The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black

Anyone muggle giving birth for the first time after age 35 is known as an elder primagravida. Also, lots of the worldwide statistics for fertility rates & women of child bearing age END at age 40. In our modern time we can extend this, for BEARING children, but not always with our own EGGS. A child born to a mom at age 40, that mom is old. Think, if that baby themselves doesn't bear children until age 40, then you would be 80 before you're a grandparent. That's old!

Names we didn't see on the tapestry:Nott Crabbe Goyle Weasley Fenwick Dearborne Moody Dumbledore McGonagall Gaunt Pettigrew Fudge Hooch Flitwick Hagrid (that's his last name - dad a wizard) Malfoy Parkinson Bagman Binns Marchbank Bagshot Bones Abbott Smith Diggory Perkins Bode Podmore Shunpike Diggle Purkiss Filch Pince Prince Patel Brown Corner Prewitt Skeeter Scrimegeour

I think the family tree has to be considered canon, but could be an earlier draft, and is not the tapestry, which is something created from a family tree, not the tree itself.

I'm still mesmerized by the average ages. If Dumbledore was 150, McGonnagal and Slughorn so old, why are these wizards so ... average? Is it something about teaching at Hogwarts perhaps? (hummm.... island in time theme .... )

Um... who are Charlus and Dorea? :blush:
Well there are speculations now that they are of some relation to Harry (due to the common last name Potter). We have no evidence to tell us the direct relationship as of right now.
Have you seen the Black Family Tree yet, because that is where they are at?

If Dumbledore was 150, McGonnagal and Slughorn so old, why are these wizards so ... average? Is it something about teaching at Hogwarts perhaps?
Didn't help Phineas Nigellus Black, did it? :lol: Maybe we should take into account life expectancies from when these people were born? Phineas was 79 (or maybe 78 if he died before his birthday in 1926), which would be "old" for the time he was born (compared to Muggles in the same generation)...But Dorea is surely "behind" the curve, dying at age 57 and having been born in 1920...And Albus must be "ahead" (well ahead, even!) of his, having outlived his contemporary Phineas by more than 50 years! [I don't even like to contemplate how old Griselda Marchbanks is, since she is older than Albus!]

And we really can't know what percentage of the wizarding world dies of illness, accident, or deliberate murder...

Have you seen the Black Family Tree yet, because that is where they are at?
Nope. Must've missed it. Where is it?

Where is it?
MuggleNet, The Leaky Cauldron, probably a ton of other Harry Potter sites...:D

Try: MuggleNet link (http://www.mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=jkrtelegraph/telegraph_jkrbookaidclose.jpg).

Nope. Must've missed it. Where is it?
It's pretty interesting, but you can't see very much of it.
http://www.mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=jkrtelegraph/telegraph_jkrbookaidclose.jpg

Thanks :)
Just wondering... but from when is this tree? Post HBP?
And I just noticed Arcturus... most interesting...

With all these Wizarding family relationships, it seems wierd how it is possible the Ginny and Harry are related. These has to be something mor ethat we are missing, I don;t think JKR would want them to turn out actually related after they dated and kissed.

She didn't have any problems with Harry believing Tonks was in love with Sirius.

However, you have to remember that if Harry and Ginny are related, it will either be very distantly (third cousins once-removed), or it will be through marriage - Charlus Potter being an uncle of James' who married into the Black family - and not a blood relation. I think the latter is more likely, since given what JKR has told us so far, it doesn't make sense for Dorea to be James's mum.

Whatever the truth, it won't be raised as an issue in Book 7, since JKR said Harry's grandparents aren't important.

Just wondering... but from when is this tree? Post HBP?

As far as I know, we haven't been given a date yet. Does anyone else know for sure?

[quote=FaceofBoe]

However, you have to remember that if Harry and Ginny are related, it will either be very distantly (third cousins once-removed), or it will be through marriage - Charlus Potter being an uncle of James' who married into the Black family - and not a blood relation. I think the latter is more likely, since given what JKR has told us so far, it doesn't make sense for Dorea to be James's mum.

quote]

Huh? How did you figure that ? Just curious!

A few pages back people were talking about when Dumbledore was born. Anyway, on Harry Potter Lexicon, the timeline says this:

c. Y-135 (1844) D=0
Albus Dumbledore born (Sch2).
This is the first date on our timeline which is not stated specifically in canon. JKR said in an interview that Dumbledore was 150 years old. Using that information, we can determine the year in which he was born by subtracting 150 years. The trick, of course, is knowing what year to subtract 150 from. If we assume that Rowling was saying that Dumbledore was 150 years old at that point in the stories, which was summer of Y15 (1994), then he was born in 1994-150, which is 1844, according to the official timeline (CS/DVD).

This would mean Dumbledore was born about...3 years befor Phineas?

Just to add to the discussion of the 'paper tapestry' being cannon or not, if you read the article that came with the picture, it says:

Each was asked to fill an empty page somehow incorporating that phrase.
The phrase mentioned is 'Between the lines' which as we all saw can be found beneath the title of the family tree. This would imply that J.K.Rowling has only very recently made this paper tapestry, so it should be up to date with HBP and can probably be considered canon.

Here's (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/images/image.php?image=2006/01/JKR_Telegraph_article_p2.jpg) a link to the picture with the part of the article I took the qote from.
You can also find the first page here (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/images/image.php?image=2006/01/JKR_Telegraph_article%282%29.jpg), though that one is harder to read.

JKR recently gave out a handwritten copy of the Black Family Tree, part of which was revealed to us in 'The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black;, chapter 6 pg. 110-115 about. This new one shows some new names, and I can't wait till they reveal the whole thing. I;m guessing JKR will show it on her site. Those are two people found, in her handwriting, on the tree. Scroll up and see (page 30- post # 584) what I wrote about the family tree for more information :).

If that answers your question...

Huh? How did you figure that ? Just curious!
I think for the most part it comes down to the ages. Dorea died in her fifties and according to Jo, James's parents "were old in wizarding terms" when they died. There are a few other inconsistencies but that's basically it.

I think for the most part it comes down to the ages. Dorea died in her fifties and according to Jo, James's parents "were old in wizarding terms" when they died. There are a few other inconsistencies but that's basically it.

And remember that wizards have a much greater life-expectancy than Muggles. The mid-fifties isn't even "old" in Muggle terms, let alone wizard terms. It's not even middle-age for a wizard.

What we can gess of the Black's familly tree
(see file)

29584

Phineas Nigellus is someone I am wondering about. Isn't Nigellus his last name? How did he become a black? Unless his mom was a Black.

Phineas Nigellus is someone I am wondering about. Isn't Nigellus his last name? How did he become a black? Unless his mom was a Black.Pre-HBP maybe, but it was confirmed in six that it's Black: "Impertinent," said a soft voice from one of the portraits on the wall, and Phineas Nigellus Black, Sirius's great-great-grandfather...."

What we can gess of the Black's familly tree


Interesting, but as we've said, Charlus and Dorea can't have been James's parents, because the dates don't add up.

Just to add to the discussion of the 'paper tapestry' being cannon or not, if you read the article that came with the picture, it says:


The phrase mentioned is 'Between the lines' which as we all saw can be found beneath the title of the family tree. This would imply that J.K.Rowling has only very recently made this paper tapestry, so it should be up to date with HBP and can probably be considered canon.

Here's (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/images/image.php?image=2006/01/JKR_Telegraph_article_p2.jpg) a link to the picture with the part of the article I took the qote from.
You can also find the first page here (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/images/image.php?image=2006/01/JKR_Telegraph_article%282%29.jpg), though that one is harder to read.:clap: That's a great catch Besanamo...and it's good enough for me.

The Tapestry is pristine and pretty because it was recently drawn up by JK for this particular charity auction, as she incooperated the phrase, just like the other author's did; the paper Tapestry is fresh, solid canon.:D

'Between the lines' was the gnomic brief for the writers whose work appears on these two pages. Each was asked to fill an empty page, somehow incorperating that phrase. The resulting manuscripts, to be auctioned next month for charity, show an extraordinary range of response.

Just an observation for everyone who thinks the Potter on the family tree can't be James's father because the dates for his wife don't fit what JKR has previously said about their ages: none of the witches and wizards with dates listed lived to over approximately 80 years old. This seems rather strange, given what we know about Dumbledore's age, but could it just be a result of JKR's difficulty with math and numbers? If so, it's possible that the Potter on the family tree is James's father.

(Another issue, though, is why would they not have been blasted off for harboring Sirius after he ran away? It seems like they would have been.)

