[HPforGrownups] Re: 6 older siblings/Masons: Conspiracy?

[Sherry Garfio]

No: HPFGUIDX 46809

Audra wrote:
> This theory about the Wealeys being Slytherin's heirs is believable as well. 

Me:
Thanks!  I'm so delighted that someone thinks so.

Audra again:
> I bet that just chafes Lucius Malfoy's caboose if it's true.

Me:
That's what I like about the idea.

Audra:
> It's a bit contradictory though to my personal theory of the Potters being 
> Slytherin's heirs.

Now me:
Not necessarily.  Part of my post (okay, it was the part that occurred to me
while I was typing, so it's not totally thought out) mentioned the possible
link between Lily and the Weasleys, making her a Slytherin descendant as well.

As for the reference to Voldemort being the last descendant (ancestor - I
*knew* it had to be intentional!) of Slytherin, keep in mind that we are only
presented with information that the *characters* know.  Lily was Muggle-born;
if my theory proves out, then somewhere among Slytherin's descendants, a line
was thought to have died out, because they were all Squibs and the Wizarding
World lost track of them, or even rejected them under Slytherin's influence (he
was considered one of the greatest wizards of his time; presumably that means
he was also influential).  This is the line that eventually produced Lily, and
a closely related line stayed magical and eventually produced the Weasleys. 
This may also explain why the Weasley line rejected Slytherin's ideals: they
had close cousins who were Squibs, and came to realize that the nature of
wizards has little to do with parentage.  This line was disowned by the
"faithful" Slytherin descendants, leading to the modern-day assumption that Tom
Riddle was the last in his line.

Audra again: 
> The idea that James, and therefore Harry, are relatives of Voldemort has been
> used to  explain why Voldemort did not want to kill Lily.  He asked her to 
> stand aside.  He told Harry, "Your mother needn't have died."  But there has 
> to be more to it than that.  Since when does Lord Voldemort warn some 
> inconsequential mudblood to stand aside, and years later express what could 
> be construed as regret about killing her ("Your mother needn't have died.")? 

My turn:
But if Lily, rather than James, is the Slytherin descendant, maybe Voldemort
was willing to spare her because he could use her heritage.  Along this line of
reasoning, he wanted to kill James and Harry because they are *Gryffindor's*
heirs.  But another thought just occurred to me: since this would mean that
Harry is heir to *both* founding wizards, he represents a reunification, one
that Voldemort can not tolerate.  Perhaps Harry's Slytherin blood is exactly
the thing that prevents Voldemort from killing him - he can't kill another
Slytherin.  Harry's Slytherin blood came from his mother, reinforcing the idea
that it is his mother who is protecting him.  Having the blood of *both*
Gryffindor and Slytherin might play into this as well, although I'll have to
think on it some more.  Maybe there was a showdown 1000 years ago between
Gryffindor and Slytherin (bold Godric being the most adamant defender of
Muggle-borns), which culminated in Slytherin's departure because Gryffindor
defeated him.  This leads to the current rivalry between their Houses, along
with Voldemort's defeat by trying to kill the heir of both founders.

I'm rambling more than usual now; I need to go think about this.  Apparently
you did spark something, Audra.  In any case, I don't think my theory
contradicts yours at all, it's just another angle.

Sherry


=====
"The one thing that unites all human beings, regardless of age, gender, religion, economic status or ethnic background, is that, deep down inside, we ALL believe that we are above-average drivers."

      -Dave Barry, "Things That It Took Me 50 Years to Learn"

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com