A mirror of the eeesite "A Song of Ice and Fire"

This is a mirror of the now defunct eesite ASOIAF webboard.

The discussions for G.R.R. Martin's awesome series "A Song of Ice and Fire" are now being held at: Current ASoIaF Webboard

You cannot post new messages to this board. Go to the Current ASoIaF Webboard for the most current discussions.

A Song of Ice and Fire / A Clash of Kings III / Was Renly's marriage consumated?

Ants
User ID: 2240694 Jun 18th 8:02 PM
Was Renly's marriage consumated? Renly's comments to Stannis and in front of his host implies it was, and Cersei seems to have no doubt about it.

The reason this is interesting, is that if Maergaery is pregnant, the next heir could be a Baratheon, and have no Lanister blood at all! This would be truly irionic.

Also, the Lannister's could not pick up too much of a fuss without ruining the Tyrell alliance. Also, as the baby will probably reflect Renly a great deal, if they pick up too much of a fuss, people might start asking why Cersei's children look nothing like Robert, giving more credence to Stannis' claims.

LindaElane
User ID: 0276214 Jun 18th 9:35 PM
Too much time elapses between Renly's death and Margery's marriage to Joffrey. Margery could claim the child was premature, but a full term infant does not look premature. The aqe of the child would look too wrong for her to be believed. So, even if the Lannister's had their reasons for keeping quiet, others would not.

Besides, Cersei simply kills any heirs who are related to Robert whilst they are fetuses. So, from her point of view, why not kill Margery's child before or just after it comes.

Jeff
User ID: 8813033 Jun 18th 9:56 PM
I thought there was a comment somewhere that the marriage was not consumnated, and that was one reason why the Lannisters agreed to the marriage.

Relic
User ID: 9308123 Jun 18th 10:04 PM
Think yer right.

Ser Benjen
User ID: 2122084 Jun 19th 7:45 AM
I think Ser Garlan Tyrell actually mentioned that when he requested Joff marry Margaery at the honors and awards ceremony after the Battle of the Blackwater.

labor
User ID: 0798784 Jun 19th 8:53 AM
Yes, at least 2 or 3 months between Margaery and Renly being at the same location at the same time and her marriage to Joff... BTW, it looks like they have no required span od mourning at all.

Besides, I have no idea how it is done in Westeros, but in RL, the prospective brides were often investigated by knoweldgeable women. I don't know if virginity is a great issue in Westeros - from we have seen and heard about Cersei and Lysa (and how Littlefingers boasts about Catelyn were easily believed) I suspect that it isn't, but pre-marital pregnancy is another thing altogether.

Emily
User ID: 2192024 Jun 19th 12:45 PM
The Tyrells certainly claimed that Marg was a virgin, but they would, wouldn't they? King Joffrey wouldn't want to take anyone's leavings, let alone his evil usurper uncle's.

However, I'm inclined to believe them. Renly was IMHO Loras's lover, and had no interest in women. And Mr I-cannot-tell-a-lie Stannis said that in Renly's bed, Marg was like to remain a virgin.

On the other hand, it would be incredibly stupid of Renly not to consummate his marriage, if he was physically capable of doing so, as his Tyrell support rested on the marriage, and their hopes of a grandson eventually on the throne.

I think virginity _is_ an issue in Westeros. It is in every other patriarchal society. If it hadn't been a big deal, why didn't Catelyn and Brandon, or Robert and Lyanna, sleep together, as they were betrothed? What about that girl in AGOT who was so terrified when she was caught in bed with a boy that she accused him of rape and got him sent to the Night's Watch? And as far as I'm concerned, Littlefinger was lying through his teeth about Lysa as well as Catelyn. And Robert was too drunk on his wedding night to realise Cersei wasn't a virgin, or there'd have been trouble.

Padraig
User ID: 8548253 Jun 20th 4:33 PM
I also remember something from the so spoke GRRM collection that sometimes men didn't bed their wives if the wife was too young. I think that was Renly's excuse for not consumating his marriage. He thought he had plenty time to get around to the "unsavoury" act;-)

LindaElane
User ID: 0276214 Jun 20th 9:04 PM
Excellent point. Yes, they were always getting married at 12, and it would often be annulled as it had not been consumated and was merely performed as part of a political alliance. I think Margery is 15 when she marries Renly? If so, thats a little old, but as Padraig said, its really just an excuse anyway.

