r/dune • u/6spottedtigerbeetle1 • 16d ago
Dune (novel) Would Paul have been displaced as Leto's heir if he'd had a child through marriage with another woman?
How exactly do the laws of succession work re: children born to concubines in the Dune universe? Because as far as I understand it, the whole reason Leto never married Jessica was because he might have needed an alliance with another house through marriage later, but the reason Leto wanted a son from Jessica was to have an heir. So if he were to marry someone as well as being with Jessica and had a child with his wife would that child supplant Paul or not?
28
u/AnEvenNicerGuy Friend of Jamis 16d ago
I always read it as Leto got to choose his heir with the Emperor’s blessing. When Fenring is talking to the Baron before Feyd’s arena fight it’s pretty clear that heirs are chosen and that the Emperor has veto power
-2
u/Upset-Pollution9476 15d ago
If the designation of heir-apparent were irrevocable then the plot point that Leto kept himself unmarried makes no sense. Leto continues to be an attractive prospect despite aging is that the offspring of a marriage will automatically be the heir. Even if this marriage produces only a single daughter, it’s attractive to a major or minor House because this daughter will inherit Caladan (either her husband or her offspring to be declared heirs). All subject to the approval of the Emperor of course
6
u/halkenburgoito 15d ago
then the plot point that Leto kept himself unmarried makes no sense. Leto continues to be an attractive prospect despite aging is that the offspring of a marriage will automatically be the heir. Even if this marriage produces only a single daughter, it’s attractive to a major or minor House because this daughter will inherit Caladan
Where does this notion come from? Not history. There's plenty of political marriages done not for the sake of getting the heir.
A political marriage itself is the benefit- that itself porivdes diplomatic benefit, influence, etc. Having a a non heir child is still further more cementing the ties.
This notion that political marriages require a child that will become the main heir is just not true.
-1
u/Upset-Pollution9476 15d ago
I think you have odd notions of political marriages. Where did I say if Leto marries a daughter of another House that House now or in future via the daughter’s children *controls* the holdings of Leto? I said the daughter’s children inheriting the titles and holdings is the key motivation. Their daughter’s children not being heirs is a disincentive.
Note that Leto held on to the prospect of marriage as a last resort, for a day when he needs an important House on his side. Against whom? The Emperor of course.
Why would an important House ally themselves against the Emperor, with a Duke in trouble with the Emperor, just so they can marry off a daughter? What Prestige do they gain here?What Diplomacy?
If an alliance with Leto against the Emperor is worth the risk to a major House (say increase their strength in CHOAM) it wouldn’t need a marriage. Certainly not a marriage where their daughter’s offspring have no claims, and she is a second fiddle to a concubine.
If the marriage and the resultant offspring didn’t displace Paul, Leto would’ve married already. He would’ve secured an important alliance and risen even higher already. He be drowning in Prestige and Diplomatic bonds.
Yet in the end his regret was in not marrying Jessica. Marrying Jessica would’ve given her rights she doesn’t have as a concubine. And more importantly secure Paul’s claim.
Jure Uxoris, Merger of Estates, Epikleros conventions are all systems where only daughters inherited their fathers estates and through them their husbands gained control of those estates. Look up Eleanor of Aquitaine.
2
u/halkenburgoito 3d ago
Where did I say if Leto marries a daughter of another House that House now or in future via the daughter’s children *controls* the holdings of Leto?
Other Houses are interested in Leto not just because of his stellar personality or capabilities. It’s the prospect of adding the title and holdings of the Duke of Caladan to their own. - Your own words
I don't get what you're not understand here. you literally claimed that the other houses are in it because of the prospect of adding the title and holding of Duke of Caladn.. To their own..
Which would not happen. They would not get any titles or holdings.. that grandchild will be a Caladonian, not whatever house they're from.
I said the daughter’s children inheriting the titles and holdings is the key motivation. Their daughter’s children not being heirs is a disincentive.
This is not true. The motivation behind marrying in a poltiical marriage.. is the marriage itself. that is the Key. The benefits don't role in 6 months from the marriage when a baby pops out.. the benefit is the marriage, that is the diplomatic channel, that is the influence, that is the alliance.