(Another issue, though, is why would they not have been blasted off for harboring Sirius after he ran away? It seems like they would have been.)
That aspect gives many of us qualms. Personally, it bothers me that Sirius didn't claim any kinship with Harry or James. He would have been thrilled by the fact that James was his cousin once removed! Sirius and Harry would be second cousins...Sirius brought up Molly as a cousin by marriage and Arthur as a second cousin once removed, and neither is a closer relationship than the one he would have had with James--if Dorea was James's mother. Heck, Sirius doesn't even mention that James was a cousin by marriage, which makes me doubt that Charlus was very closely related to James's parents at all!

That aspect gives many of us qualms. Personally, it bothers me that Sirius didn't claim any kinship with Harry or James. He would have been thrilled by the fact that James was his cousin once removed! Sirius and Harry would be second cousins...Sirius brought up Molly as a cousin by marriage and Arthur as a second cousin once removed, and neither is a closer relationship than the one he would have had with James--if Dorea was James's mother. Heck, Sirius doesn't even mention that James was a cousin by marriage, which makes me doubt that Charlus was very closely related to James's parents at all!

I concur.

It would be dreadfully sloppy of JKR to have made the Potters cousins to the Blacks, and just not bother to mention it until Book 7! It would also undermine the oft-stated situation that the Dursleys are Harry's only relatives after the murder of his parents.

Cousins, even second cousins, are relatives.

the paper Tapestry is fresh, solid canon.:DNow if only we had the whole thing.

Since the tapestry has been brought up once more, it got me wondering again what second cousin once removed means. How exactly is Arthur related to Sirius? I've looked up second cousin and removed and I get that Arthur's greatgrandmother/father has to be the same as Sirius's greatgreatgrandmother/father, is that how they are related or did I not understand it quite right?

Just an observation for everyone who thinks the Potter on the family tree can't be James's father because the dates for his wife don't fit what JKR has previously said about their ages: none of the witches and wizards with dates listed lived to over approximately 80 years old. This seems rather strange, given what we know about Dumbledore's age, but could it just be a result of JKR's difficulty with math and numbers? If so, it's possible that the Potter on the family tree is James's father.


JKR specifically said this in an interview:

"Wizards have a much longer life expectancy than Muggles".

She said Dumbledore is 150, and McGonagall is a "sprightly seventy". Also, Newt Scamander is still alive at 100, Nott's father is said to be "very elderly" even though Nott is only 17, and Slughorn will be about 90, since he had a big bald patch when he taught Riddle, so was probably in his late 30s-early 40s then. Make no mistake - wizards and witches have a greater expectancy than Muggles, and are probably expected to live into their 100s. The fact that none of the people on the tapestry live past 80 can be attributed to various reasons, from illnesses they may have had, to the fact that there are two wars on during this period - the Grindelwald war, and the war with Voldemort which lasted 11 years itself. JKR specifically said she wrote a backstory about James's parents, who were "elderly" and "old by wizard terms" when they had James, and when they died. "By wizard terms" is the key point - 57 isn't even middle-aged by wizard terms, but that's the age Dorea died.

Now if only we had the whole thing.

Since the tapestry has been brought up once more, it got me wondering again what second cousin once removed means. How exactly is Arthur related to Sirius? I've looked up second cousin and removed and I get that Arthur's greatgrandmother/father has to be the same as Sirius's greatgreatgrandmother/father, is that how they are related or did I not understand it quite right?
Heck even 10th cousins even though far removed with be relatives.

Tonks and Draco would be 1st cousin once removed to Sirius, so I’d think if Siruis had children they would be Tonks and Draco 2nd cousins, and their children would be 2nd cousins once removed.

I found this information on a website


Cousin (a.k.a "first cousin")
Your first cousins are the people in your family who have two of the same grandparents as you. In other words, they are the children of your aunts and uncles.

Second Cousin
Your second cousins are the people in your family who have the same great-grandparents as you., but not the same grandparents.

Third, Fourth, and Fifth Cousins

Your third cousins have the same great-great-grandparents, fourth cousins have the same great-great-great-grandparents, and so on.

removed

When the word "removed" is used to describe a relationship, it indicates that the two people are from different generations. You and your first cousins are in the same generation (two generations younger than your grandparents), so the word "removed" is not used to describe your relationship.

The words "once removed" mean that there is a difference of one generation. For example, your mother's first cousin is your first cousin, once removed. This is because your mother's first cousin is one generation younger than your grandparents and you are two generations younger than your grandparents. This one-generation difference equals "once removed."

Twice removed means that there is a two-generation difference. You are two generations younger than a first cousin of your grandmother, so you and your grandmother's first cousin are first cousins, twice removed.

The beauty that is Wikipedia has a chart to explain it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin

I've looked up second cousin and removed and I get that Arthur's greatgrandmother/father has to be the same as Sirius's greatgreatgrandmother/father, is that how they are related or did I not understand it quite right?
The common ancestor would have to be Phineas Nigellus, if Mr. and Mrs. Black (Sirius's parents) are a generation below the line containing Dorea, Callidora and Charis. (Just as an example, because I don't know which female married a Weasley, put Arthur's mum in the blast spot between Callidora and Charis; put a brother left of Dorea--this will be Sirius's grandfather who would then be cousin to Callidora and Charis and the missing female. This will make Arthur second cousin to Mr. Black (and maybe Mrs. Black, too :evil: ) and Sirius "once removed" from that...) Not knowing how many generations are between Dorea and Sirius is a problem, though. If Mr. Black was Dorea's brother, the common relative for him and Arthur is further back than Phineas...

When did the family name switch from Nigellus to Black?

If Dorea and Mr. Black were siblings then that would have made James and Siruis first cousin and then I’d think that James would have been Siruis favorite cousin. Even more further indication that. So I think it unlikely that Dorea and Mr Black were siblings. More likley cousins of some form

his full name is Phineas Nigellus Black, so Nigellus is his middle name.

When did the family name switch from Nigellus to Black?
When HBP confirmed that the name was Phineas Nigellus Black...

So I think it unlikely that Dorea and Mr Black were siblings. More likley cousins of some form
I'm thinking Dorea would have been an aunt to Mr. Black (Sirius's father).

[Jeez, I would like to know Sirius's father's name just to keep from having to qualify "Mr. Black"! :lol: ]

Personally, it bothers me that Sirius didn't claim any kinship with Harry or James. I thought that, as well. However, since Sirius says that the purebloods are practically all related and he doesn't seem to feel any particular kinship to his cousins, even Tonks, maybe it was more important to him to be James's brother in friendship, if not in name, and Harry's godfather. It does seem as if he'd have pointed out Harry's grandparents on the tapestry, though, if they were there, even if James wasn't on it (listed only as #1 son).
Since the tapestry has been brought up once more, it got me wondering again what second cousin once removed means.I think this is right:

The child of my first cousin is my first cousin once removed. The child of my first cousin's child is my first cousin twice removed. My child is a second cousin to my first cousin's child. My child is a second cousin once removed to my first cousin's child's child. Etc.

Er. . .I hope that made sense to everyone. :lol:
The fact that none of the people on the tapestry live past 80 can be attributed to various reasons, from illnesses they may have had, to the fact that there are two wars on during this period - the Grindelwald war, and the war with Voldemort which lasted 11 years itself. JKR specifically said she wrote a backstory about James's parents, who were "elderly" and "old by wizard terms" when they had James, and when they died. "By wizard terms" is the key point - 57 isn't even middle-aged by wizard terms, but that's the age Dorea died.I know. My point, though, was that JKR is notoriously bad with numbers. Have you ever heard her varying answers for how many students there are at Hogwarts and how many students there are per year? The numbers definitely don't add up.

None of the dates of death for the people on the tapestry are during the years of Grindelwald and there is one for the time of Voldemort's rise to power, so it doesn't seem like war accounts for the relatively young ages of their deaths.

Someone on another thread suggested that they might be dates of marriage, but that would be unconventional.

If Dorea and Mr. Black were siblings then that would have made James and Siruis first cousin and then I’d think that James would have been Siruis favorite cousin.


But doesn't that depend on Dorea being James's mother, which looks disctinctly unlikely?


I know. My point, though, was that JKR is notoriously bad with numbers. Have you ever heard her varying answers for how many students there are at Hogwarts and how many students there are per year? The numbers definitely don't add up.


This is a very different situation, though. Jo mentioned only last year that James's mum and dad were elderly, by wizard terms, when James was born, that they died at a very old age, that they died from a wizard illness, and we also know they left money to them. In other words: JKR knows their story in a lot of detail. Notice that she didn't give a number - she doesn't have to remember their ages in this case, because she knows there were "old in wizard terms". This is how she's always known it.

Now, if Dorea and Charlus were meant to be James's mum and dad, why did Dorea die at 57? Either JKR made a mistake last year (despite knowing their story in detail, which makes it very unlikely), or she made a mistake with his bit of paper (which is also unlikely, as it's from her notes, and she could also have corrected it to what she now believes about James's mum and dad if she had made a mistake).

