 325 -353, 2003.

Fabian, Jenny. "Love, Terror & Emancipation: Angela Carter's interrogation of authority in The Bloody Chamber. Web.

http://londongrip.co...r-emancipation/

Bonnici, Thomas. "Female Desire in Angela Carter's fairy stories. Mimesis, Bauru, v. 18, n.1, p. 7-17, 1997.

Bonnici, Thomas. "Angela Carter's critique of phallocentrism in The Bloody Chamber and other stories." Acta Scientiarum 20 (1): 9-15, 1998.

Barootes, Ben. "Nobody's Meat: Freedom Through Monstrosity in Contemporary British Fiction." Monsters and the Monstrous: Myths of Enduring Evil. Ed. Niall Scott. New York: Rodopi, 2007.

Mulvey Laura: "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema." The Sexual Subject: A Screen Reader in Sexuality. New York: Routledge, 1992.

Santana da Silva, M.A Meyre Ivone. "An Analysis of Angela Carter's review of the Beauty and the Beast: The Courtship of Mr. Lyon and The Tiger's Bride." Volume III, Numero X - July- September, 2004.

Williams, Linda. When the Woman Looks.

Jones, Cynthia. Into the Woods.

Re-reading fear in fairy tales

[voodooqueen126]

Sansa is close to crossing an important moral line regarding SweetRobin. Using the sweetsleep to get him down the mountain can be justified, since he would starve if he stayed up at the Eyrie, and the weather was such that they had to get him down fairly quickly. But if she continues to press for the use of the drug on little Robert, having heard from the maester that it can kill him if continually given, then Sansa will be guilty of complicity in his eventual death. She knows, or should be able to guess, that Littlefinger not only believes that the child will die, he is planning on him dying. Sansa has to take a moral stand and do it soon. Unless she persuades herself that her cousin is so sickly and damaged that he will die anyway and that the sweetsleep prevents him from pointless suffering...

Myranda could well turn out to be a false friend to 'Alayne'. I'm willing to bet that Myranda wants a husband with good prospects and is setting her cap for Littlefinger (who she could possibly blackmail, or might already be in cahoots with in order to better manage Sansa). Although Littlefinger did warn Alayne not to talk to or trust Myranda; and LF has not so far tried to handle Sansa by telling her to do the opposite of what he actually wants.

Sansa cannot legally marry Harry the Heir until the marriage of Sansa Stark to Tyrion Lannister is annulled, or Tyrion dead. To annul the marriage, Littlefinger must reveal that Sansa is alive and under his protection; I doubt that he wants to do so. And I'm not sure that someone who is not the legal guardian of Sansa Stark can have the marriage annulled - Littlefinger is not. Her last legal guardian (according to the Iron Throne) would have probably been Cersei as queen regent (who is no longer either; and the Council wants Sansa arrested, at least most of them); and an argument can also be made for Manderly or Stannis (if they gain control of Rickon, who would be regarded as Lord Stark) or even Jon Snow if Robb's will can be upheld. I doubt that Manderly or Stannis would let Littlefinger decide who a Stark daughter can marry. So I don't think Sansa will be marrying Harry anytime soon; unless Littlefinger keeps her true identity a secret and doesn't mind that the marriage is illegal.

Of course, if Littlefinger, as Lord Protector of the Vale, has the legal right to have a Vale septon annul the marriage of a Stark and a Lannister, a marriage decreed by the Iron Throne, then he can arrange the marriage of Sansa to anyone he wants, provided that she'll go along with it. And Sansa is far less interested in being married off for her claim to Winterfell these days.

I think Sansa will try and save Sweet Robin, though hopefully she will not be successful as A) Sweet Robin would be a terrible lord and B] Another nail is Petyr Baelish's cross, especially if Sansa can prove she was not complicit.

However in terms of annulment, given Sansa's position (essentially a Princess married to a Prince-because Tywin was in many ways a king) it would be necessary to take her case to the High Septon, as it is not something that could be handled by the equivalent to the Archbishop or Cardinal of the Vale...