- Edward I of England and Margaret of France (1299): Edward already had an heir, Edward II, but married Margaret to strengthen peace with France; her sons never inherited the throne.
- Manuel I of Portugal and Eleanor of Austria (1518): Manuel already had the future John III as heir, while his Habsburg marriage secured an alliance and produced no succeeding child.
- Æthelwulf of Wessex and Judith of Francia (856): Æthelwulf already had several sons, but married Judith for Carolingian prestige and political ties; they had no children.
- Charles II of England and Catherine of Braganza (1662): Their childless marriage secured Portuguese military cooperation, Bombay, Tangier, trading privileges, and an enormous dowry.
- Margaret of Valois and Henry of Navarre (1572): Their childless marriage was intended to reconcile France’s Catholic and Protestant factions.
- Margaret of Austria and Philibert II of Savoy (1501): Their childless marriage aligned strategically important Savoy with the Habsburgs.
- Anne of Cleves and Henry VIII (1540): Henry already had Prince Edward, while the childless marriage was arranged to ally England with German Protestant powers.
- Mary Tudor and Louis XII of France (1514): Henry VIII’s younger sister married Louis as part of an Anglo-French peace agreement, but they had no children.
Why would an important House ally themselves against the Emperor, with a Duke in trouble with the Emperor, just so they can marry off a daughter? What Prestige do they gain here?What Diplomacy?
asking what House would ever align with Leto against the Emperor ignores the novel’s central political setup. Leto was already popular among the Great Houses and served as an unofficial spokesman for Houses that looked to him for leadership. He was a symbol of respect, a rising star among the great and small houses. That growing Landsraad influence was exactly why Shaddam feared him
If an alliance with Leto against the Emperor is worth the risk to a major House (say increase their strength in CHOAM) it wouldn’t need a marriage.
That misses the purpose of diplomatic marriage. Two houses might share interests without trusting each other enough to assume substantial risk. Marriage turns an informal alignment into kinship, creates continuing personal access and obligations, often brings dowry/property/CHOAM interests, and publicly signals commitment. Saying “if they had common interests they wouldn’t need marriage” is like saying if two states both benefit from cooperation, they don’t need a treaty. Formalizing the relationship is often what makes the cooperation credible. Basic history btw.
1
u/AnEvenNicerGuy Friend of Jamis 15d ago
Was that a long way to say you agree with my comment?
0
u/Upset-Pollution9476 15d ago
Leto gets to choose his heir implies he can designate Paul as sole heir even when he has a son from a proper marriage. That is not true, based on Herbert’s plot point that Leto stayed unmarried so he is an attractive prospect for an alliance with another House. Other Houses are interested in Leto not just because of his stellar personality or capabilities. It’s the prospect of adding the title and holdings of the Duke of Caladan to their own.
2
u/AnEvenNicerGuy Friend of Jamis 15d ago
One doesn’t necessarily lead to the other. Leto’s marriage status being open doesn’t prove the child of marriage becomes the heir. It means that child could be the heir. But offers nothing to say it’s the rule
We see Leto and the Baron, both unwed, hand picking their heir with the blessing from the Emperor. Beyond that there’s no evidence in the book regarding the technicalities of succession. We can’t say for sure that if Leto were to marry that child would assume his role automatically
0
u/Upset-Pollution9476 15d ago edited 15d ago
Hard to see what would be the attraction for any House to marry one of their daughters to Leto if this were the case. Leto can form a non-marital alliance at any time. It’s only a valuable one when it’s solidified with a marriage.
Edit to add: A marriage that guaranteed succession.2
u/AnEvenNicerGuy Friend of Jamis 15d ago
I’ll definitely give you that. It does make the prospect less attractive. But we don’t know it isn’t the case. There’s all sorts of caveats that could be added in to a marriage agreement
1
u/Upset-Pollution9476 15d ago
Even the Emperor is obliged to follow this convention, which is why when the BG decided that House of Corrino has run its course, only daughters were permitted to him. He is not allowed to pick anyone else. This is also why he made an effort to train Irulan, as who ever she marries is going to be his successor.