I just don't think the "JKR isn't good at numbers" debate adds anything to this issue, since JKR didn't give us numbers in July - she said that their story is that they were "elderly". Dorea was not elderly when she died. There is also a lot of other evidence pointing away from Dorea being James's mum. Why wasn't she blasted of the tree as a blood-traitor for taking Sirius in as a son? Alphard was blasted off just for giving Sirius some money! It also contradicts JKR's statements that she killed off all of Harry's family except the Dursleys.

Yes that is if Dorea is James mother but I’m starting to highly doubt she is
Siruis didn’t seem to have anything against Tonks I’m sure she is a relative he would have acknowledge and did.

Perhaps we can try and guess Sirius’s father’s name


Cepheus
Canopus
Aquarius
Cetus
Cygnus
Perseus

What we can gess of the Black's familly tree
(see file)

29584

Way cool tree - thanks :tu: :tu: :tu: Amazing first post :welcome:

What if Charles Potter is James Potter's grandfather? Matches Neville's line better.
I thought Elladora was a COUSIN but not a sister of either of Sirius' parents.

That aspect gives many of us qualms. Personally, it bothers me that Sirius didn't claim any kinship with Harry or James.

Well if Charles Potter was the brother of James' Grandfather ... yes, still second cousins, assuming that is Sirius' line ... but if it's not Sirius' line, do you count a second cousin of your second cousin as your cousin ?

What if Charles Potter is James Potter's grandfather?

No, he's surely too young. James's father was said to be "elderly in wizard terms" - we're looking at him maybe being around 100 or so when he died. That means James's grandfather would have been even older than that. I can't imagine young Dorea marrying someone 100 years older than her.

FaceofBoe, I'm just keeping the possibility open, given her known inconsistency with numbers. You don't have to agree with me, since I'm not really interested in debating whether or not it's James's parents on the family tree. However, it's still information that other people might find useful when thinking about the issue.

As you say, there are other reasons for the Potter on the family tree not to be James's father. I wouldn't discount it because of the age of the wife alone, though.

You know, I have a headache coming on! It's like a puzzle where you are given insufficient information. It's not SUDUKU that's for sure.

FaceofBoe, I'm just keeping the possibility open, given her known inconsistency with numbers. You don't have to agree with me, since I'm not really interested in debating whether or not it's James's parents on the family tree. However, it's still information that other people might find useful when thinking about the issue.

As you say, there are other reasons for the Potter on the family tree not to be James's father. I wouldn't discount it because of the age of the wife alone, though.

True, we can never discount it - JKR may have messed up the family tree. I just think it's unlikely, though. Just a personal opinion, but I don't think JKR would write a story in which Harry falls madly in love with (and may one day marry!) his third cousin once-removed, but keep the issue relegated to her notes. It would be an odd choice for a writer to make, and there's no real point in Harry being related to the Weasleys or Sirius.

What if Charles Potter is James Potter's grandfather?
That makes it even worse for matching to the "elderly" parents of James...remember, they had to have died before October 1981. We are probably looking for a couple born around the turn of the century (c. 1900) to be James's parents, and maybe even a bit earlier...

sirius really did have a dark family. i find it amazing that sirius is good when most of his family bad. well actually when you think about it he is related to alot of good families too. odd eh?

Thanks for all the answers on the second cousin once removed, I think I get it now.

The thing with Dorea's death is while she didn't get old (only 57) especially for a wizard, we need to remember that she did die in the right time frame (before James and Lily got Harry and then got killed by Voldemort in 1981) to be James's mother. It's the birth date that doesn't fit. :shrug:

The thing with Dorea's death is while she didn't get old (only 57) especially for a wizard, we need to remember that she did die in the right time frame (before James and Lily got Harry and then got killed by Voldemort in 1981) to be James's mother. It's the birth date that doesn't fit.
:agree: It should be a couple one-half to one generation older than Dorea Black Potter and Charlus Potter.

Can we assume that all of Harry's grandparents were dead before 1979? They weren't mentioned in any of the photos in the album Hagrid gave Harry, were they? ie, They seem to have missed Lily and James getting married....or Harry fails to notice them (which would be really odd). Because the series has its moral values, Lily and James must have married at least 9 months before Harry was born (and maybe a bit longer to dispel any curiosity at the timing...:D ). This means they married no later than early October, 1979--and probably sooner.

This is closely related to the tree, but I have some questions for someone who knows about family terms:

What is a second cousin?
What is a second cousin once removed?
What is Bellatrix, Narcissa, and Andromeda to Sirius? Cousins?
What is a cousin..?

I am not up to date with family terms. Thanks..

I really wouldn't put much hope in the idea that JKR gets anything dealing with numbers wrong WHEN it's about something she has thought a great deal about. So far she has made two numerical mistakes while IN interview - mostly because she answered quickly without sitting down to think about it. It isn't that she can't add or subtract - only that doing it in her head, without all her complex notes, while under the stress of an interview, when she was still quite new at the 'fame' game has sometimes lead to mistakes.

For instance she has said she doesn't know why she said 1000 kids went to Hogwarts - it just sounded like a good number (no math involved in figuring it - just random number picked from the air).

Considering how much effort she put into at least the minimum of backstory (name, blood-status and house) for every one of Harry's classmates (some of whom we've never heard mentioned again), she obviously was quite certain that she wanted there to be 40 kids in his year. Basically she forgot to even think from the beginning of 'how many students did I put in Harry's year' and then multiply to the correct answer.

The other example was the ages of Charlie and Bill. Which get twisted up with when Gryffindor last won the Quidditch cup. This is another case where she wasn't checking her notes and gave the quick answer off the top of her head.

As far as I remember, these are the only two glaring mistakes she has made with numbers. Both down on the spur of the moment, under pressure, without her notes, early on in the series.

To accept the 'bad with maths' idea would mean that we now have to question every little bit of canon that has ever had anything to do with a number. It makes it sound like she can't add up her sums, even when she's alone in her quiet study working on the planning for her books (or drawing a clean family tree directly from one she has worked hard on before).

Notice that since some of those old interviews where she mispoke about Charlie's age and the total number of students, she now will be indistinct about the numbers instead - giving us approximates.

For such reasons, we don't have the exact ages of the Marauders pinned down. Was their first year at Hogwarts '70-'71 or '71-'72? We don't know because she's qualifying about numbers since those earlier incorrect answers were given. She's giving approximates unless it's something she KNOWs in her head without checking her notes at that moment.

This site (http://www.genealogy.com/16_cousn.html) and everybody's responses cleared it up for me.

I posted this in another thread, but I think it's relevent here:



There are lots of reasons why it is very unlikely that Charlus and Dorea are James's parents.

1) Is Dumbledore a liar?

Dumbledore told us this in PS:

"I've come to bring Harry to his aunt and uncle. They're the only family he has left now."

The only family. If Charlus and Dorea are James's parents, that means Harry is related, by blood, to the Weasleys. But we know Harry doesn't have any family left, so the Weasleys can't be blood family to him.

2) The age problem

JKR said this about James's parents in The Interview:

James's parents were elderly, were getting on a little when he was born, which explains the only child, very pampered, had-him-late-in-life-so-he's-an-extra-treasure, as often happens, I think. They were old in wizarding terms, and they died.

This is what she has said in the past:

Dumbledore is a hundred and fifty, and Professor McGonagall is a sprightly seventy. Wizards have a much longer life expectancy than Muggles.

So, James's mum and dad were "old in wizard terms" when James was born. We know wizards live until a very old age. Not only Dumbledore and McGonagall, but Newt Scamander is about 100 at the time of HBP, and Slughorn must be around 90 now, since he already had a big bald patch when he taught Tom Riddle.

However, look at the family tree. If Dorea were James's mother, she'd have given birth to him when she was 40, and died at 57. 40 is certainly not "elderly" in any sense, and 57 is a young death for a Muggle, let alone a wizard. James's parents were elderly, in wizard terms, when he was born - so Dorea cannot be his mother.

If anyone thinks it weird that James's parents might have been 80, 100, 120 years old when he was born, then remember what JKR said about Theodore Nott - he was raised by a "very elderly" wizard. It might be quite common for elderly wizards and witches to have children, so James would not be different in this regard. Either way, it all points directly away from Dorea and Charlus being mum and dad.

3) Importance

If Harry was related, through blood, to Ron, Sirius and Draco, I'm sure it would have been mentioned - it's a pretty important connection, after all. JKR has had several occassions to mention it if this is so - the tapestry scene in OotP, Harry talking to Phineas (who would be his anscestor) several times, and the talk about the inheritance of Grimmauld Place in HBP. Never once has it even been hinted that Harry is related to any of these characters. JKR also says that Harry's grandparents are "not important", so we won't be hearing anything about them in Book 7 - meaning we won't find out about any relations Harry may have with the other families in Book 7. Something this important would have to be mentioned, but it isn't - therefore, it's just not important, so Harry can't be related to them.