My readings of Gratian would suggest that Sansa has a very good case for an annulment, based on her lack of consent.

[Raksha the Demon]

I have a sneaking desire to see SweetRobin defy all expectation and, with Sansa's help, survive and grow up and have a fairly long and even successful life. That probably won't happen, but it would be interesting...I do want her to act to at least try to protect him, though.

Officially, according to the current regime that rules most of Westeros, Sansa is not a princess; but the daughter of an attainted and exiled Great House, married to a patricidal accused regicide. And she's accused of being her husband's partner in kingslaying. I don't really know how even Littlefinger could pull off getting the High Septon to annul the marriage, and thus bring the wrath of the Iron Throne on him for harboring Sansa. Perhaps he planned on waiting two or three years to actually wed Sansa to Harry, by which time he counted on Cersei being totally powerless or dead and the Tyrells in charge of the Iron Throne. (which wouldn't necessarily help Sansa; Mace Tyrell believes her guilty and wants her tried and executed as far as I remember). Littlefinger over-reached himself with his plotting; he was counting on Tyrion's execution freeing Sansa for future marital/political alliances; but Tyrion escaped.

Sansa could also have the marriage annulled because it was not consummated; something which seems to have been common knowledge at court.

[greensleeves]

I have a sneaking desire to see SweetRobin defy all expectation and, with Sansa's help, survive and grow up and have a fairly long and even successful life. That probably won't happen, but it would be interesting...I do want her to act to at least try to protect him, though.

:agree:

I do think it's pretty likely to happen though. This is a narrative constructed by a man who loves to defy expectation. The more everyone assumes SweetRobin is doomed just makes me convinced that he will overcome his obstacles. He reminds me so much of Colin from Secret Garden.

Sansa is in a very strange place legally... this goes beyond her marriage.

[Lord Bronn Stokeworth]

I think Sansa will try and save Sweet Robin, though hopefully she will not be successful as A) Sweet Robin would be a terrible lord and B] Another nail is Petyr Baelish's cross, especially if Sansa can prove she was not complicit.

However in terms of annulment, given Sansa's position (essentially a Princess married to a Prince-because Tywin was in many ways a king) it would be necessary to take her case to the High Septon, as it is not something that could be handled by the equivalent to the Archbishop or Cardinal of the Vale...

My readings of Gratian would suggest that Sansa has a very good case for an annulment, based on her lack of consent.

I could see her marriage simply being declared invalid in three likely scenarios.

1. Tysha is alive, and Tyrion's first marriage is decided as legal. Thus, she was never married to him. I think I remember reading only the High Septon has the right annual ANY marriage (or maybe only those after consummation, but still applies in this case). Since I doubt Tywin made this matter public, the marriage still stands.

2. Stannis/Shireen take the Iron Throne. This could cause the marriage to become invalid for two possible reasons. The first is that it was never legal to begin with. Sansa did not want the marriage. No one in House Stark wanted it. Joffery claimed the ability to give Sansa to Tyrion because he was king and her family were traitors. This would be true with the exception that Stannis was the true king. If Stannis or Shireen take the throne, neither would recognize Joffery's reign as legitimate even if he held the power at the time. Thus, he never had the power to give Sansa away. That would have been Stannis's right if he chose to exercise it. So, Sansa's marriage would become null and void.

The second is the victor simply declares that the marriage didn't take place in the Lord of Light's Church and is thus not valid. This would be a legal dance to avoid invalidating almost every marriage in Westeros. I could see it in a Stark/Baratheon alliance where the king/queen basically decides since it was not made in the right church and is contested by one of the members, s/he has the right to annual it. This is a bit messier than the first.

3. The North remains independent and simply refuses to recognize the Church of the Seven's power.

[Pod The Impaler]

Not only such, but judging by the airs Myranda has put on about being naughty with the menfolk, she might appreciate LF's physique - he seems to be more or less good looking apart form being short, and well, everyone remembers his wedding night with Lysa, and his "minty fresh" breath.