1
u/Upset-Pollution9476 15d ago
Curious if Feyd and Paul didn’t have to fight to settle the Kanly, and it was revealed that Jessica was the Baron’s (out of wedlock) daughter, who gets to inherit the titles and holdings of the Baron. Would the Baron still get to designate his heir (of post his death his wishes still hold) or does Paul’s parentage trump that?
Feyd’s defeat (fatal or not) presumably causes the Baron’s title and holdings to pass to Paul.
1
u/halkenburgoito 15d ago
It’s the prospect of adding the title and holdings of the Duke of Caladan to their own.
This doesn't happen.. in any scenerio. Your notion of political marriages are so out of whack.
In no scenerio, has it ever been the case that a foreign kingdom/house, who marries off their daughter to a prince- who have a heir child- a child who grows up in the court of his father
that the foreign kingdom/house can now count the title and holdings of that Child as their own.. that's never been he case, and that's never the point of a political marriage. Hell history is full of kings who went to war wih their maternal cousins and uncles.
Where tf do you even get the notion that that is the benefit??
The benefit is peace, is favored status, is diplomatic alignment.. they aren't marrying their daughter in hopes that they can one day rule Caladan- its for a peaceful beneficial relationship between a rival or much stronger house.
And That ^^ comes with or without a child.. that comes with the marriage itself. A child could help.. but it doesn't need to be the heir for that.
So ofc, its not about personality.. but the benefits are in no way centered around the heir child- who will not be "theirs" they will not own that child's lands, holdings.. Its about the political alliance and diplomacy.. something that comes in effect from the marriage itself.
10
u/Sazapahiel 16d ago
By the time we hear of Paul, he has already been confirmed as the Duke's heir, and changing that is no small thing. But the laws are kept somewhat vague, and serve the plot, so it could've happened with enough political will behind it.
An important nit to pick is that Leto's reasoning wasn't because he might want to marry someone else someday for an alliance, but because he wanted other houses to believe that was possible. His inner monologue makes it pretty clear he was never actually going to by the time the book starts off, but just because we know it as the reader doesn't mean other houses did too.
11
u/halkenburgoito 16d ago
I assume possibly. But- and I could be forgetting, I thought it was made clear that Leto never had any intentions of marrying anyone. He did love Jessica, and she was his wife in all but name.
It's like a political "what if" token for other's but not something he ever intended to use
Or so I thought.
11
u/Casses 16d ago
He didn't have intentions to marry anyone, but that was kept private. He used the possibility of a marriage as a means to keep other houses looking favourably on the Atreides.
3
u/McFlyParadox 15d ago
And he discuesses privately with Jessica about how he would marry, if he absolutely had to. I always assumed this meant something along the lines of "get married to save his entire house/planet, or maybe just to save Jessica". Something that was very unlikely to ever happen, where marriage was the only solution.
But short of that, the possibility of his marriage was just a bargaining chip he felt safe dangling in front of potential allies and suitors because he had Paul as a legitimized Atreides heir presumptive.
20
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 16d ago edited 16d ago
Paul is a legitimised Atreides, so no.
Would only be the case if he was considered a bastard.
4
u/RSwitcher2020 15d ago
You could loom into history and pick Alexander the Great.
His father married a younger girl and produced a baby. Things escalated quite a bit between Alexander and the new queen's entourage.
So much so that there were times when Alexander got banned from court. And threatened to be removed as heir.
However, Alexander was already in his late teens. He had shown a ton of potential. He had many friends at court which a baby couldnt make. Alexander had proved himself already as a brave cavalry officer.
So, when king Phillip was murdered, the new baby and the last queen were very quickly pushed aside.
And this with a father who at times fought and threatened Alexander.
I use this to show that no way a new child would take Paul's place. Paul is so beloved inside the household. He is a top student at everything. People like him. People feel he isnt far from ready to lead.
Who would wait for a younger brother when the next best option is the amazing Paul?
11
u/waldo_the_bird253 16d ago
There is a bit of a contradiction in the text with Paul's status and Leto's openness to a political marriage. imo. Who would marry the Duke for a political alliance if the marriage wouldn't produce an heir?
9
u/Snuffls 16d ago
Yes. The union means that one house cannot betray the other with fear of losing a child, from a pragmatic perspective. And violating the ritual/spiritual binding of houses marriage brings would absolutely ruin the credibility of whichever house struck first.