4) Cousins in love

Just a personal opinion - but do you really think JKR would write a story in which Harry falls madly in love with his third cousin, once-removed? I have my doubts, personally. I have absolutely nothing wrong with cousins marrying, and it's legal here in Britain - but planning a story that way wouldn't make much sense, especially since any relations would never be mentioned.


My personal opinion about this - it just doesn't make sense for Charlus Potter to be James's father. On face value, yes Charlus and Dorea had one child - but on closer examination, the facts just don't hold up.

JKR wrote this tapestry when she was planning the series - it might have been done 10-15 years ago. She's just copied it out to auction off for charity. Any important information from this tapestry will have been given in OotP - anything else is just backstory she wanted to know for her own pleasure.

The name "Potter" is there to prove the theory that "all the pureblood families are interrelated". But JKR couldn't have made it James's dad, because that would cause too many messy problems with the families. So she made it James's uncle, meaning Harry is not directly related to the other families by blood, and is only connected to them through the marriage of one of his uncles.

That's the only conclusion I can make - Charlus and Dorea are not James's parents, and Harry is not directly related to Sirius, the Weasleys, or the Malfoys.

PS, one more thing - if Dorea and Charlus WERE James's mum and dad, and basically adopted Sirius as a son, surely they would have been blasted off the map as blood-traitors? Uncle Alphard was blasted off purely for leaving Sirius some gold.

...Because the series has its moral values, Lily and James must have married at least 9 months before Harry was born (and maybe a bit longer to dispel any curiosity at the timing...:D ). This means they married no later than early October, 1980--and probably sooner. :lol: :lol: forgive me but now I need to call your math into question! :D (or like JKR you didn't take time to think it through at the moment, which happens to every one of us). You've just been talking about JKR making sure to have Lily and James legally married before Harry is concieved and then give a date for their marriage that is after he was born :D

This just shows how difficult it can be, when thinking fast without looking at notes (and we have a lot less to remember than JKR does) to get a number correct.

Sorry to embarass you, if I have. It just seemed ironic that you were going on about the morals and then put their wedding date after Harry's birth. Please know this wasn't intended as a slam, just a little tease.

Harry was born July 31, 1980. So he was possibly concieved Oct. 31, 1979. That's the last possible date for the wedding.:D

Hmm i only posted half of my answer. :shrug:

Here's the rest:

If you go to this site (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/blacktree.html) of the lexicon, you can see that Bellatrix Narcissa and Andromeda are first cousins to Sirius, while Nymphadora Tonks and Draco are second cousins to him.

A cousin is if you have the same grandparents on either maternal or paternal side. A second cousin is if your greatgrandparents are the same. Seond cousin once removed, someone's greatgrandparents are the same as someone elses greatgreatgrandparents. Removed means you need to skip a generation.

So This is what I came up with..

Because of the dates shown on Dorea (1920-1977) Im guessing her husband (Charlus) died around the same time. Which is the exact era that TLC states when James father dies (1976-81 ish) Also between these two names, they have one son.. and James was an only child. So is it safe to say that Charlus was James father?

Also, (because of the dates) Collidora is still alive (1915-) and her husband is Harfang Longbottom.. Possibly Harfang had a brother, Nevilles Grandfather. To keep the Longbottom name, a man must marry a woman. So (around the same timeline) Nevilles Father marries Augusta (Nevilles Grandmother) and has Frank and Algie (droped neville out of a window to see if neville had magic ablity) whom both would be the same age as James Potter..

This may sound scetchy.. but I wrote it out on myspace.. heres the link
http://www.myspace.com/12531569

Hmm i only posted half of my answer. :shrug:

Here's the rest:

If you go to this site (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/blacktree.html) of the lexicon, you can see that Bellatrix Narcissa and Andromeda are first cousins to Sirius, while Nymphadora Tonks and Draco are second cousins to him.

A cousin is if you have the same grandparents on either maternal or paternal side. A second cousin is if your greatgrandparents are the same. Seond cousin once removed, someone's greatgrandparents are the same as someone elses greatgreatgrandparents. Removed means you need to skip a generation.

hahah I really hope Im not the only one confused on that.. lol

So This is what I came up with..

Because of the dates shown on Dorea (1920-1977) Im guessing her husband (Charlus) died around the same time. Which is the exact era that TLC states when James father dies (1976-81 ish) Also between these two names, they have one son.. and James was an only child. So is it safe to say that Charlus was James father? No, I don't think so...57 is not elderly, nor is it 'old by wizarding standards'---as we are told James's parents were when they had him.
Also, (because of the dates) Collidora is still alive (1915-) and her husband is Harfang Longbottom.. Possibly Harfang had a brother, Nevilles Grandfather. To keep the Longbottom name, a man must marry a woman. So (around the same timeline) Nevilles Father marries Augusta (Nevilles Grandmother) and has Frank and Algie (droped neville out of a window to see if neville had magic ablity) whom both would be the same age as James Potter.. It's Neville's great-uncle Algie...not Frank's brother at all.

Algie, if he is a Longbottom {which has not been confirmed} could be brother to Harfang, though.

This is closely related to the tree, but I have some questions for someone who knows about family terms:


What is Bellatrix, Narcissa, and Andromeda to Sirius? Cousins?


They would be first cousin , their fathers would have been brothers (Mr. Black I and Mr. Black II)

I think it would make sense if Harry didn’t recognize his grandparents he doesn’t even know their names, so I doubt he’d see a photo of them and think oh that must be Grandma and Grandpa Potter. For all we know James and Lily could have been married a year or two before they had Harry, perhaps they married right out of school; they would have been 17 or 18 .

Even if Harry had another blood relative, he went to Petunia specifically because she was his mothers sister, and had his mothers blood.

I dont think we can confrim that Charles and Dora were James parents just because they had one child , there are other people who have only one chlild, Draco is an only child.

Because of the dates shown on Dorea (1920-1977) Im guessing her husband (Charlus) died around the same time. Which is the exact era that TLC states when James father dies (1976-81 ish) Also between these two names, they have one son.. and James was an only child. So is it safe to say that Charlus was James father?


Not really. The death date is in the right area (obviously - JKR had to kill off ALL the Potters by then), but not the date of Dorea's birth. According to JKR, James's mum was "elderly" when James was born, and when she died. 39-57 is not elderly, especially by wizard standards - wizards live for much longer than Muggles. James's mother was probably born before 1900.

...Because of the dates shown on Dorea (1920-1977) Im guessing her husband (Charlus) died around the same time. Which is the exact era that TLC states when James father dies (1976-81 ish) Also between these two names, they have one son.. and James was an only child. So is it safe to say that Charlus was James father? Again - Dorea and Charlus do not fit the age criteria that JKR has given us. She has said just this past summer that James' parents were 'elderly' when he was born and that they were 'old even by wizarding terms' when they died of illness.

...Also, (because of the dates) Collidora is still alive (1915-) and her husband is Harfang Longbottom.. Possibly Harfang had a brother, Nevilles Grandfather. To keep the Longbottom name, a man must marry a woman. So (around the same timeline) Nevilles Father marries Augusta (Nevilles Grandmother) and has Frank and Algie (droped neville out of a window to see if neville had magic ablity) whom both would be the same age as James Potter.. Actually I think Neville's Grandfather would be the same generation as Harfang's children. I'm guessing that Harfang's 1 son and 1 daughter MIGHT be Great-Uncle Algie and Great-Aunt Enid. They would not literally be aunt and uncle (more a form of cousin) but with elder relatives it would not be an unusual way to address them for Neville. However - you may be right and Enid and Algie come from Gran's side of the family instead or something

Ah yea.. I guess your right about James parents.. And HP Lexicon got the dates from TLC about Neviles uncle.. I didnt know it was his great uncle.. oh well

I've come to the conclusion that most of the names on the tapestry have only peripheral linkage to the main characters whose surnames they might share. So they are probably all distant cousins. I don't think that JKR would make James a first or second cousin to Sirius, or that she would make Sirius a second cousin to Neville.

I think it does shown how the wizarding families are interrelated. Also, I think that if the tapestry was drawn specifically for the auction, she would be careful not to give away any plotline secrets.

Also, I think that if the tapestry was drawn specifically for the auction, she would be careful not to give away any plotline secrets.
Actually, I think the only plotline that everyone is interested in, is whether RAB stands for Regulus Arcturus Black or not...

