[[Theory Thread]] Whatever Happened to Marley McDuck?

[Scrooge MacDuck]

Hello there! I always have many Disney Comic theories simmering around my brain, so I've decided to start making posts/threads about them around here and share them with the world. Because why not? For the purposes of these theories we'll be looking at this from a Watsonian perspective only — and trying to marry all the evidence we can. Today we'll start with - 

Whatever Happened to Marley McDuck?


For the confused, Marley McDuck is this guy. 


(From Donald Duck and the Man of the West, Martina/Carpi/Chierchini)

Evidence is split on whether his Italian name is Papiron De'Paperoni or just flat-out the same as Scrooge: Paperon De'Paperoni. But at any rate, he features in a 1958 story by Guido Martina, Giovan Battista Carpi and Giulio Chierchini entitled Donald Duck and the Man of the West. 

This bloke's gimmick is that he's Scrooge's twin brother — every bit as scrappy and resourceful as Scrooge, but with a generous disposition, which Scrooge is deeply ashamed of to the point of keeping his existence a family secret. He lives in a small Wild West town, where he has a gold mine and is considered the town's great benefactor thanks to his philanthropy.

I'm inclined to take the story's word on Scrooge managing to keep Marley's existence a secret. After all, per Rosa lore, Donald and Scrooge buried all evidence of Matilda McDuck outside of even Huey, Dewey and Louie's reach… and anyway, the Duck family has way too many relatives to be keeping track of them all on a regular basis. 

There are still a couple of weird issues with this. The first is why on Earth Donald or even Gladstone would be considered Scrooge's closest living relatives (and potential heirs) in so many stories if he's got a perfectly healthy twin brother, albeit a secret one. However, this is essentially a nonissue, because the Duckverse's inheritance laws don't make a shred of sense anyway — Marley or no Marley, there's also Gideon, and if weird Italian-continuity characters repulse you, well guess what…



…yeah, unless we assume Duckburg's laws are weirdly sexist (but then, why should Donald, a heir through the female line, take precedence over a male relative such as Uncle Midas?), Don Rosa dropped that ball just as much as Martina when he decided Matilda McDuck was still alive. 

So let's accept that the Duckburg legal system is bonkers and leave it at that.


(Great C'rruso, this panel keeps reminding me of Mayor Moneybag in The Christmas Tree.)

Likewise, Scrooge himself is often hailed as the "Last of the Clan McDuck", but that's… pretty obvious not true (even in a very strict Rosa-only universe because again, Matilda, unless again, random sexism). Even disregarding Gideon, Scrooge has a gazillion cousins, uncles and nephews left in Scotland who carry the McDuck name; this is no modern trend, either, starting in the U.S.A. as early as the 1950's with Wee Angus McDuck, Slye McDuck or Cyril McDuck. The best we can say is that he's symbolically the latest heir of the clan McDuck — chosen by the spooky ancestors to carry on the McDuck legacy and be the head of the family, to embody who the McDUcks are as opposed to simply being "a" McDuck.

The bigger issue is clearly, where the hell was Marley in Scrooge's childhood per Don Rosa? 


(From "The Last of the Clan McDuck", Don Rosa/Erickson)

Granted you could say the same thing about Gideon, but I've got him more or less solved: he was off to boarding school. It is historically accurate, and fitting of Gideon's future character, that Fergus and Downy might have decided they could strain their budget just enough to send one kid to school, and because he was the one who showed obvious talent with writing from the start, that kid ended up being Li'l Giddy. There's even some interesting additions to the Scrooge/Gideon dynamic to be found in the idea that the money Scrooge earned toiling away in Glasgow was, partially, to help Gideon receive the education that would eventually make him head of the County Conscience — making Gideon indebted to Scrooge from the start. 

Marley on the other hand, doesn't seem the type at all, and even then I feel he ought to be mentioned somewhere. 

Well, I mentioned The Search for Cyril above, and I think we have our answer. From that story:


(From "The Search for Cyril”, Lockman/Strobl/Steere)

Clearly, generous philanthropist Marley wouldn't have passed that test. (We know this flashback takes place before Last of the Clan from Grandpa McDuck's conspicuous and probably death-suggesting absence in L&T.) And just like he's proud of having succeeded, Scrooge must have been ashamed that his twin brother had failed, become a pariah, and been sent away to relatives in America (say, Catfish McDuck?)… enough to never mention him again, and to double up on the stinginess to bring honor back to his branch of the family. In fact, Marley may be whom Douglas McDuck is unspokenly referring to when he accuses not Scrooge himself, but Scrooge's side of the family of being famously non-miserly by proper McDuck standards. 