Another concern deriving from her is who she answers to, if anyone. The way she goes about phrasing her conversation with "Alayne" traveling down the mountain speaks of wanting to ferret out information. But for whom? Herself? Her father? An unknown ally? We can't be sure of whose side of the conflict the Royces are alligned with. For all we know they may be divided in of themselves as a family, as the Freys were.

Myranda is a game-player, definitely. I think she probably has designs on some Lord (perhaps LF, perhaps even awaiting a double-cross to snag HTH herself).

I also don't think she'd be as genuine a friend to Sansa - not sure why, but I think she is just someone who would not be as true as (let's say) Mya Stone.

However, we could be over-thinking this: Both Lord Royces seem the sort who are not good at intrigues, so maybe sending in saucy and charming Myranda is their way of ferreting out information they can't get themselves. We don't know which branch of her house she'd be most loyal to, but she may have her own circle of loyal friends and pliable suitors to draw upon, if someone in the Vale becomes a problem. Littlefinger may realize this about her, and thus be wary, because Sansa is a girl as could be enticed into gossiping too much info away.

Sansa is wise enough to keep her guard up and say as little as possible to Myranda, even when it comes to girl talk. That in itself may draw suspicion from Myranda - she may think Alayne is far too guarded and over-dutiful for a girl of her age.

It would be interesting to get clarification on if LF's status would permit him that authority. Anyone have a definitive answer? Manderly or Stannis would certainly have a problem with LF choosing the husband. It'd be an outrage for the former, and Stannis has no love for LF in fact would probably rout him out if he could.

As to the circumstances, it seems LF is most interested in perhaps spreading a rumor around the kingdoms that Tyrion has perished on the lam and that would grant Sansa's "annullment" for his purposes. No body at this point nearby would be able to disprove that notion, as Tyrion has fallen off the beaten path in where he is now located.

LF does not need to produce proof of Tyrion's death to secure an annulment.

First of all, Tyrion left Sansa a maid, and the principle is that an unconsummated marriage can be set aside (especially a marriage to a traitor). Precedent has already been set for this by the marriages of Margaery.

Second and most importantly is that the rules can be bent or set aside for powerful lords - Baelish is the lord paramount of the Trident and lord protector of the Vale. That plus LF's ability to foster corruption means that somewhere in the Vale, he should be able to find some septon wiling to annul Sansa's marriage and then officiate another (and all clandestinely). If bribes don't work, implied threats do.

I hope he is shipped off to have a nice little meeting with Lady Stoneheart.

Yeah, he can finally have Cat's affections all to himself.

"You found me beautiful once."

"Honey, you got real ugly."

:devil:

[VoicesInTheTrees]

LF does not need to produce proof of Tyrion's death to secure an annulment.

First of all, Tyrion left Sansa a maid, and the principle is that an unconsummated marriage can be set aside (especially a marriage to a traitor). Precedent has already been set for this by the marriages of Margaery.

Second and most importantly is that the rules can be bent or set aside for powerful lords - Baelish is the lord paramount of the Trident and lord protector of the Vale. That plus LF's ability to foster corruption means that somewhere in the Vale, he should be able to find some septon wiling to annul Sansa's marriage and then officiate another (and all clandestinely). If bribes don't work, implied threats do.

It seems like LF was entirely focused on waiting for Tyrion to die, rather than getting an annulment for Sansa. That would be the cleaner solution all the way around, but it would also allow LF to seduce or rape Sansa without the problem of having to prove that she is a maid for an annulment. I can't believe that LF intends to just leave her alone. He would certainly arrange things so that she can't turn on him without risking death or dishonor for herself, though.

[Pod The Impaler]

It seems like LF was entirely focused on waiting for Tyrion to die, rather than getting an annulment for Sansa. That would be the cleaner solution all the way around, but it would also allow LF to seduce or rape Sansa without the problem of having to prove that she is a maid for an annulment. I can't believe that LF intends to just leave her alone. He would certainly arrange things so that she can't turn on him without risking death or dishonor for herself, though.

Tyrion's death would have been simpler and more elegant a solution, but I don't think LF expected Tyrion to escape execution. But clearly, LF is adapting to the fact Tyrion is alive and at large. Like so many others, I think LF is one of those who would be eager to kill Tyrion if he turns up again. The difference is his reason would be to make Sansa a widow.

