Family ties.

[Barry Arrowsmith]

No: HPFGUIDX 117226

Useful bit of kit, that Tapestry.
Gives us some of the familial background links between characters - the 
ones that JKR wants us to be aware of, anyway. The more interesting 
ones don't get mentioned of course - much to the frustration of those 
with a theory or two that might place even more of them  firmly within  
boodlines that  could give them interesting ties and/or a social 
context.

So now we know about the Black tribe, their connections to the
Lestranges, Malfoys, Weasleys  and Tonks'. All well and good,  but 
since the pureblood faction of the WW is so small, with everybody more 
or  less distantly connected to everyone else, I'd love a closer look 
at it. Since so far as Harry could tell it stretched back to the Middle 
Ages (usually accepted as being between 500 - 800 years ago) it would 
have been more fun,  and maybe more informative, if our noses hadn't 
been firmly pressed against a limited part of the whole.

Where,  for example, do you  think  the Potter  family fit in the 
genealogy of the WW? Or DD, Snape or Tom Riddle?

The Potters are a bit iffy; we've no confirmation as to whether or no 
they come from a pureblood line - just that they are an "old" wizarding 
family. (Just the sort - rich and old - to have a House Elf. Hello 
Dobby. So that's why you're so  interested in Harry.) It's the name 
that bothers me - so unwizardly, so neutral, giving no clue (unlike so 
many others) as to the character of the family (Malfoy, Black, Bode, 
Fudge, Croaker etc.), nor yet is it one of the fanciful variety 
(Dumbledore, Diggle, Shunpike). Taken at face value it would indicate 
inter-marriage with Muggles at some time in the past - unless,  and 
this is something I've wondered about before, it's not the 'true' 
family name but a nom de guerre,  taken to provide a measure of 
protection for others that were perhaps more vulnerable.  If so it 
probably didn't work; James's parents seem to have dropped off the twig 
with indecent haste. Just like Lily's - something that was speculated 
about in a thread a few weeks back.

Another  speculation of mine is a link between the Potters and the 
Longbottoms. No evidence, but Jo seems interested in bloodlines and the 
possibility of the two putative saviours of the WW coming from the same 
line is quite possible and viewed in retrospect would be unsurprising, 
almost traditional.

Anyone think that DD, the acceptable face of wizardry, is not 
pureblood? Again, there's no evidence - not unless you're an 
unreconstructable theorist like me, in which case there's a pointer in 
his dress. I posit that all adult purebloods, unless otherwise forced 
by circumstances, always wear robes. (Madam Malkin, robes for all 
occasions. It throws a nice insight into the attitudes of Dear Dolly, 
her and her fluffy cardigan.) Most readers suspect DD of being a direct 
descendant of GG - that's unless he's an actual re-incarnation. It'd be 
neat, I'll admit, fitting nicely into the "Gryffindor good, Slytherin 
bad" ethical divide.

Though if you pay close attention to canon, apart from an old-fashioned 
and to modern eyes reprehensible attachment to elitism, we've no 
evidence that old Sally actually did anything bad. He built the 
Chamber, true -  and also left the Basilisk behind, though when he left 
it'd be no more than a tiddler. A fascination with highly dangerous 
monsters does not predicate an evil nature (see Hagrid) and he can 
hardly be responsible  for what later generations get up to can he? 
Unless,  that is, you  subscribe to my 'Possession' ideas which suggest 
that Sally (or an important part of him) never left the Chamber and 
invaded or joined with Tom to form "Voldy!, the New! Improved! Mudblood 
and Muggle removal product!"

Tom of course is the last remaining descendant (corrected from 
ancestor) of Sally. Though strictly speaking you could argue about 
that. Voldy (at least part Tom and therefore some minute fraction of 
the original Sally, diluted over many generations)  placed some of 
himself (not just his powers - see CoS, chap. 18) in Harry. So Harry 
contains at least a fraction of a fraction - not quite zero - and 
according to  DD in the same passage this transplant accounts for 
Harry's "Parseltongue....resourcefulness...determination....a certain 
disregard for the rules,..."
Think how boring Harry would be if he wasn't part Voldy.
He could be another Neville.
But as it is he's been adopted - sort of.

I also  wonder about Voldy reconstructing himself from"..bone of my 
father..." Seems a bit strange. Why use the Muggle side of the family 
to re-create a wizard body? Unless Tom's lying to us again.... Riddle 
would be an apt wizarding name.... maybe
that side is descended from Squibs. Hmm.

It seems unlikely that in the hundreds of years covered by the Tapestry 
there wasn't some connection tying the Blacks to the descendants of 
Slytherin. "Toujours Pur" would be a sentiment Sally would 
whole-heartedly subscribe to, but nothing is shown. Nor are links 
evident to everyone's favourite Potions Prof. As a Slytherin it's 
probable he's a pureblood, but I don't know; I have a sneaking 
suspicion that his background is more complicated than that. I wouldn't 
be surprised if there wasn't an unexpected family connection or two 
buried in his background.
Though it'd suit some if he were descended from Herpo the Foul.

It's a bit much to expect, but it'd be fun if JKR published a full 
genealogy - maybe a supplement, like QTTA or FBaWTFT.
You might even find your own family in there somewhere;  or that funny 
old woman, the one that lives down the road, the one with all the cats.

Kneasy