Which means, once it is viewed, we'll probably have some form of official word from JK as to RABs identity.

Well it would certainly shake canon to have Harry turn up as Sirius's cousin. It would be even worse if Ginny turned out to be Harry's cousin. I think she drew the tapestry to show the interrelationships of the wizarding family names, but only for distant relations, not main characters. That would be in accordance with the "between the lines" concept--peripheral relationships, not the main ones.

We do see Arcturus on the tapestry, but he is an indefinite relative at this point. If the tapestry extends to Sirius's generation and his side of the family tree, that would be revealing.

In fact the tapestry doesn't show any children for the Potter son, and there is no blast mark where offspring would be. An accurate tapestry would show that Charlus Potter's son married and had a son (if Charlus was Harry's granddad).

I'm thinking that the Potters on the tapestry were some distant relation to Harry's grandparents (second cousins or something). But JKR killed them off so they couldn't be available to take Harry in. That would mean that Charlus's son died too, but the tapestry doesn't show that.

Actually, I think the only plotline that everyone is interested in, is whether RAB stands for Regulus Arcturus Black or not...

Which means, once it is viewed, we'll probably have some form of official word from JK as to RABs identity.
You have brought up something I have been wondering and I would like to know what you - and anyone else who wants to share their opinion - thinks: The auction that this family tree is for ends on February 21st, or about that time. One person is going to win it. After that is JK going to let the rest of us know what was on that paper or do you think we have to hope that whoever wins the family tree is a nice person and scans it so everyone can see it? Personally, I'm very scared that the people, like me, who can't bid on it will not get to know what is on there and see the whole thing. Do you think I'm worry over nothing kingwidgit (or anyone else)?

In fact the tapestry doesn't show any children for the Potter son, and there is no blast mark where offspring would be. An accurate tapestry would show that Charlus Potter's son married and had a son (if Charlus was Harry's granddad).Not necessarily. It seems that the children of the female Blacks are only listed as having existed, but their names are not important enough for the family tree, since they are not Blacks. This is the notation on the drawing. I can't remember whether or not Sirius shows Harry Draco's name on the tapestry--if so, this would be an inconsistency between the book and the drawing.

Regardless, since the names of the children of the Black girls aren't important enough for the tapestry, it seems that any notation of their children wouldn't be important enough either. On the drawing, there are 6 children who would not have the Black surname noted--none of them are noted to have children themselves. However, it seems unlikely that none of the 6 would've had children.

...The auction that this family tree is for ends on February 21st, or about that time. One person is going to win it. After that is JK going to let the rest of us know what was on that paper or do you think we have to hope that whoever wins the family tree is a nice person and scans it so everyone can see it? Personally, I'm very scared that the people, like me, who can't bid on it will not get to know what is on there and see the whole thing. Do you think I'm worry over nothing kingwidgit (or anyone else)?Well - according to the article surrounding the image - all the items will be on display on Feb 20 (as is usual for an auction). Apparently there will be a £10 admission to the viewing (proceeds go to the same charity). We may not get a scan - but I would hope that whichever posters to this forum can go to London and to this viewing would be nice enough to jot down some of the hidden info. Unknown of course whether photography would be allowed.

Actually, I think the only plotline that everyone is interested in, is whether RAB stands for Regulus Arcturus Black or not... And actually, she already had an 'A' name that we were aware of - I've been assuming he was Regulus Alphard Black.

My chief interest is to find out whether Sirius' mother was a ______ Prince (or any other way that the name Prince shows up on the tree). Personally, I'm afraid that just the fact she is releasing this 'tree' ruins the theory.

I just can't understand WHY there have been so many clues to take a deeper look at the tree and the 'practically royal' hint - if Prince doesn't show up on that paper

I can't remember whether or not Sirius shows Harry Draco's name on the tapestry--if so, this would be an inconsistency between the book and the drawing.


Yes Draco’s name was on the family tree, I think most people names probably were even if they aren’t on this small draft of JK rowlings

From OOTP
Harry noticed the name s
"A double line of gold embroidery linked Narcissa Black with Lucius Malfoy, and a single vertical gold line from their names led to the name Draco"

I can't remember whether or not Sirius shows Harry Draco's name on the tapestry--if so, this would be an inconsistency between the book and the drawing.
He does show it to Harry. Here's a quote from HBP:
A double line of gold embroidery linked Narcissa Black with Lucius Malfoy and a single vertical gold line from their names led to the name Draco.

He does show it to Harry. Here's a quote from HBP:
A double line of gold embroidery linked Narcissa Black with Lucius Malfoy and a single vertical gold line from their names led to the name Draco.

acutally he didnt point it out to Harry, Harry was looking at the tree and saw the name Malfoy linked to Siruis cousin

Well - according to the article surrounding the image - all the items will be on display on Feb 20 (as is usual for an auction). Apparently there will be a £10 admission to the viewing (proceeds go to the same charity). We may not get a scan - but I would hope that whichever posters to this forum can go to London and to this viewing would be nice enough to jot down some of the hidden info. Unknown of course whether photography would be allowed.
ahhh, thank you! :) i couldn't read the article, i guess my eyes aren't so good.

This is closely related to the tree, but I have some questions for someone who knows about family terms:

What is a second cousin?
What is a second cousin once removed?
What is Bellatrix, Narcissa, and Andromeda to Sirius? Cousins?
What is a cousin..?

I am not up to date with family terms. Thanks..

For example: Edward m. Debra (first generation)
Their children are Andrew and Julia (2nd generation) siblings

Andrew m. Ellen . . . . . . . . . . Julia m. Allen
> Ted, Marie . . . . . . . . .. . . Barbara (3rd gen) Ted & Marie are Barbs first cousins

Ted m. Jane . . . . . . . . . . . Barbie m. Ken
> Bill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Celia (4th gen) Bill and Celia are second cousins.

Bill m. Eve . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Celia m. Louis
> Maggie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Brandon (5th gen) Maggie and Brandon are 3rd cousins.

Maggie is Celia's second cousin once removed. Brandon is Bill's second cousin once removed.

Bill and Celia are 4th gen and second cousins. Their children are in the 5th gen and third cousins. When describing a cousin in an earlier generation the term removed is used. So, Maggie and Brandon are third cousins. Celia is Maggie's second cousin, once removed, one generation back.

No, I don't think so...57 is not elderly, nor is it 'old by wizarding standards'I would hope it wasn't elderly, nor is it old by muggle standards (especially mine :lol:).

I would hope it wasn't elderly, nor is it old by muggle standards (especially mine :lol:).Nah, 57's not elderly at all ;) ...my grandma had her last child {my mom's one of 13} at 53.

While initially thrilled with the Potters on the Tapestry, now I'm gettin' a wee bit irritated, cause the dates match up to the Potters deaths...yet they don't match with 'elderly'.:lol:

The dates for the Potters are tantalyzing, but the ages are all off. I'm trying to figure out James's relationship to Sirius if that is his parents on the tapestry. First cousin, first cousin, once removed? That seems too close to work in canon.

I think we see some of the prominent wizarding names, but not the direct families of the main characters. These are all probably more distant relatives. The chart is designed to show up how they are all interrelated, but not to imply they are all closely related. It would upset the applecart too much to make James a close cousin of Sirius.

The dates for the Potters are tantalyzing, but the ages are all off. I'm trying to figure out James's relationship to Sirius if that is his parents on the tapestry. First cousin, first cousin, once removed? That seems too close to work in canon.

If those are James Parents which i doubt,:no: he and Siruis are probably at least 3rd once removed cousins or futher. I dont think there is any possible way that they'd be 1st couisns of any sort or even 2nd cousins

they can't be realated... can they?
james and sirius i mean

Well it would certainly shake canon to have Harry turn up as Sirius's cousin. It would be even worse if Ginny turned out to be Harry's cousin. I think she drew the tapestry to show the interrelationships of the wizarding family names, but only for distant relations, not main characters. That would be in accordance with the "between the lines" concept--peripheral relationships, not the main ones.
I wouldn't be surprised that Sirius and James were distant relatives, since Sirius says all purebloods are distantly related. It's just logical that if James, Sirius, and Ginny are all purebloods, then Harry is related to both Sirius and Ginny - but in a very distant way.

We should remember that Eleanor Roosevelt and Franklin were actually cousins in the same family - quite removed - but that is how they met. Not that unusual in the wealthy set.

All of the crowned heads of Europe are related, too. I'm absolutely sure that is one of her models for the family tree. I have a book about British Royalty, and in the back are pages and pages of family trees.

If the tapestry extends to Sirius's generation and his side of the family tree, that would be revealing.
We know that it does, since it does in the book. I just hope we all get to see it.

