Hogwarts Upkeep

[pekiaki]

No: HPFGUIDX 36467

In message # 36455, Abigail said

> There wasn't even an England a thousand years ago, much less
> a national government - are we to assume that wizards were so ahead
> of muggles in the field of centralized government that they were 
> able to arrange for public education for their children?

According to Bede, the first "state funded" school in England was 
founded in 631 AD by Sigebert (no kidding!), King of the East 
Angles.  This was modelled on an existing school in Canterbury, but 
it is not clear when that school was founded, or by whom.

The "state funding" wouldn't have been in the form we think of, 
through taxation.  A (muggle) school's operating expenses would have 
been met out of income from land gifted to the school by its 
founder.  As Hogwarts was founded in the 10th century or earlier, the 
founders could well have adopted the same system.  The jewels on 
Gryffindor's sword show that he at least was very wealthy (as well as 
being one of the four greatest wizards of the day).

That doesn't mean that Hogwarts is still funded the same way.  Its 
estates may have been sold or seized, and even if they have not the 
present income from them may not cover the running costs.  All I'm 
saying is that Hogwarts' age doesn't mean that it has to be a fee 
paying school ...

Pekiaki