Here is another theory. Doesn't the world suppose Joff to be Renly's nephew. Maybe it breaks a rule of consaguinity, or comes close enough to breaking it that the Tyrells don't want any trouble and so say the marriage was never consumated. This way Joff can't try to put away Margery because "she slept with my uncle, ewe, gross, we are committing a sin and thats why I don't have a son" (I am sure you all know which historical personage I am alluding to with that.)

Of course Margery would have to "fake it" but its my understanding that if there is no examination, this is pretty easily done. Since Cersei, a non-virgin, married Robert, I think we may presume Margery can succeed. Btw, this assumes Cersei claimed to be a virgin because she had to in order to marry the King.

One more point is that the Tyrells want the marriage to take place rather soon, a couple of months after Renly's death. Its possible to have periods until the third month of pregnancy. So, maybe they just don't want the wedding put off because of Margery's possible pregnancy. Of course, they are taking a huge risk if she does turn out to be pregnant. This argues for Margery really being a virgin since the Tyrells are letting her marry so soon after Renly.

I personally believe Renly was gay and loathed the idea of having sex with a woman. He could have said "Oh, not in a tent, my dear, with my guards just beyond the cloth. Let us want for a more propitious time."

Emily
User ID: 2192024 Jun 21st 7:29 AM
Sansa having her period at 13 meant that she was, as she (rather unenthusiastically) said herself, ready to wed and bed Joffrey. Renly leaving Margaery untouched at 15 would be distinctly odd. He seemed to be pretending he _had_ consummated the marriage - all that cuddling in public, the 'My sweet Queen is woman enough for me' stuff. Also, the Tyrells' excuse for Marg's virginity was not 'She was too young' but 'Renly went off to war before he could consummate it' (a blatant lie - OK, Renly _did_ go off to war, but he took his wife with him).

labor
User ID: 0798784 Jun 21st 7:38 AM
Well, IIRC GRRM said that because of the maesters the Westerosi did notice that if a woman has a child too young, it is likely to be sickly and all sort of complications are likely, so most nobles will wait with bedding until the wife is 15-_16_. so, renly certainly had his excuse.

Concerning cosanguity - in Westeros there is a custom that if a betrothed man dies, his unmarried brother has to fulfill the marriage contract. IIRC it is something directly contradicting medieval traditions. I am quite sure that some of the truly ridiculous medieval cosanguity restrictions (i.e. two brothers can't marry two sisters) aren't followed in Westeros. And one also notices that marrying one's first cousins isn't forbidden either.

Virginity - Linda, Littlefinger's claims, true or not, were quite readily believed. No one thought it strange that the two great lords married "damaged goods" without any fuss.

LindaElane
User ID: 0276214 Jun 21st 9:05 PM
I am not sure that Littlefinger's claims were readily believed. I was just rereading the portion where Cersei, et al, decide to remain silent in the face of accusations of the three children's bastardy, except for starting a counter rumor. I think the counter rumor (in this case true) about Littlefinger's humiliation at Brandon's hands would have created doubt as to whether his story was true or was snivling back biting gossip stated as pure revenge. Well, thats my opinion.

Interesting information on consaguinity. I recall a long passage in Leviticus (you shall not marry your grandfather's wife, for thereby you uncover his nakedness, among other things) and perhaps medieval laws were based on this. I know you could not marry your brother's wife, according to this same passage.

I seem to remember Joff declaring an intention to bed Sansa as soon as she mensturates. What I got from it at the time was that while this happened, it was not always the done thing.

Padraig
User ID: 1564944 Jun 23rd 6:02 PM
I think the most interesting thing about the Tyrells claims about Margarey's virginity is that their lies did appear so blatant. Aren't they making obvious fools of the Lannisters by making the ridiculous assertion that Margarey was still a virgin? Except if they know something we don't.