FDR and Eleanor were 5th cousins once removed ,

Since all Pureblood are interrelated, doesn’t that many all or most ½ bloods who are not muggle born would also be related to all the Purebloods as well m since they likely have a pureblood parent or pureblood grandparent

It could be said if your traced your family tree back far enough that everyone would be on it in some capacity

I doubt Harry is closely related to either Sirius or Ginny, distant relations

What is a cousin..?
What is a second cousin?
What is a second cousin once removed?
What is Bellatrix, Narcissa, and Andromeda to Sirius? Cousins?

1. Start with parents. They have children.
2. Their children are brothers or sisters to each other. Siblings.
3. Now their children have kids. The children's kids are grandchildren. With me so far?
4. The kids are cousins to each other. The children of siblings are cousins. Cousins have a set of common grandparents.
5. Now, the kids have children of their own. They are great-grandchildren. But to each other, in the same generation, they are SECOND cousins. The children of cousins are second cousins.

All the above is what people are to each other within the same generation.

.............................Parent............... ..................Parent
............................/.......\............................
.......................Brother.....Sister......... .................Child
........................./...............\........................
....................Cousin............Cousin...... ................Grandchild
..................../......................\......................
.....Second Cousin...................Second Cousin............Great Grandchild
................/...............................\..................
...Third Cousin..........................Third Cousin...........Great Great Grandchild

Removal is the relationship of a person to another of two different generations.

The child of my first cousin is my first cousin once removed. (and vice versa).
The grandchild of my first cousin is my first cousin twice removed.
But in common language, I might be called a great aunt.

.....Second Cousin...................Second Cousin............
................/.................................................
...Second Cousin once Removed........................................... .........


Have I spelled cousin right?

Well explained lindaluna! This means the common ancestor to Sirius and Arthur is on the 2nd tier visible on the tree. This the tier that we actually DON'T see a blot on - however there is plenty of room off to the left for blot 2 to be hidden by the other papers. This means that it must have been Phineas' eldest daughter (far left on the tree) that married a Weasley.

So do we still think that Dumbledore links into the tree at some point? JKR did say that his was a family worth looking into, but how can we explore things she's not given us information on? Just wondering about that anyway. Perhaps he and Phineas were cousins? I dunno, anyway, they are of similar ages, so could be.

So do we still think that Dumbledore links into the tree at some point? JKR did say that his was a family worth looking into, but how can we explore things she's not given us information on? Just wondering about that anyway. Perhaps he and Phineas were cousins? I dunno, anyway, they are of similar ages, so could be.
Well, Dumbledore was born in 1840, according to HP lexicon, and Phineas in 1847. They can't be brothers, as there is only one hole, so no place left for Aberforth. I think cousins is very probable. I am not sure either.

Who do you think is the hole between the Longbottoms and Crouchs? Could it be the Prewetts? Sirius said in OotP that he and Molly are "distant relatives", but we don't know how distant they are.

Yep, plus I believe that Dumbledore only had one brother - Aberforth.

I thought Sirius said he and Molly were related by marriage, which would surely be because he is related to Arthur, right?

Yep, plus I believe that Dumbledore only had one brother - Aberforth.
Well, at least we know of only one brother.

I thought Sirius said he and Molly were related by marriage, which would surely be because he is related to Arthur, right?
I looked it up in my book and he says that he and Molly are related over a wedding, but doesn't say which one. I think he doesn't mean her marriage to Arthur, however. Otherwise he wouldn't mention her at all, because it's clear that if he's related to Arthur, than he's related to Molly over their marriage as well.

By the way, HP Lexicon has updated the Black Family Tree. Here's the link:
http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/blackfamilytree.html

I wouldn't be surprised that Sirius and James were distant relatives, since Sirius says all purebloods are distantly related. It's just logical that if James, Sirius, and Ginny are all purebloods, then Harry is related to both Sirius and Ginny - but in a very distant way.


Yes, Sirius said "all the pureblood families are interrelated". However, what we're saying is that Harry cannot be related to Sirius and Ginny through blood. Dorea doesn't fit the dates to be James's mother - so if Charlus is the only Potter to marry into that family, he must be some other relation of James. Therefore, neither James or Harry are related to them by blood - only by marriage.

well several question remains:
first is Phineus'n familly name is Nigellus or it's just a second name and he is a Black? (after all the tree begins with him and is the one of the black familly)By the way why is it Phineus on the familly tree and PhineAs in the book ?

Second: How Sirius's mother related to the Blacks ? (the portrait says
"how dare you befoul the house of my fhaters !" so she is related with them before wedding to Sirrius's father)
we see clearly here that the whole thing is a real meess ! :
29605

Did anyone get the name beginning wiht DR under "Charlus Potter" ?

I'm trying to figure out James's relationship to Sirius if that is his parents on the tapestry. First cousin, first cousin, once removed? That seems too close to work in canon.Since we should have lines making Sirius cousin to Andromeda, Bellatrix and Cissy, I suspect the Black parents will be a line below the one that has Dorea (but it's just assumption!)....it would make James a cousin of Sirius's parents, and then James and Sirius would be cousins once removed. If Mr. or Mrs. Black are on the same line as Dorea, James and Sirius would be cousins, period. [I agree that Dorea and Charlus can not be James's parents--for soooo many reasons!]
I looked it up in my book and he says that he and Molly are related over a wedding, but doesn't say which one.If Molly is a "direct" cousin by marriage, one of her parents' siblings married one of Sirius's parents siblings...But he may just have omitted the actual "level" of cousin-ship.
Sorry to embarass you, if I have. It just seemed ironic that you were going on about the morals and then put their wedding date after Harry's birth. Please know this wasn't intended as a slam, just a little tease.

Harry was born July 31, 1980. So he was possibly concieved Oct. 31, 1979. That's the last possible date for the wedding
Oh, no, hwyla, thanks for the great catch. (My kids often drive me nuts when I am trying to be serious on the forums...) Yes, of course I meant early October 1979...I think I mixed up birth year for Harry with the death year for Lily and James....:blush:

So do we still think that Dumbledore links into the tree at some point? JKR did say that his was a family worth looking into, but how can we explore things she's not given us information on? Just wondering about that anyway. Perhaps he and Phineas were cousins? I dunno, anyway, they are of similar ages, so could be.I think JKR just meant that Aberforth might have a more important role in the future.

When JKR spoke of Albus' family she had just said a short while earlier that she was shutting down the gum wrappers theories 'because it doesn't really lead anywhere very interesting even if they're wrong'. So JKR is referring back to the idea of whether or not a theory is worthwhile to continue on with when speaking about Albus' family being a more profitable line of inquiry that the gum wrappers from Mrs Longbottom.

This does not mean we must delve deeply into Albus' family finding unknown, hidden secrets. Just that someone in Albus' family is likely to play an important part. We already HAVE an appropriate 'someone' in Aberforth. He has been downplayed ever since he was first mentioned, so we hopefully wouldn't pay much attention to him. Yet we can see him working in the background.

1) He might have had an eye on the kids when they were in the HogsHead planning the DA

2) Some believe that Aberforth hid Albus from the ministry in bk5. That HogsHead Inn stands for HOGSwart HEADmaster INside

3) He's hiding Albus' leaving the castle this book. The minister has aurors trying to find out where Albus goes and Albus goes to the Hogshead first to cover his tracks. Apparently Aberforth is able to somehow confuse them or keep them from following

4) We saw how important a source of info Aberforth can be when Tom goes to apply for a job again. Aberforth has prewarned Albus of his coming and just who awaits his return in the bar

5) We also saw Aberforth's importance in preventing Snape from hearing the entire prophecy

6) I think there were plenty of clues that Aberforth is the one who helped Albus get Burke's memory of Merope selling the locket

So - Aberforth is doing Order work - Harry just isn't aware of it. Which leaves Aberforth relatively safe from discovery by Voldy if he goes looking in Harry's mind again. Because of this Albus can probably risk telling Aberforth important information (like the fact that he and Snape plan to use his death to place Snape in a safer position closer to Voldy) that he apparently CAN'T risk telling the rest of the Order for fear they will be captured and legilimensed - blowing Snape's cover.

There is no need to hare off looking for anyone more significant. Aberforth is in prime position to be a key player in the next book (passing Snape's info onto the rest of the Order since they would no longer trust it coming from Snape) - whether Harry ever notices it or not.

well several question remains:
first is Phineus'n familly name is Nigellus or it's just a second name and he is a Black? (after all the tree begins with him and is the one of the black familly)By the way why is it Phineus on the familly tree and PhineAs in the book ?
I think his full name is Phineas Nigellus Black, which would mean that Nigellus is his second name and Black his surname. It'd make more sence, as the whole family are Blacks, not Nigellus'.

