Aranarth and the heirs of King Ondoher
I was looking at some genealogy on Tolkien Gateway and ended up a little confused by succession debate in Gondor after the death of King Ondoher. He and his two sons were killed in TA 1944. Eärnil, the great-grandson of Ondoher's great-uncle (Ondoher's second cousin once removed), was ultimately chosen as his successor. However, Ondoher's grandson Aranarth via his daughter Fíriel had been born by this time. I thought he would be an obvious heir, but I see no mention of any claim in his name anywhere. Instead the competing claim is by his father Arvedui, husband of Fíriel, and was rejected by the Council of Gondor in favor of Eärnil.
Why did Arvedui and Fíriel not claim their son was heir at this time, and why did the Council not automatically consider Ondoher's own grandson as the next in line after his sons?
First, I understand the political reasons the Council chose against Arvedui may have applied to Aranarth as well:
- Arvedui's realm of Arthedain was considered small, so his stature was seen as insufficient to rule Gondor. Aranarth was of that house and could be seen in the same light.
- Eärnil was a victorious general and had just avenged Ondoher's death in battle, giving him a great amount of political support in the moment as a "spiritual successor" regardless of any strict rules of succession.
But my question is not really whether he would've won the throne, but why the conversation was even about Arvedui rather than Aranarth. Part of Arvedui's argument was that Fíriel would've been Ondoher's female heir by ancient Númenórean law; he claims the throne as husband of the heir. But Aranarth is HEIR to the heir, by blood not just marriage. Even if Arvedui's claim is tenuous, his seems more ironclad to inherit any claim of Fíriel's.
I would love to hear of other factors here, and your opinions. I'm far from an expert on Tolkien or on real-life royal traditions, but here are some possibilities that occur to me but don't know if they would apply/are accurate:
- Did the direct male line take strict precedence in that era of Gondor? I suppose this would explain a second cousin being the default over a maternal grandson, strange as it seems to my modern mindset.
- Would Aranarth being a young child at the time prevent him from being considered? There's some confusion over the date of his birth vs the marriage of his parents, but all seem to agree he was born a few years before his grandfather was killed.
- Presumably either his father Arvedui would rule as regent until he was older, or the stewards would do so as they did a century later after Eärnur. But perhaps they would only govern like this given no other heir, and there was no tradition or willingness to do so with a child king? Or perhaps the feelings against Arvedui made them cautious to give him any reason to claim the rule through his son.
- In searching before posting, I found another thread here that mentioned the possibility Aranarth was born out of wedlock ("the only bastard on Middle-Earth" haha). It seems more likely the date discrepancy is just changes over multiple drafts, but it's also the only idea I heard that explains why his claim would be weaker than his father's - though even that requires certain assumptions about royalty rules for illegitimate sons vs husbands.
- Perhaps Aranarth did have the most legitimate claim, but Arvedui's choice to try to claim the throne for himself spoiled it, and pushed the Council to choose the option outside of his orbit?
- Similarly, perhaps if the argument for Aranarth went through Fíriel, then Fíriel herself should've made the claim, whereas one for Arvedui OR Aranarth spoils it by in a sense invalidating its own argument by not acknowledging her as the rightful heir.
What do you think? Why not Aranarth? Thanks for your thoughts!