Harry is not Gryffindor's heir (was Horcruxes: Groundrules and Theories

[Geoff Bannister]

No: HPFGUIDX 136437

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fanofminerva" 
<drjuliehoward at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Morgan Adams 
> <MorganAnnAdams at y...> wrote:

> > Morgan: 
> JKR has shot down that theory. Read the text of her Leaky 
> Cauldron/Mugglenet interview below where she states that Harry 
> is not the hair of Gryffindor:

> > MA: What about Harry's family — his grandparents — were they 
> killed?
> > 
> > JKR: No. This takes us into more mundane territory. 

<snipped>

> > MA: That sort of shuts down Heir of Gryffindor [theories], as 
> > well.

> > JKR: [Pause.] Yeah. Well - yeah. 
> > 
> > MA: Another one bites the dust.
> > 
> > --Morgan
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Julie: 
> I read that in the interview and again in this post.  However, I 
> need help with something.  Just how DOES this shoot down the heir 
of 
> Gryffindor theories?  How does JKR's answer/backstory answer this?  
> I was confused by MA's follow-up question then and I still am.  
> Please enlighten!

Geoff:
I think it is only shot down in the sense that MA interpreted "the 
heir of Gryffindor" as being a lineal and direct descendant of Godric 
Gryffindor.

It has been pointed out in the group previously that an heir does not 
have to be a blood relative. It can be a person designated by the 
holder of the estate or position.