Did anyone get the name beginning wiht DR under "Charlus Potter" ?
It looks to me like Druette or something like that. I searched through HP Lexicon and didn't find anyone with a name like that, so he/she probably didn't appear in the story yet. I am not even sure if it's a first name or surname, but I am guessing it should be the first name.

If Molly is a "direct" cousin by marriage, one of her parents' siblings married one of Sirius's parents siblings...But he may just have omitted the actual "level" of cousin-ship.
He doesn't say anything about being cousins with Molly (at least it is not in my book). I am probably confused by the meaning of "cousin" in English, but if they are related by marriage, they should be something like "cousin-in-law". Does that exist in English?

Did anyone get the name beginning wiht DR under "Charlus Potter" ?
It looks like Drucilla (there appears to be at least one l towards the end of the name). The problem is not enough letter spaces between the u and the l, so it could be more like Druella.

She appears to have married the son of the older sibling of blast spot number 3 and Dorea Black. The lack of a visible vertical line coming from the marriage notation is a problem for that.

He doesn't say anything about being cousins with Molly (at least it is not in my book). I am probably confused by the meaning of "cousin" in English, but if they are related by marriage, they should be something like "cousin-in-law". Does that exist in English?
Some people might use the term 'cousin-in-law', but it isn't actually common to claim such kinship by marriage. We tend to focus on bloodkin when referring to cousins and such. [Or maybe it's just my "commoner" status and high brow Americans do worry about such things! :p]
"The pure-blood families are all interrelated," said Sirius. "If you're only going to let your sons and daughters marry purebloods your choice is very limited, there are hardly any of us left. Molly and I are cousins by marriage and Arthur's something like my second cousin once removed. But there's no point looking for them on here -- if ever a family was a bunch of blood traitors it's the Weasleys."

...She appears to have married the son of the older sibling of blast spot number 3 and Dorea Black. The lack of a visible vertical line coming from the marriage notation is a problem for that.I agree. This is the only line that continues down as Black (not Potter, Longbottom or Crouch). So Dur_____ (whatever her name really is) is the wife of a Black male and is probably either the mother or aunt of Sirius.
-------------
Since Sirius said the Blacks always sorted to Slytherin, I wonder if the children of Charlus, Harfang and Caspar were Slytherins? I feel fairly sure that we can be certain that Caspar Crouch was Barty Jr.'s grandfather, since that line is also now dead.

I wonder if part of Barty Crouch Sr's harsh and zealous treatment of Sirius (his imprisonment without trial) comes from not wanting to appear 'soft' especially where a relative of sorts was concerned.

Also shows that Bella's attack on the Longbottoms was limited to 'family' if Barty Jr is now related to her. Her group then would have been her, her husband and brother-in-law and a second cousin. Attacking someone who may be related by marriage. And puts another face on Bella killing her cousin Sirius

I agree. This is the only line that continues down as Black (not Potter, Longbottom or Crouch). So Dur_____ (whatever her name really is) is the wife of a Black male and is probably either the mother or aunt of Sirius.
Druetta, Druella, Druatta, Drualla...I think I'd go with Drue__a. I'm also going to propose that Sirius's parents will be found further to the left as I expect both of them to have the surname Black. *

Druella, an elfin vision, Teutonic.
Druetta is showing up as a surname in Argentina on google...
Druatta also showing as a surname.
Drualla is at least a road in Australia...and the first name of a woman who died in Texas...but that isn't helpful at all!

*[Just for illustration: My father's mother had the same last name as the man she married, a third cousin once removed...Grandpa's family emigrated to the US from Prussia, Grandma's from Russia and they happened to settle (homestead) within a 10 mile radius...Grandpa always denied any blood relation to Grandma and she always said they were "something like seventh cousins"...The family was ignorant of the truth until my own father did the genealogy searches!]

Some people might use the term 'cousin-in-law', but it isn't actually common to claim such kinship by marriage. We tend to focus on bloodkin when referring to cousins and such. [Or maybe it's just my "commoner" status and high brow Americans do worry about such things! :p]
"The pure-blood families are all interrelated," said Sirius. "If you're only going to let your sons and daughters marry purebloods your choice is very limited, there are hardly any of us left. Molly and I are cousins by marriage and Arthur's something like my second cousin once removed. But there's no point looking for them on here -- if ever a family was a bunch of blood traitors it's the Weasleys."
Thanks a lot for explaining it to me. By the way, there should be OotP instead of HBP in the quote, but never mind.
Since Sirius said the Blacks always sorted to Slytherin, I wonder if the children of Charlus, Harfang and Caspar were Slytherins?
I don't think so. Charlus's son was a Potter and Harfang's children were Longbottoms, so I don't think they count as "Blacks". In my opinion, Sirius meant Blacks only as his direct relatives. I wonder, though, whether the blasted holes represent everyone who wasn't sorted to Slytherin. Maybe Sirius's mother considered this being a bloodtraitor. That would mean, than, that Charlus, Dorea, Callidora and Harfang were Slytherins.
I wonder if part of Barty Crouch Sr's harsh and zealous treatment of Sirius (his imprisonment without trial) comes from not wanting to appear 'soft' especially where a relative of sorts was concerned.

Also shows that Bella's attack on the Longbottoms was limited to 'family' if Barty Jr is now related to her. Her group then would have been her, her husband and brother-in-law and a second cousin. Attacking someone who may be related by marriage. And puts another face on Bella killing her cousin Sirius
Good observation. :tu:

Druetta, Druella, Druatta, Drualla...I think I'd go with Drue__a. I'm also going to propose that Sirius's parents will be found further to the left as I expect both of them to have the surname Black. There isn't any hint that her last name isn't Black since that spot is covered. I think she still could be Sirius' mom.

Altho' I still will hold my breath to see if the name Prince shows up for Sirius' mom (I think it less likely now that we know JKR is releasing the info ahead of the books, but until I see it I won't let go of the idea - that 'practically royal' was just too good of a hint)

I'll go out on a limb here....

The space to the left of Phineas Nigellus is a brother whose line will lead to Mr. Black (Sirius's father). Violetta Bulstrode obviously married a son of Phineas, let's say the one who inherited the house. Looks like Dorea had a sibling blasted off, but I will suppose there is a brother left of the blast mark. This is Mr. Black, Sirius's maternal grandfather. He inherits the house, but has only daughters. The house passes to the eldest daughter, Mrs. Black (Sirius's mum) who has married her third cousin [supposing the number of generations away from Phineas are equal], Mr. Black who has descended from Phineas's brother (who didn't inherit the house at Grimmauld Place).

It allows Sirius and Regulus to carry the surname Black while having the house come to Sirius via Mrs. Black...and explains why Kreacher likes her better!

It allows Sirius and Regulus to carry the surname Black while having the house come to Sirius via Mrs. Black...and explains why Kreacher likes her better!This contradicts canon though:"Black family tradition decreed that the house was handed down the direct line, to the next male with the name of 'Black'. It could only pass to a female were there no males alive...unless someone bent the rules like Sirius did...which I doubt, otherwise Sirius---a filthy traitor, "shame of my flesh"---wouldn't have owned 12 Grimmauld at all.

As Dumbledore mentioned, Bellatrix would have been the eldest female 'Black'---of course Mrs. Black, who'd died ten years previous as of OoP, had lived in the House after her husband died...So any female listed on the Tapestry higher than Bella are deceased.

Nicole: That's a great explanation! :)

But I think Wizarding Genealogy is becoming alot like Time Travel for me - I'm getting a headache trying to get my mind around these connections. :lol:

What do you make of the folded piece of paper JKR included that says "Murder"? Obviously, with money to inherit there would be some intrigue going on in these families.

I've been watching Charles Dickens "Bleak House" on PBS, about a family that is driven "mad" by an inheritance that is tied up in the courts, and it reminds me of the House of Black. I was reading the book last night, too, and there is a character who has one eyebrow, lol, which reminded me of Harry. Also a character named "Smallweed" who is compared to an old spider obsessed with money. :D

I still think it's a bit weird to marry within any traceable cousins, but hey I think we're supposed to feel that way about Pure-bloods. They're so worried about their blood status that they'd resort to near-incest!
But yeah, other than thinking it's slightly wrong (in a moral way, not as in I disagree) I do agree with your theory. I was a bit confused at the beginning, because I was thinking 'wait, Phineas is Sirius' great grandfather, so why would his father be the son of Phineas' brother?' but then i realised that this would make Phineas the maternal great grandfather, and the hidden person to the left would be the paternal great grandfather. right?

This contradicts canon though:"Black family tradition decreed that the house was handed down the direct line, to the next male with the name of 'Black'. It could only pass to a female were there no males alive...unless someone bent the rules like Sirius did...which I doubt, otherwise Sirius---a filthy traitor, "shame of my flesh"---wouldn't have owned 12 Grimmauld at all.