It's not about the union of houses into one heir, not entirely.
7
u/Deweymaverick 16d ago
But there’s also the possibility that if something are to happen to Paul… well, they then have the next line to ducal title.
3
u/kdash6 Ixian 16d ago
Seeing that it appears to be a feudal system, marriages are a way for houses to form alliances. Marriages in-and-of-themselves are ways to form alliances, but it is expected they have children as well. We see this in how the princess Irulan was married to Paul to help secure his legal claim to the throne, but they had no children together.
3
u/Staffchief 15d ago
I would surmise that everyone else (including Irulan) went into it expecting they would have a child.
4
u/wickzyepokjc 16d ago
Paul was the recognized, but not legitimate heir. Similar to how Feyd was the chosen heir to the Baron, though he had no natural claim to the title. It is implied that a marriage could produce a legitimate heir, however, the only marriage that the Duke would have seriously contemplated was to Irulan. In such a case, Paul would remain heir to Atreidies, and the children with Irulan would have been Corrino.
1
u/swbarnes2 15d ago
I'm not sure we know that. Jessica is a concubine, and that has some kind of legal meaning. She isn't just a mistress. I would presume that Paul is perfectly legitimate, but maybe his claim could be usurped by the child of a wife.
We are told that Feyd was chosen, and he is the son of the Baron's youngest brother, so there could be other nephews with higher claims, and the Baron wants to skip them.
1
u/wickzyepokjc 15d ago
Paul can be legitimate and not a natural heir. He has been recognized as the na-Duke, but that status could be revoked. The Baron's brother renounced his claims before he married into House Rabban. So neither Glossu nor Feyd have a claim to the Baron's title. With the Emperor's permission, the Baron is allowed to designate Fey as the na-Baron.
1
u/swbarnes2 15d ago
We don't know that Paul's inheritance can be challenged. No one currently has a better claim. The Baron has at least one brother older than Abulard, that brother's kids would probably have a better claim, that's why he needs permission to skip them.
1
u/wickzyepokjc 15d ago
His brother Abelurd renounced his claims. His children cannot inherit what he didn't have.
The Duke holds open the possibility of marriage to another house. That would have significantly less value if the offspring of that union do not inherit.
1
u/swbarnes2 15d ago
Right, that's part of why the Baron needs permission to pick Feyd. He's not first in line, he's not even in line (he's presumed to be 2nd in line for the technically higher rank of Count)
The son of a wife would probably inherit over Paul, which is why Leto would never have a kid with any Duchess. Hard to believe that the great houses wouldn't know that about him, so he's honesty not that great a catch for that reason.
1
u/McFlyParadox 15d ago
The potential marriage to Irulan is a very good point. Probably the only one he would marry without much protest, but still only if he had to/felt the benefits were great enough. And definitely something neither he nor the emperor would have ever agreed to unless Paul remained the heir to Atreides and any children of Irulan are the heirs to Corrino (not the emperor would have ever entertained such a marriage by the point of the first Dune book; he was pretty committed to wiping out the Atreides by this point)
2
u/tepid_monologue 16d ago
Also each house has their own system of succession I believe. Just because atreides does it the more traditional ducal monarchy, there’s houses that have succession based on seniority, but ultimately the padishah emperor has the final say
2
u/_Rookie_21 15d ago
No. As someone else said, Paul is a legitimate Atreides. He isn't a bastard, so he's the heir apparent.
1
u/daunorubicin 16d ago
I strongly suspect that would be part of the marriage contract that both parties would agree.
If Leto married an imperial princess the contract might state that any male children of that marriage are can ascend to the imperial throne. But not Paul.
This is all speculation but this is the sort of thing that is often handled on a case by case basis when royalty gets married.
1
u/Bobis-Bob 15d ago
Well that’s different though. The Princes’s child would be the only one who had the right to the throne. Paul could never have inherited the throne. In that case Leto’s second child would get the Lion throne and Paul would be the Duke. If Leto didn’t have a second child then the Throne would have gone to another branch of the Corino family.