LindaElane
User ID: 0276214 Jun 23rd 6:59 PM
I agree Padraig. I am almost certain this claim would only be made unless it were true.

WeissVan
User ID: 1125704 Jun 26th 1:33 AM
labor and LindaElane:

Actually ancient Hebrew custom proscribes that if a married man dies and has not had children yet, that his brother would marry her, and that the firstborn would succeed the dead man. I believe this is called 'levirate marriage' and is found in Deuteronomy 25:5-10.

The custom was probably well established in the Ancient Near East, as we see it in Genesis, which preceded the giving of the Mosaic Law by about 400+ years -- Genesis 38 records the story of Er and Onan, Judah's oldest sons, and Onan's refusal to provide an heir for Er (the details of which shall not be provided here, but you can either look it up or ask Ser Wanksalot).

LindaElane
User ID: 0276214 Jun 26th 1:54 AM
Hahah..well, I get it. I am quite familiar with Onan. Anyway.....

I think you are very correct about the old testament law that you would indeed marry your brother's widow if there had been no issue from the marriage. Thats what first horribly confused me when I first watched the "Six Wives of Henry the 8th" ages ago. I knew very well you were supposed to marry your brother's widow, in the old testament, if there had been no issue. How cool someone else wonders.

All I can say is that apparently the Catholic church picked and choose by a system unknown to me, which laws of the Old Testament to heed, and which to say no longer applied. For example, the eating of pork is not forbidden to Catholics. It is in the Old Testament, but is considered a mere "dietary law" and so it does not apply in modern times. Interestingly, the lack of refrigeration in the desert made this a darn good law in the Israeli desert, but not necessarily elsewhere, so I am not claiming the Popes were always and without exception utter idiots in deciding which Old Testament laws to heed and which not to.

To make a long story short, there is a verse which says "Thou shalt not marry thy brothers widow, for thou dost uncover his nakedness"....not exact words but a close paraphrase. Later, there is an exception to that law, that you should do it if the brother had no issue. Apparently the medieval church paid great heed to the former law, and held the later to be not binding anymore.

Again, there was some reason for that. It is thought that the reason a man was commanded to marry his brothers widow is the same reason some men marry their brother's widow in many African countries today. The woman would die if he did not. This is a big deal when Africans want to convert to Christianity. Some are married to brother's widows and will not give them up. Yet to this day, the Christian church says they must if they have other wives.....