[KittensRuleBeetsDrool]

If LF could whistle up a fake Arya, it would be an easy matter for him to find a fake Tysha if need be.

I also hope Sansa can save Sweetrobin. I think that the kid isn't as sick as all that, just spoilt and badly brought up - no fresh air or exercise, Lysa probably allowed him to eat whatever Westerosi junk food he wanted, she nursed him past toddlerhood and even bathed him - she was the ultimate in helicopter parents. If SR could lead the life of a normal little boy he'd probably turn out all right. Not big and tough and strong, but normal and capable.

A meeting between Lady Stoneheart and Petyr would be something I'd love to see. Bahah. :lmao:

[DrunkSister]

1. Tysha is alive, and Tyrion's first marriage is decided as legal.

3. The North remains independent and simply refuses to recognize the Church of the Seven's power.

1. Hasn't Tywin had that marriage quietly annulled?

3. Then Sansa is a bastard because Ned and Cat were married in a sept. :devil: (I think there is a lot more religious sincretism than we are aware of. I don't have any conclusive textual evidence, though.)

I wonder if Sansa could have the marriage annulled on the basis of 1) it being illegal, Joffrey not being the rightful king; 2) she being unwilling; 3) non-consummation; 4) abandonment.

In the end it will depend more on the political situation than anything to do with law, but all of the above is pretty conclusive to prove that the marriage was a sham.

I don't want Cat to kill Littlefinger unless he gets to be a prologue or an epilogue so that I can savor his horror. Barring that, I want Sansa to do him in. *:drool: with knife, napkin and fork*

[Lord Bronn Stokeworth]

1. Hasn't Tywin had that marriage quietly annulled?

3. Then Sansa is a bastard because Ned and Cat were married in a sept. :devil: (I think there is a lot more religious sincretism than we are aware of. I don't have any conclusive textual evidence, though.)

I wonder if Sansa could have the marriage annulled on the basis of 1) it being illegal, Joffrey not being the rightful king; 2) she being unwilling; 3) non-consummation; 4) abandonment.

In the end it will depend more on the political situation than anything to do with law, but all of the above is pretty conclusive to prove that the marriage was a sham.

I don't want Cat to kill Littlefinger unless he gets to be a prologue or an epilogue so that I can savor his horror. Barring that, I want Sansa to do him in. * :drool: with knife, napkin and fork*

1. Maybe. Like I said, I think only the High Septon could do. Though it is possible that Tywin could have done it under the radar.

3. They were married when the North was still under Iron Throne. Sansa was married after the North declared independence.

I think number two (which would actually apply under Aegon or Dany also, though there is no current relationship with either of them and the North) would be the most likely. While it would be nice to see Tyrion come out of his mess a better man than he is currently (or even at the beginning of GoT), I don't see a happy ending with Tysha. Nor do I see an independent North since they are barely holding together now. Add the Others, and it is simply too much.

Also, I want Sansa to take out LF. Cat* is dead. I hope her corpse and the thing inhabiting it joins her.

*I liked Cat. But I'm in the camp that thinks the thing called Stoneheart is not her.

[tze]

I was looking, and couldn't find a full description of the Faith of the Seven's marriage vows. We know the ceremony ends with an exchange of cloaks, a kiss, and a pledge of love---but before that, many "vows" are given, the exact wordings of which are never (from what I can tell) told to the readership. Sansa simply mentions "prayers and vows and singing" when detailing her wedding, and Tyrion mentions "seven vows were made" and "seven promises exchanged" during his running commentary on the Joffrey/Margaery wedding, but as far as I can tell we're never given the content of those "vows" or those "promises". In the marriage vows GRRM has to know most of his English-speaking audience would be most familiar with, the couple vows "till death do us part"---if there's something similar in the Faith's marriage vows, that in itself might be an "out" for Sansa.

