Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house?

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 117916



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at y...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Private schools of this nature are almost always created on 
benevolent
> grants and endowments by the founders. That means that one forth of
> the school belongs to Slytherin by virtue of the fact that he paid 
for
> it. His house/sub-school continues to exist, because he donated 
grants
> and endowments which would allow it to exist in perpetuity (assuming
> the endowments aren't mismanaged). To kill Slytherin House would be
> like stealing that money.
> 

I am assuming you are using "private school" in the American use of 
the term (i.e. Public School vs. Private School).  Now, the problem 
is, given that use of the term, Hogwarts isn't a private school.  It 
is clearly managed by the Ministry, to the point that the Ministry 
has the right to appoint faculty and determine curriculum.  One 
assumes that means it is also largely supported by government funds.  
Indeed, given that it is the only school in Wizarding Britain, it 
would be hard to see how it couldn't be supported by "tax galleons."  
This is further evidenced by the fact that we have never heard 
anybody say anything about paying tuition at Hogwarts.

One way to explain this is that the Founders may well have been the 
closest thing the British Wizarding World had to a government circa 
1000 A.D.  If they were indeed the four most powerful wizards of 
their time, that would have been logical.  If that is the case, 
Hogwarts then becomes a massive public works project, and the House 
structures are a matter of governmental politics, not private 
endowment (although it would be anachronistic to draw a line between 
public and private projects in the medieval world in any case).

The idea that the Founders may have been the government of their era 
is supported if you are one of those who suspects Godric Gryffindor 
will turn out to be the Half-Blood Prince.  

Lupinlore