Ants User ID: 2240694	Jun 18th 8:02 PM Was Renly's marriage consumated? Renly's comments to Stannis and in front of his host implies it was, and Cersei seems to have no doubt about it. The reason this is interesting, is that if Maergaery is pregnant, the next heir could be a Baratheon, and have no Lanister blood at all! This would be truly irionic. Also, the Lannister's could not pick up too much of a fuss without ruining the Tyrell alliance. Also, as the baby will probably reflect Renly a great deal, if they pick up too much of a fuss, people might start asking why Cersei's children look nothing like Robert, giving more credence to Stannis' claims.
LindaElane User ID: 0276214	Jun 18th 9:35 PM Too much time elapses between Renly's death and Margery's marriage to Joffrey. Margery could claim the child was premature, but a full term infant does not look premature. The aqe of the child would look too wrong for her to be believed. So, even if the Lannister's had their reasons for keeping quiet, others would not. Besides, Cersei simply kills any heirs who are related to Robert whilst they are fetuses. So, from her point of view, why not kill Margery's child before or just after it comes.
Jeff User ID: 8813033	Jun 18th 9:56 PM I thought there was a comment somewhere that the marriage was not consumnated, and that was one reason why the Lannisters agreed to the marriage.
Relic User ID: 9308123	Jun 18th 10:04 PM Think yer right.
Ser Benjen User ID: 2122084	Jun 19th 7:45 AM I think Ser Garlan Tyrell actually mentioned that when he requested Joff marry Margaery at the honors and awards ceremony after the Battle of the Blackwater.
labor User ID: 0798784	Jun 19th 8:53 AM Yes, at least 2 or 3 months between Margaery and Renly being at the same location at the same time and her marriage to Joff... BTW, it looks like they have no required span od mourning at all. Besides, I have no idea how it is done in Westeros, but in RL, the prospective brides were often investigated by knoweldgeable women. I don't know if virginity is a great issue in Westeros - from we have seen and heard about Cersei and Lysa (and how Littlefingers boasts about Catelyn were easily believed) I suspect that it isn't, but pre-marital pregnancy is another thing altogether.
Emily User ID: 2192024	Jun 19th 12:45 PM The Tyrells certainly claimed that Marg was a virgin, but they would, wouldn't they? King Joffrey wouldn't want to take anyone's leavings, let alone his evil usurper uncle's. However, I'm inclined to believe them. Renly was IMHO Loras's lover, and had no interest in women. And Mr I-cannot-tell-a-lie Stannis said that in Renly's bed, Marg was like to remain a virgin. On the other hand, it would be incredibly stupid of Renly not to consummate his marriage, if he was physically capable of doing so, as his Tyrell support rested on the marriage, and their hopes of a grandson eventually on the throne. I think virginity _is_ an issue in Westeros. It is in every other patriarchal society. If it hadn't been a big deal, why didn't Catelyn and Brandon, or Robert and Lyanna, sleep together, as they were betrothed? What about that girl in AGOT who was so terrified when she was caught in bed with a boy that she accused him of rape and got him sent to the Night's Watch? And as far as I'm concerned, Littlefinger was lying through his teeth about Lysa as well as Catelyn. And Robert was too drunk on his wedding night to realise Cersei wasn't a virgin, or there'd have been trouble.
Padraig User ID: 8548253	Jun 20th 4:33 PM I also remember something from the so spoke GRRM collection that sometimes men didn't bed their wives if the wife was too young. I think that was Renly's excuse for not consumating his marriage. He thought he had plenty time to get around to the "unsavoury" act;-)
LindaElane User ID: 0276214	Jun 20th 9:04 PM Excellent point. Yes, they were always getting married at 12, and it would often be annulled as it had not been consumated and was merely performed as part of a political alliance. I think Margery is 15 when she marries Renly? If so, thats a little old, but as Padraig said, its really just an excuse anyway. Here is another theory. Doesn't the world suppose Joff to be Renly's nephew. Maybe it breaks a rule of consaguinity, or comes close enough to breaking it that the Tyrells don't want any trouble and so say the marriage was never consumated. This way Joff can't try to put away Margery because "she slept with my uncle, ewe, gross, we are committing a sin and thats why I don't have a son" (I am sure you all know which historical personage I am alluding to with that.) Of course Margery would have to "fake it" but its my understanding that if there is no examination, this is pretty easily done. Since Cersei, a non-virgin, married Robert, I think we may presume Margery can succeed. Btw, this assumes Cersei claimed to be a virgin because she had to in order to marry the King. One more point is that the Tyrells want the marriage to take place rather soon, a couple of months after Renly's death. Its possible to have periods until the third month of pregnancy. So, maybe they just don't want the wedding put off because of Margery's possible pregnancy. Of course, they are taking a huge risk if she does turn out to be pregnant. This argues for Margery really being a virgin since the Tyrells are letting her marry so soon after Renly. I personally believe Renly was gay and loathed the idea of having sex with a woman. He could have said "Oh, not in a tent, my dear, with my guards just beyond the cloth. Let us want for a more propitious time."
