Pureblood Vs. Halfblood (was Dudley as HBP??!!)

[rotedrache]

No: HPFGUIDX 106168


> Mandy wrote: 
> > 
> > It follows the creed that if there is just one drop of non-
magical 
> > blood in your family line, you are considered non-pure or half-
> > blooded. 
> > 
> > Cheers Mandy
> 
> Jake replied:
> 
> 
A half-blood is anyone who 
> has at least a drop of old, pure blood in their immediate family 
> line. A muggle-blood is someone without any old, pure blood in 
their 
> immediate family line. A pure-blood is someone with old, pure-blood 
> on both sides of their immediate family line. This definition fits 
> with all characters in the book and makes sense of how both Tom and 
> Harry are half-bloods. It also makes it impossible for dudley 
diddums 
> to be a half blood.
> 
> Jake

Tilly adds:

Hi, I'm new here, but I've been following this 'what is a halfblood?' 
debate with interest.
 
I'm not all that well up on geneology or heraldry, but I remember 
reading about the idea of the proof of nobility that was needed, for 
example by Napoleon to get into the school at Brienne. The idea there 
was that to be proper "nobility" you had to be able to prove it for 
so many generations for say four lines of descent (paternal and 
maternal grandparents.) 

I would be inclined toward a similar idea for pureblooded wizards. A 
pureblood would be one who had wizarding ancestors for a specified 
number of generations, in a specified number of lines of descent.

A muggleborn equates with someone who is raised to the nobility. Both 
parents are muggles.

A halfblood is someone who falls between the two. Either one parent  
is a muggle or there is a muggle within the specified number of 
generations. 

Jake said:
> Consider what would happen if two 
> muggle-blood magic folk had a child. Would the child be a half-
blood 
> a pure-blood or a muggle-blood? By your definition, the child would 
> be a half-blood. But then think of what the Malfoys would say of 
> this. They don't count the blood for you but they do for your 
child? 
> That doesn't make sense. In thier eyes, the child would still be a 
> muggle-blood witch or wizard. 

Tilly replies:

I would disagree here. Strangely I think that the blood would count 
for the child and not for the parents. Blood depends on the parents. 
You cannot be 'muggleborn' with a wizard for a parent. However, you 
would be far from being a pureblood. 

Jake said:

Ernie Mac., who claims to 
> be as pure as anyone, only claims to be able to trace his pure 
> heritage back thirteen generations (at which point, we are led to 
> assume, there may be some muggle-blood--hence the disclaimer). 
> Indeed, the text clearly states that there isn't a witch or wizard 
> alive that doesn't have some muggle-blood in their family line.

Tilly replies:

I'm wondering about the 13 generations. Does he mean that every 
ancestor for 13 generations is a wizard (which is a lot of people!) 
Or is it as I've said above only in a specified number of lines of 
descent. Because if it is the latter, there may be a muggle somewhere 
a lot closer than 13 generations ago in his family tree, but is 
ignored because it's on his maternal grandmother's maternal side!

Just adding my 2 cent to the discussion.

Tilly