Marriage in Westeros appears to be a religious, not civil, institution----you're married because your religion says you are, not because "the state" as an institution formally sanctions it. Clearly death automatically releases one spouse to remarry under the Faith, but given the lack of medical resuscitation capabilities on the mainland, I doubt there's much precedent (if any) for a married person being dead at one point and alive at a future point. (Clearly the situation is different on the Iron Isles, but their religion and marriage ceremonies are obviously different in form and content in any case---Asha was married without even having to be present, something that doesn't seem to be possible under the Faith).

I've written in the past about the pretty substantial amount of resurrection imagery present in Sansa's arc, and these boards have been abuzz with discussion since the release of ADWD about the possibility of Jon being released from his Watch vows via death and resurrection (because those vows explicitly end at death). If that route might get Jon out of his vows, perhaps a similar route could get Sansa out of her vows? If the vows exchanged at a Faith-based wedding include a promise to be married until death, then if the repeated resurrection imagery in Sansa's arc in fact foreshadows her own death and resurrection, Sansa might be able to argue (post-resurrection) that her marriage to Tyrion was rendered void at the time of her death, because her marriage vows were explicitly only valid until one spouse's death.

[DrunkSister]

1. Maybe. Like I said, I think only the High Septon could do. Though it is possible that Tywin could have done it under the radar.

3. They were married when the North was still under Iron Throne. Sansa was married after the North declared independence.

1) Lord Tywin asking High Septon to quietly annul the marriage would be a breeze IMO. Especially if he offered to give them money/build a sept.

3) Oh, good point. I still wouldn't like that to happen because some northerners worship 7, and there is a tradition of religious tolerance (swearing by gods old and new, people praying to both, retelling of old stories about cotf and famous knights all over the 7kingdoms) which would be forever lost. Moreover, what would happen to NW (unless you count on it no longer being necessary).

I still think non-consummation and abandonment should count as reasons enough, though. Or, Tyrion could be proclaimed dead.

Tze,

both Catelyn and Sansa mention that they have sworn to obey. I doubt guys would have sworn to the same, so those 7 vows/promises needn't be the same for husband and wife.

[Lord Bronn Stokeworth]

1) Lord Tywin asking High Septon to quietly annul the marriage would be a breeze IMO. Especially if he offered to give them money/build a sept.

3) Oh, good point. I still wouldn't like that to happen because some northerners worship 7, and there is a tradition of religious tolerance (swearing by gods old and new, people praying to both, retelling of old stories about cotf and famous knights all over the 7kingdoms) which would be forever lost. Moreover, what would happen to NW (unless you count on it no longer being necessary).

I still think non-consummation and abandonment should count as reasons enough, though. Or, Tyrion could be proclaimed dead.

Tze,

both Catelyn and Sansa mention that they have sworn to obey. I doubt guys would have sworn to the same, so those 7 vows/promises needn't be the same for husband and wife.

That is a difficult question. I would imagine it as a strictly a political move rather than the start religious intolerance. Maybe even declaring it to the royal family only or saying if both sides approve of using a Faith of the Seven ceremony, then it's OK (of course, Sansa would claim she wants to be married in the old ways to nullify her marriage).

However, an armed Faith could change that. Westeros seemed to be pretty religiously tolerant. However, Stannis has changed that. And the Faith of the Seven are becoming more militant. If they try to force the North to convert (especially in an independent North), they could be kicked out. It would cause a challenge for Manderly and some other houses, but I could easily see a reactionary return to the old faith only (started of course by Stannis and Mel).

[Milady of York]

If we stick to the idea that GRRM based Westeros on Medieval Europe, then of course the marriage was only religious, as civil marriage was nonexistent then, because only the Church had legal jurisdiction to celebrate marriages from about the 9^th-10^th century onwards. Nobody else could celebrate matrimonial unions, not a king, not a nobleman, not a royal official, no one, only a septon or a monk, and they had to be public (with grown-up witnesses that didn’t include the septon or monk, by the way) because a secret ceremony was deemed null and void. The northern ceremony is also a religious marriage, even if there is no septon for the religion of the Old Gods, because it’s celebrated in a place of worship. When Christianity wasn’t yet the official church, it didn’t require the presence of a septon in the ceremonies, only that the couple should take their vows before witnesses and swear by their god.

