Quote:
Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin
However, I've still always been a bit puzzled why Aranarth didn't go south and claim the Crown; he was the only living descendant of Ondoher, and his father was of unimpeachable Numenorean lineage. Arvedui's claim to Anarion's inheritance was shaky, but not his son's.
|
From my point of view, Aranarth didn't even try to claim the Kingship of Arnor, thus he didn't feel able to claim the Kingship of Gondor. His father had been rejected based on the various claims, and I don't think Gondor reckons inheritance of royal status through matrilineal descent. The Line of Isildur had essentially been permanently rejected, and they had rejected claim of descent from Anárion by disallowing inheritance through mothers. Notice that in the entire history of Gondor, no sister-son of a king ever inherited the crown. It was always solely through male descent. Furthermore, Fíriel's own claim was rejected by proxy, when Arvedui used it to bolster his own claim, and the withheld the crown. In a way, one could argue that once a claim on the throne is rejected, a descendant further down the line can't resurrect it via the same justification. He'd have to find a new way to justify his claim on the crown of Gondor.
That being said, there are counter-arguments to this. 1. After the death of Ëarnur, there was no one with sufficiently royal heritage to claim the crown, and thus with all other possible candidates exhausted, withholding the crown from Aranarth (had he pressed a claim) would have been impossible, despite earlier rejections. 2. Aranarth could have done as both Arvedui and, later, Aragorn did, and use their status as the Heir of Elendil to surpass all other claims. Note that when Arvedui mentioned this, the Council of Gondor did not respond: they didn't write back, telling him that his claim didn't matter or was insufficient, as they did when they felt they had grounds for legal refusal, they simply ignored it and went on to crown Ëarnil II. This, to me, was a tacit acknowledgment that he had a valid point, but that it should be clear they weren't going to give him the crown. Once a king had been crowned, it would have taken a war to dethrone him, which Arvedui had neither the strength, nor likely the desire, to do. Aranarth, however, could have made his case before the Council after the death of Ëarnur, and though the council might have hemmed and hawed about it, claiming that Ëarnur's fate was technically unknown, they eventually (in my opinion) would have had to crown Aranarth. Unless they could find some legal means of withholding the crown from him, I don't think they would have been willing to become what amounted to usurpers.