OoP: Pureblood Relations - what about the Potters?

[l3al3y_Doll_3]

No: HPFGUIDX 66677

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eay50" <rioandem at h...> wrote:
> Okay, this has been troubling me since I first read the tapestry 
> scene.
> 
> Sirius says that pretty much all pureblood wizards are related 
> somehow.  If that's true, why doesn't he mention the Potters??
> 
> We have been told again and again that Harry is 'half-blood like 
> Voldemort' - that Lily was muggle-born and that James came from a 
> wizarding family.
> 
> If Sirius went to all the trouble of telling Harry about his 
distant 
> connections with Molly and Arthur, why would he not mention 
Harry's 
> own family???
> 
> Any suggestions?
> 
> E.A.Y.

Good point.

I think it was written for Sirius to tell Harry about the tapestry 
to make us readers aware about the Weasleys/Blacks/Malfoys relation. 
Which makes me wonder why Ron and the other Weasley kids weren't 
surprised to hear about their connection to the Malfoys, it's not 
like they ever mentioned it before. I mean they were all in the room 
at the time and listening to what Sirius had to say. Or maybe they 
did know and just never thought twice about it?

I'm thinking what Sirius said was just an overstatement. Even if it 
weren't, obviously the whole wizarding world would not be 
represented on that tapestry- pureblood or not. After all, it's not 
a little town where everyone knows everyone else's name, it's a 
whole other largely populated world.

Someone from Arhtur's family married someone from Sirius's family. 
If the Potters are distantly related to the Blacks, it would be VERY 
distant. You know that whole six degrees of seperation thing? Well, 
in their case I'm thinking it's about a hundred, by marriage, that's 
IF they are related. Making it too distant for any Potter to be on 
the tapestry.

That's my two cents.

-Maritza