Divorce didn’t exist in the Middle Ages, not in the modern sense of the word, and in that regard Martin has been true to history. The term appears in medieval documents, but it is in reference to annulment, which meant to declare a marriage invalid since the beginning, and only the Church could grant you one. Apart from this, there was only one way out of a marriage: judicial separation, called a mensa et thoro in legal medieval terminology, and which meant the man and wife could live separately and where they wished, but didn’t mean the marriage bond between them was broken, so they couldn’t remarry. It didn’t require any clerical sanction.

The fact that only a High Septon can annul a noble marriage also has a historical basis, as only the Pope could annul highborn marriages, not a Cardinal nor a Bishop no matter how high-ranking, and you could get that annulment arguing that:

- It wasn’t physically consummated for whatever reasons, usually impotence.

- Pre-contract, which means a previous betrothal or marriage contract (verbal or written) that wasn’t annulled. It was not necessary to have the party to the pre-contract present to dissolve an existing union, it was only required that the person seeking an annulment could prove via witnesses that he or she had contracted with a first person previous to contracting a second marriage.

- Lack of consent; consent of the parties was essential in the eyes of the Church, and if absent, the marriage could be dissolved, and the parties had also the right to refuse a marriage. If a guardian forced her ward to marry, the marriage could be annulled if the ward later appealed to the Church demanding her right to consent and argue she was brought to the marriage by force and fear. This is mostly in theory, because in reality pressure and coercion were often used by the family and guardians to strong-arm unwilling parties into “consenting” to the marriage.

- If the married couple were commoners or serfs, they needed the approval of their overlord. If they had not gotten his approval, the marriage was dissolved.

- Consanguinity, if they were close relatives (first cousins, aunt and nephew, niece and uncle, etc.), they had to petition the Pope for a dispensation to marry, and if they hadn’t done so, then the marriage could be dissolved. However, it wasn’t unusual to petition for an annulment even if the dispensation had been issued, though it was extremely difficult to get a divorce on these grounds, as the Church was generally reluctant.

Death meant a change in status from married to widow. But to declare a person dead, physical evidence was required. If the same person resurfaced with a new identity, it didn’t mean that the marriage had ended, only that the person had feigned his or her death, and if caught, and if his or her former identity could be proved, his or her matrimonial vows were still valid. Alayne Stone can marry with her new identity, but if anyone discovers Alayne is Sansa Stark and proves it, then it means her second marriage is invalid, not that her first is no longer valid. There are real life examples of this scenario in the Middle Ages and other epochs, and usually the argument used in this case was pre-contract, and apart from that, you had the additional problem of impersonation and bigamy, both criminal offences in that time as now. If you “die” but resurface with your old identity, then it means you are still you and whatever you had before is still yours, including your spouse. If Sansa resurfaces as Sansa, she’s still Lady Lannister no matter how many deaths and rebirths she has. Vows are valid until one spouse’s physical and proven death or until a legal annulment, rebirth and symbolical deaths aren’t valid nor acceptable, neither are new identities. Medieval canon laws allowed for marriages to be in theory annulled after the physical and proved death of a spouse.

[DrunkSister]

^^

Even if T+T marriage has been annulled, LF could find witnesses to claim Tyrion is dead, "Sadly, his ship has sunk, and no body was ever found etc."

No need for fake Tysha.

[Kittykatknits]

1. Maybe. Like I said, I think only the High Septon could do. Though it is possible that Tywin could have done it under the radar.

3. They were married when the North was still under Iron Throne. Sansa was married after the North declared independence.

I think number two (which would actually apply under Aegon or Dany also, though there is no current relationship with either of them and the North) would be the most likely. While it would be nice to see Tyrion come out of his mess a better man than he is currently (or even at the beginning of GoT), I don't see a happy ending with Tysha. Nor do I see an independent North since they are barely holding together now. Add the Others, and it is simply too much.