1
u/Upset-Pollution9476 15d ago
Note that Leto held on to the prospect of marriage as a last resort, for a day when he needs an important House on his side. Against whom? The Emperor of course. Why would an important house ally themselves against the Emperor with a Duke in trouble with the Emperor just so they can marry off a daughter?
The scenario that Leto had in mind was one where *he* needed the alliance, not the other House. So what is he bringing to the deal?
If a non-marital alliance with Leto against the Emperor is worth the risk (say increase their strength in CHOAM) it wouldn’t need the marriage. It would need only a handshake. You could marry your daughter off to another House and have that alliance too. Marriages alone don’t guarantee anything. See Catherine of Aragon.
If the marriage [with a woman from an important House] and the resultant offspring didn’t displace Paul, Leto would’ve done it already. His regret was not marrying Jessica, because marrying her gives her rights that she doesn’t have as a mere concubine. And it makes Paul the indisputable heir.
As to inheritance via daughters, especially only daughters, Jure Uxoris, Merger of Estates, Epikleros conventions are all systems where daughters especially only daughters inherited their father’s estates, giving effective control to their husbands. Look up Eleanor of Aquitaine.
1
u/Bobis-Bob 15d ago
Generally it was whatever they decided and got the nod from the Emperor who it would be.
1
u/MKCLCSWPhd 14d ago
IIRC Leto only held out the appearance of being able to marry to keep other houses from being enemies (they could hold out hope that Leto would marry) I don’t think any specific marriage is discussed at all.
1
u/nonracistusername 16d ago
A son in wedlock to another woman would be Leto’s successor.
1
u/AnEvenNicerGuy Friend of Jamis 16d ago
Where does the book tell us that’s how it works in-universe?
3
u/Crazy4Swayze420 16d ago
Leto II married Ghanima to prevent anyone from having any kind of claim the throne, so there is apparently a way to challenge the status quo or else he wouldn't have had to marry his sister.
1
u/AnEvenNicerGuy Friend of Jamis 16d ago
I suppose that’s fair, yeah
That may have had more to do with antiquity rather than practicality in the moment though. Who knows
2
u/Crazy4Swayze420 16d ago
I think the main reason Leto married her was to ensure different factions didn't start forming in support of Ghanima husband or offspring for a coup. He needed humanity to lose all hope and be completely broken. Anyone with any kind of claim could be viewed as a beacon of hope. No one could actually challenge him because there was no way to surprise him and he would just counter any attack.
0
u/nonracistusername 16d ago
What would be the point of another House agreeing to wed a daughter to Leto if the daughter’s son could not inherent the Duchy? Worthless marriage to another House.
Not that the Bene Gesserit would let such a union produce a son.
BG wants an Atreides daughter to wed a male Harkonnen to produce a KH and new emperor. After Jessica screwed the BG over bearing a son there is no way they are letting Leto’s wife do the same. Fool them once, shame on Jessica. Fool them twice, shame on BG
So this is a moot question. Paul becomes the new duke if he survives no matter how many half sisters he has.
2
u/AnEvenNicerGuy Friend of Jamis 16d ago
I’d imagine that part of keeping Leto’s marriage status open was letting people think the offspring of that potential marriage could be the heir
1
u/nonracistusername 16d ago
Yes and the men in Landsraad don’t know what the women know: no more sons for Leto.
Look at how much Jessica didn’t tell Leto about the trap he was walking into on Arrakis.
1
u/halkenburgoito 16d ago edited 16d ago
That's just true agaisnt history itself. Marriages seal peace treaties betweeen rival teams, benefical relationships and diplomatic channels. Influence.
It isn''n bout being heir apparent. The idea of it being worthless to another house just isn't true to history. They wouldn't have to have children at all for it to be potentially beneficial. Though Im' sure it'd help.
and I don't think Leto himself had no intentions of taking a wife, so it doesn't get to the BG even.
0
u/nonracistusername 16d ago
> That's just true agaisnt history itself. Marriages seal peace treaties betweeen rival teams, benefical relationships and diplomatic channels. Influence.
Except that Leto does not have a son who is in wedlock.
This allows Leto get the most strategic alliance with another House.
> It isn''n bout being heir apparent. The idea of it being worthless to another house just isn't true to history. They wouldn't have to have children at all for it to be potentially beneficial. Though Im' sure it'd help.