(From “Gall in the Family”, Lars Jensen/Christopher Spencer/Vicar, 2001)

So there you have it. Based on Man of the West, Search for Cyril and Gall in the Family, the century-old conspiracy of the richest duck in the world's secret twin brother finally revealed! What do you think?  

[Matilda]

Re: inheritance and Matilda--I find no difficulty in imagining that Matilda had made it ABUNDANTLY CLEAR that she personally wanted no part of Scrooge's blasted fortune, after he showed that he cared about it more than he cared about her or the rest of the family. Even after the rapprochement of "A Letter from Home," I can see her continuing this policy, especially at her age and with no biological descendants herself. So, Italian relatives aside, that leaves us with Gladstone, Donald and HDL. The inheritance issue is one of the main reasons I hold that Paperetta/Dickie is not Scrooge's grandchild.

[Scrooge MacDuck]

Apr 29, 2018 13:10:00 GMT Matilda said:

So, Italian relatives aside, that leaves us with Gladstone, Donald and HDL.

Even with Barks-Rosa-only lore, the inheritance laws still seem rather bizarre in allowing Gladstone in. Gladstone is an in-law, and by that reasoning not the closest one; why not Eider, or Whitewater, or Grandma, if Gladstone is eligible?

Apr 29, 2018 13:10:00 GMT Matilda said:

The inheritance issue is one of the main reasons I hold that Paperetta/Dickie is not Scrooge's grandchild.

Hm, I don't know if I'd call that strong evidence, though. Whether or not Dickie's mother is biologically Scrooge's daughter, it seems pretty clear Scrooge never legally recognized her as such, and thus depending on Duckburg's laws it could very well be that Dickie would have no claim to Scrooge's fortune, or at best a claim much weaker than an official relative like Matilda or Donald. 

[Matilda]

I just meant, they're the only relatives available for consideration by Scrooge (who can, of course, leave his gazillions to anyone he chooses, relative or non-relative). Quite a different question from "who would inherit legally if Scrooge died intestate." Similarly with reference to Paperetta: I'm not arguing that the law would give her the right to inherit if Scrooge had not acknowledged her parent as his child; I'm arguing that if she were his grandchild Scrooge himself would be morally obligated to consider her right to inherit, since she (and her parent, assuming s/he's alive) would be his *only* direct descendant(s).

[sirtao]

Frankly, I always thought the Duckburg inheritance laws were basically "Testament is the rule. Only without, go by family ties." given the recurring threat of striking Donald out of the testament.

[Matilda]

Apr 29, 2018 23:05:48 GMT sirtao said:

Frankly, I always thought the Duckburg inheritance laws were basically "Testament is the rule. Only without, go by family ties." given the recurring threat of striking Donald out of the testament.

Isn't that basically the way inheritance law works in the USA generally? or am I showing my ignorance here? I would have thought that the only exception to this is the fact that marital law allows the surviving spouse to claim money...and that can be limited by a prenuptial agreement. My vague understanding is that in British and American inheritance law, a person can "cut someone out of their will" if they want, even if it's a daughter/son.

Clearly, I do not come from a dysfunctional family, or I would have had to know this!

[The KKM]

I dont care for the last of the clan stuff, but odds are, it's a patriarchal system and so Mathilda existing doesnt really matter- Scrooge is the last son.

[Scroogerello]

Apr 30, 2018 14:50:42 GMT The KKM said:

I dont care for the last of the clan stuff, but odds are, it's a patriarchal system and so Mathilda existing doesnt really matter- Scrooge is the last son.

But that still contradicts Barks' line from "The Old Castle's Secret", on which I believe Don Rosa and his fans base all this "but Scrooge can't have a brother" sillyness. Which makes it all the more ironic that, while Don Rosa used the line to disregard any relatives added by other authors, he ended up contradicing the line HIMSELF by showing that Scrooge has a living sister in one of his stories. The expression of being "the last in one's family line" refers to the last surviving member of a family, regardless of their gender.

I don't care for the "last of the clan" thing, either (and, to be frank, I highly doubt that Barks cared much for it either--it was just a line from one of his earliest Scrooge stories. I doubt that Barks seriously wanted to establish any continuity, or wanted to prevent the creation of new characters like Gideon with this one line. In fact, he had probably forgotten about it himself when he created Jake McDuck!).