Also, I want Sansa to take out LF. Cat* is dead. I hope her corpse and the thing inhabiting it joins her.

*I liked Cat. But I'm in the camp that thinks the thing called Stoneheart is not her.

An annulment can be obtained via two methods: High Septon or a Council of the Faith.

<snip>

The vows are never told via the text. We do have marriage vows in the TV show however I refuse to use them as a form of evidence or to explore the text on general principle.

Someone else pointed out that both Sansa and Cat say they made a vow to obey. If the vows when married in the faith of the Seven are like some of the vows that remain today (I live in an area with many pockets of fundamentalism), the wife vows to obey, look to him as a teacher in their faith, and as head of their family. In exchange, he vows to protect, teach, and lead her as Jesus leads the faithful. I do remember going to one wedding where the wife vowed to "cleave unto her husband as a child", that particular line has always stayed with me. We may not ever know the specifics, but I'd imagine vows in ASOIAF bear at least some resemblance to the above.

1) Lord Tywin asking High Septon to quietly annul the marriage would be a breeze IMO. Especially if he offered to give them money/build a sept.

3) Oh, good point. I still wouldn't like that to happen because some northerners worship 7, and there is a tradition of religious tolerance (swearing by gods old and new, people praying to both, retelling of old stories about cotf and famous knights all over the 7kingdoms) which would be forever lost. Moreover, what would happen to NW (unless you count on it no longer being necessary).

I still think non-consummation and abandonment should count as reasons enough, though. Or, Tyrion could be proclaimed dead.

Tze,

both Catelyn and Sansa mention that they have sworn to obey. I doubt guys would have sworn to the same, so those 7 vows/promises needn't be the same for husband and wife.

On the first point, it is Tyrion that told us that about his marriage to Tysha. I remember his wording being a bit vague, that Tywin made it so the marriage never was. However, LF doesn't really have to prove anything. The HS, Tywin, and all those who would have been connected to the Tysha affair are dead. All LF needs to do is make people believe he has the real Tysha who can say her marriage was never annulled. He produced a fake Arya from his brothel and Martin does like to do things twice. So, what else may LF pull from out of his brothel?

[tze]

If you “die” but resurface with your old identity, then it means you are still you and whatever you had before is still yours, including your spouse. If Sansa resurfaces as Sansa, she’s still Lady Lannister no matter how many deaths and rebirths she has. Vows are valid until one spouse’s physical and proven death or until a legal annulment, rebirth and symbolical deaths aren’t valid nor acceptable, neither are new identities.

I'm not actually being metaphorical here. :) I'm not speculating "what if Sansa metaphorically or symbolically dies?" I'm speculating about what would happen to the validity of her marriage vows were she to literally die and literally be resurrected (the same type of scenario which many are speculating will happen with Jon). Medieval church laws aren't going to be applicable to such a situation, as the Christian church pretty clearly wasn't expecting literal death and literal rebirth to be an option for any married couples under its jurisdiction. It's a situation that can happen in our modern world (where a person can be clinically dead for a minute or so but is later revived), but we ignore the "death" as basically "not counting" for purposes of marriage, contracts, etc.. My question is, would the Faith of the Seven necessarily see a literal death and literal rebirth situation the same way, as pertaining to marriage vows, if those vows explicitly end at one spouse's death? I'm not so sure. And perhaps even more importantly, would Sansa view her marriage as still legally valid were she to die and be resurrected? If the vows are said to last "as long as I stay on this earth", that would be one thing. But if they're some variation of "till death do us part", the issue becomes murkier.

If the vows themselves could be said to have "run their course", by the fact that one of the marriage partners has literally died, would a resurrection necessarily automatically "reinstitute" those vows in this type of world? A legally-minded person could say "no", the marriage has run its allotted course, and for such a person to remain married, she would need to make new marriage vows. That's an argument you wouldn't find anyone realistically making in our modern society, but in a superstitious, medieval-based society like Westeros, I can see someone saying exactly that. If Sansa were to die and stay dead, Tyrion would be free to marry again, and he wouldn't need any external permissions (like from the High Septon) to do so. If Sansa were to die but then not stay dead . . . depending on the wording of the vows, there could be plenty of wiggle room there to say that the exact same situation is now happening.