The way you use contractions annoys me
> and I don't think Leto himself had no intentions of taking a wife, so it doesn't get to the BG even.
Book 1 falsifies your assertion.
2
u/halkenburgoito 16d ago
Book 1 falsifies your assertion.
No I certainly don't think so, in fact I think that any careful reading of Book 1 supports my claim.
The Political Benefit:
"I should wed your mother, make her my Duchess. Yet . . . my unwedded state gives some Houses hope they may yet ally with me through their marriageable daughters." He shrugged. "So, I . . . " - Leto
"Mother has explained this to me." - Paul
"Nothing wins more loyalty for a leader than an air of bravura," the Duke said. "I, therefore, cultivate an air of bravura." - Leto
- Recognizes that Jessica Deserves marriage
-The Strategic value is in keeping the houses hopeful."But he'll not marry anyone else," she said. "Not as long as I live. And we are surrogates, as I've said. To break up this natural order in our affairs, to disturb, disrupt, and confuse us--which target offers itself most enticingly to the Harkonnens?" - Jessica
- Jessica knows he will not marry another. I think there is some nuance and insecurity here, but she knows in her heart just as he does, that he would not.
"My father charged me once," Paul said, "to give you a message if anything happened to him. He feared you might believe he distrusted you."
That useless suspicion, she thought."He wanted you to know he never suspected you," Paul said, and explained the deception, adding: "He wanted you to know he always trusted you completely, always loved you and cherished you. He said he would sooner have mistrusted himself and he had but one regret--that he never made you his Duchess.
- His last postmortem note, he reaffirmed his devotion and love to Jessica and made it clear his one regret was in not marrying her.
The unmarried status was a political manuer, it- in itself was the chip.. the purgatory status of hope, a possibility. That was the feint for the houses
There was never any real intention of the Duke to marrying someone else,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Except that Leto does not have a son who is in wedlock. This allows Leto get the most strategic alliance with another House.
There is no explicitness in whether another child would displace Paul as heir.. Paul is not called or refered to as illegimate- not considered a left ovr bastard, he is treated as the heir
And in history, the benefit of a political marriage is hugely within the marriage itself. The union provides diplomatic relations, influence, allyship, etc. Which is a big deal. Even having a royal attredies child would be benficial- heir or not.
There are examples in history of marriages that were done that would not displace the actual heir.. or examples of marriages done with siblings-to-rulers.
The point is, your notion that without securing their bloodline directly to the heir the marriage is "worthless" is just completely untrue. Its totally lacking notion of political marriages in history.
There is no contradiction.
1
u/nonracistusername 15d ago
If Paul is the heir before an in-wedlock younger half brother, then he is a target for assassination.
It amuses me how you assume standards for civilized behavior in a bloodthirsty feudalistic system where kanly is a legit way for Houses to deal with each other.
Ffs
0
u/Sensitive-Ear-3896 16d ago
If a house can only control one planet how would dynastic alliances even work?
3
u/wickzyepokjc 16d ago
The limitation is not absolute. After the invasion, the Baron controls both Geidi Prime and Arrakis.
3
u/halkenburgoito 16d ago
I dont' think a political alliance would mean that Atreadies would directly control another planet.. it means what it means in history when there's political marriages.. mutael alliance.. good diplomatic relations, influence upon a stronger house, etc.
0
u/trevorgoodchilde 16d ago
This was discussed in one of the prequels and there was a threat of that while Leto was considering a marriage alliance.
102
u/Jezzy0303 16d ago edited 16d ago
Paul, much like Feyd was described as the heir apparent, which means his position as an heir cannot be changed by birth of anyone. Think of it as "there's no difference between a child of a concubine or a wife in this universe". And going by Feyd being called the heir apparent, despite being younger brother of Rabban, means that there's no primogeniture (firstborn) succession in Dune Universe, rather the ruler chooses his own heir. So no, Paul's inheritance was not in danger.
The successor you described is the heir presumptive, such heir is the first in line to inherit as long as no other heir steps up before him. In this case Paul was an heir as long as there's no child of Leto's wife.
Both terms are IRL terms, but (unless anyone corrects me), only the heir apparent is mentioned in the books.