Emily User ID: 2192024	Jun 21st 7:29 AM Sansa having her period at 13 meant that she was, as she (rather unenthusiastically) said herself, ready to wed and bed Joffrey. Renly leaving Margaery untouched at 15 would be distinctly odd. He seemed to be pretending he _had_ consummated the marriage - all that cuddling in public, the 'My sweet Queen is woman enough for me' stuff. Also, the Tyrells' excuse for Marg's virginity was not 'She was too young' but 'Renly went off to war before he could consummate it' (a blatant lie - OK, Renly _did_ go off to war, but he took his wife with him).
labor User ID: 0798784	Jun 21st 7:38 AM Well, IIRC GRRM said that because of the maesters the Westerosi did notice that if a woman has a child too young, it is likely to be sickly and all sort of complications are likely, so most nobles will wait with bedding until the wife is 15-_16_. so, renly certainly had his excuse. Concerning cosanguity - in Westeros there is a custom that if a betrothed man dies, his unmarried brother has to fulfill the marriage contract. IIRC it is something directly contradicting medieval traditions. I am quite sure that some of the truly ridiculous medieval cosanguity restrictions (i.e. two brothers can't marry two sisters) aren't followed in Westeros. And one also notices that marrying one's first cousins isn't forbidden either. Virginity - Linda, Littlefinger's claims, true or not, were quite readily believed. No one thought it strange that the two great lords married "damaged goods" without any fuss.
LindaElane User ID: 0276214	Jun 21st 9:05 PM I am not sure that Littlefinger's claims were readily believed. I was just rereading the portion where Cersei, et al, decide to remain silent in the face of accusations of the three children's bastardy, except for starting a counter rumor. I think the counter rumor (in this case true) about Littlefinger's humiliation at Brandon's hands would have created doubt as to whether his story was true or was snivling back biting gossip stated as pure revenge. Well, thats my opinion. Interesting information on consaguinity. I recall a long passage in Leviticus (you shall not marry your grandfather's wife, for thereby you uncover his nakedness, among other things) and perhaps medieval laws were based on this. I know you could not marry your brother's wife, according to this same passage. I seem to remember Joff declaring an intention to bed Sansa as soon as she mensturates. What I got from it at the time was that while this happened, it was not always the done thing.
Padraig User ID: 1564944	Jun 23rd 6:02 PM I think the most interesting thing about the Tyrells claims about Margarey's virginity is that their lies did appear so blatant. Aren't they making obvious fools of the Lannisters by making the ridiculous assertion that Margarey was still a virgin? Except if they know something we don't.
LindaElane User ID: 0276214	Jun 23rd 6:59 PM I agree Padraig. I am almost certain this claim would only be made unless it were true.
WeissVan User ID: 1125704	Jun 26th 1:33 AM labor and LindaElane: Actually ancient Hebrew custom proscribes that if a married man dies and has not had children yet, that his brother would marry her, and that the firstborn would succeed the dead man. I believe this is called 'levirate marriage' and is found in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. The custom was probably well established in the Ancient Near East, as we see it in Genesis, which preceded the giving of the Mosaic Law by about 400+ years -- Genesis 38 records the story of Er and Onan, Judah's oldest sons, and Onan's refusal to provide an heir for Er (the details of which shall not be provided here, but you can either look it up or ask Ser Wanksalot).
LindaElane User ID: 0276214	Jun 26th 1:54 AM Hahah..well, I get it. I am quite familiar with Onan. Anyway..... I think you are very correct about the old testament law that you would indeed marry your brother's widow if there had been no issue from the marriage. Thats what first horribly confused me when I first watched the "Six Wives of Henry the 8th" ages ago. I knew very well you were supposed to marry your brother's widow, in the old testament, if there had been no issue. How cool someone else wonders. All I can say is that apparently the Catholic church picked and choose by a system unknown to me, which laws of the Old Testament to heed, and which to say no longer applied. For example, the eating of pork is not forbidden to Catholics. It is in the Old Testament, but is considered a mere "dietary law" and so it does not apply in modern times. Interestingly, the lack of refrigeration in the desert made this a darn good law in the Israeli desert, but not necessarily elsewhere, so I am not claiming the Popes were always and without exception utter idiots in deciding which Old Testament laws to heed and which not to. To make a long story short, there is a verse which says "Thou shalt not marry thy brothers widow, for thou dost uncover his nakedness"....not exact words but a close paraphrase. Later, there is an exception to that law, that you should do it if the brother had no issue. Apparently the medieval church paid great heed to the former law, and held the later to be not binding anymore. Again, there was some reason for that. It is thought that the reason a man was commanded to marry his brothers widow is the same reason some men marry their brother's widow in many African countries today. The woman would die if he did not. This is a big deal when Africans want to convert to Christianity. Some are married to brother's widows and will not give them up. Yet to this day, the Christian church says they must if they have other wives.....