I bring up this idea, as a general matter, because it strikes me as potentially relevant that Jon and Sansa have strongly intertwining story arcs (I've written about this in the past), and now both are bound by a set of vows, one of which explicitly expires at death, the other which could very, very easily also explicitly expire at death. Is it possible that each could then end up freed of their vows through the same mechanism---literal death and literal resurrection? I think the issue is that we as 21st century adults are (by and large) trained to see marriage as something that requires "complete death" (for lack of a better term) to be extinguished by death. But this is a world with magic, and though the Faith is clearly inspired by the Catholic Church, that does not mean the Faith is the Catholic Church----if Sansa dies but is magically resurrected (and like I said, there is a lot of resurrection imagery in her story arc), I think it would be hard for the High Septon or any representative of the Faith to argue that she's still legally married. There can't exactly be a ton of precedent on this topic, and if her vows are said to expire at death (which is why I was asking about the content of the vows), I think it would be hard for a septon to argue that a literal death doesn't count if it happens to be followed by a literal resurrection.

[LadyMary]

I have a sneaking desire to see SweetRobin defy all expectation and, with Sansa's help, survive and grow up and have a fairly long and even successful life. That probably won't happen, but it would be interesting...I do want her to act to at least try to protect him, though.

Thank you. Me too. I hate the idea that Robin deseves to die because he is inconvenient and difficult. He's difficult because of the way he was raised, and with proper care he could become someone worthy of his title... he'll never be a knight or warrior, if he's epileptic, but he can still learn how to rule. He's still just an orphaned little boy for crying out loud. He just needs less coddling and a swift dose of reality.

I can't help thinking that Sansa will defy Peter if and when he tries to dispose of Robin. She may be trying to fly under the radar because she's in jeopardy, but I can't see her conspiring to kill the boy or willfully allowing him to be killed. Now, I can see Robin dying of an overdose of one of the drugs his Maester gives him for nerves, but not intentionally.

Officially, according to the current regime that rules most of Westeros, Sansa is not a princess; but the daughter of an attainted and exiled Great House, married to a patricidal accused regicide. And she's accused of being her husband's partner in kingslaying. I don't really know how even Littlefinger could pull off getting the High Septon to annul the marriage, and thus bring the wrath of the Iron Throne on him for harboring Sansa. Perhaps he planned on waiting two or three years to actually wed Sansa to Harry, by which time he counted on Cersei being totally powerless or dead and the Tyrells in charge of the Iron Throne. (which wouldn't necessarily help Sansa; Mace Tyrell believes her guilty and wants her tried and executed as far as I remember). Littlefinger over-reached himself with his plotting; he was counting on Tyrion's execution freeing Sansa for future marital/political alliances; but Tyrion escaped.

Sansa could also have the marriage annulled because it was not consummated; something which seems to have been common knowledge at court.

For the marriage to be annulled, someone would have to come forward and make the case for annulment. How does Sansa - or Littlefinger - do that without exposing both of them? How does Tyrion do it, when he's a kinslayer and accused kingslayer, and a fugitive from justice in another continent? Unless Littlefinger has some knowledge of Tyrion's whereabouts and a plan to kill him or ensure he is no longer Sansa's husband, or he knows how to bribe someone in power to annul the marriage, or has a fail-proof plan to completely disrupt Tommen's rule, and discredit the Lannisters for good - which might take the heat off Sansa for conspiracy, I don't see how he can go public with Sansa Stark.

Littlefinger doesn't seem worried, so I'm trying to imagine what he's plotting. Surely he doesn't know about "Aegon", and if he did I wonder if he would have a change of plans and try to ally with Aegon against the Lannisters and Tyrells. Anyway, I think Sansa will have to be even more careful than usual, because Littlefinger seems to be careless, kissing her in an unfatherly way with other nobles about. She needs to keep up the act as Alayne until she's sure she is no longer Lady Lannister and she's safe from the Lannisters' bounty hunters.