But traditionally, property is handed down from parents to the eldest male, or the eldest female if there is no male offspring. Plus, it could be possible that Sirius' father inherited the house, as it would still be the house of her fathers that way, she just didn't inherit it.

This contradicts canon though:"Black family tradition decreed that the house was handed down the direct line, to the next male with the name of 'Black'. It could only pass to a female were there no males alive...unless someone bent the rules like Sirius did...which I doubt, otherwise Sirius---a filthy traitor, "shame of my flesh"---wouldn't have owned 12 Grimmauld at all.

As Dumbledore mentioned, Bellatrix would have been the eldest female 'Black'---of course Mrs. Black, who'd died ten years previous as of OoP, had lived in the House after her husband died...So any female listed on the Tapestry higher than Bella are deceased.

But we learned in HBP that the house could be willed to either a woman or someone outside of the family. What is to say somewhere in the Black Family line it wasn't willed to someone least likey to get it, say a daughter.

The thing is, about marrying cousins, at least in the U.S., most people have limited contact with relatives beyond first cousins and maybe some first cousins removed. So, to us, the word "cousin" automatically sounds like people who are too close to marry.

However, when people used to have more contact with a wider range of family, there used to be the term "kissing cousins," which meant people who might be aware that they were related but it was so distant that they could kiss without freaking out people.

From a genetic point of view, first cousins have about 12.5% of their genes in common.

Second cousins have 3.125% of their genes in common.

Third cousins have .78125% of their genes in common.

So, from an inbreeding point of view, there are people on that family tree who would be genetically quite safe (although, if there are any known hereditary diseases, it might be a good idea to get tested, just in case you're both carriers of a recessive).

It's just that we still use the term cousin, which is so icky sounding when we say it.

Oh, wanted to add on the house passing down in the family -

If Mrs. Black was either an only child in the senior line or had only sisters, there's a question whether the house would pass to her or to a (hopefully distant) male cousin. Old, aristocratic families faced with that situation often pushed for or out and out arranged a marriage between a daughter (usually the oldest) of the senior branch and the man who had become heir.

In Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, the family estate is entailed so it will only pass to a male heir. That heir, Mr. Collins, says he feels it is his duty to marry one of the Bennet sisters, the children of the man currently owning the estate.

In Persuasion, a Baronet's title is going to pass to a cousin because he has only daughters. The oldest daughter has always felt that this cousin "belongs" to her and that they will marry (the two branches of the family stop talking to each other when it turns out the cousin has different ideas).

In the case of royal families, civil wars have been caused by there being only a female heir in the direct line. Avoiding this by arranging a marriage between a princess heir and a rival claimant may have often saved thousands of lives.

So, yeah, lots of social pressure to marry cousins in cases like that.

to the next male with the name of 'Black'.But if the direct descendants are all female? Does it revert to some other line of Blacks then? Could Sirius's mum have married her third cousin to ensure she kept the house passed down the male line that led to her? We still don't know if Andromeda, Bella and Cissy are Blacks because of Mum's brother, or because of Dad's brother...I propose that Dad and his brother weren't in the direct line to inherit the house.
What do you make of the folded piece of paper JKR included that says "Murder"? Obviously, with money to inherit there would be some intrigue going on in these families. Yes, but that is the paper from another author. It doesn't match JKR's handwriting at all and this is a charity auction involving several authors! We see three different "entries" in that one screencap...

But we learned in HBP that the house could be willed to either a woman or someone outside of the family. What is to say somewhere in the Black Family line it wasn't willed to someone least likey to get it, say a daughter.No, we learn that it could be willed to a female only if there were no living male Blacks. That is the difference.

As long as there is a male 'Black' who can trace a direct line to Phineas {and beyond}, he would supercede any female 'Black'.

But if the direct descendants are all female? Does it revert to some other line of Blacks then? Could Sirius's mum have married her third cousin to ensure she kept the house passed down the male line that led to her? We still don't know if Andromeda, Bella and Cissy are Blacks because of Mum's brother, or because of Dad's brother...I propose that Dad and his brother weren't in the direct line to inherit the house.
As long as the male Blacks have the same common progenitor, yes...Phineas Nigellus Black....or his father, grandfather, great-grandfather...etc.

The male heir has to have a common progenitor, otherwise Sirius & Regulus wouldn't have the surname Black. In a normal marriage the surname comes from the father, not the mother. Sirius was the last of the "Blacks".

Think royalty...it used to supercede females altogether, and go directly to the oldest blooded male.

whew! Nearly lost my post, but I copied it at the last minute! These glitches are driving me crazy. :grumble:

However, when people used to have more contact with a wider range of family, there used to be the term "kissing cousins," which meant people who might be aware that they were related but it was so distant that they could kiss without freaking out people.
In Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, the family estate is entailed so it will only pass to a male heir. That heir, Mr. Collins, says he feels it is his duty to marry one of the Bennet sisters, the children of the man currently owning the estate.

In Persuasion, a Baronet's title is going to pass to a cousin because he has only daughters. The oldest daughter has always felt that this cousin "belongs" to her and that they will marry (the two branches of the family stop talking to each other when it turns out the cousin has different ideas).
You took the words right out of my mouth - nineteenth century literature is full of examples!

Another Jane Austen example is Henry Hayter, who is engaged to the younger Musgrove girl in Persuasion. He is actually a first cousin, because the girl's mother mentions that Henry is her brother's son. So - ick.

In Bleak House, there are two possible heirs to the "Jarndyce" fortune, and they are cousins who want to marry.

In "The Moonstone," by Wilkie Collins, the main characters are all first cousins. :rolleyes: Franklin and Rachel are engaged, but Godfrey Ablewhite wants to marry her, too, for the money.

Finally - in Jane Eyre, when Jane flees from Mr. Rochester, a married man, she coincidentally arrives on the doorstep of some cousins. Of course, her male cousin wants to marry her, and she nearly accepts until a paranormal/spiritual intervention tells her not to do it - thank goodness.

Two American examples: Edgar Allen Poe married his young cousin (13-years-old), who died at 26 and was his inspiration for "Anabel Lee." And of course, in Gone with the Wind, Ashley Wilkes is Scarlet O'Hara's cousin!
Yes, but that is the paper from another author. It doesn't match JKR's handwriting at all and this is a charity auction involving several authors! We see three different "entries" in that one screencap...
Oh - sorry! I didn't realize that. I just looked at the full page picture of the article, and it's clear.
http://www.mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=jkrtelegraph/telegraph_jkrbookaidfull.jpg

Mugglenet didn't have that information on the original, and only showed the top of the page.

No, we learn that it could be willed to a female only if there were no living male Blacks. That is the difference.

As long as there is a male 'Black' who can trace a direct line to Phineas {and beyond}, he would supercede any female 'Black'.


As long as the male Blacks have the same common progenitor, yes...Phineas Nigellus Black....or his father, grandfather, great-grandfather...etc.

The male heir has to have a common progenitor, otherwise Sirius & Regulus wouldn't have the surname Black. In a normal marriage the surname comes from the father, not the mother. Sirius was the last of the "Blacks".

Think royalty...it used to supercede females altogether, and go directly to the oldest blooded male.


Please find the quote in cannon that says it can only be willed to a female or someone out of the if there are no males. Tradition is not law. If this is the case Draco would be the inheritor not Bella.

If I remember correctly, Aragorn is actually distantly related to Arwen in LotR. Aragorn is a descendent of Elrond's brother, Elros. This makes Aragorn something like Arwen's first cousin 1,000-times removed. ;)

It applies to the hobbits, as well - they're full of cousins marrying each other. Merry marries Estella Bolger, even though his great-great-grandmother was Adaldrida Bolger, meaning Merry and his wife are probably fourth cousins.

And also the Bagginses. Daisy Baggins married Griffo Boffin, though her great-great-grandmother was Berylla Boffin. Again, probably fourth cousins.

The Gamgees and the Cottons are also distantly related, meaning Sam is already Rosie's cousin by marriage before he marries her.

Please find the quote in cannon that says it can only be willed to a female or someone out of the if there are no males. Tradition is not law. If this is the case Draco would be the inheritor not Bella.
You got a point there. Sirius was able to write a will which goes against that family tradition. So, Mrs Black's father might have been able to do that as well.

Maybe he only left it to Mr Black (Sirius father, this gets confusing) on the condition that he married his daughter. Judging from her portrait, she was quite charming, so this could have solved two problems at once.:D

BTW: Thanx a lot for all the people who explained that second cousin once removed thing. I think I really got it now.

Please find the quote in cannon that says it can only be willed to a female or someone out of the if there are no males. Tradition is not law. If this is the case Draco would be the inheritor not Bella.
I think people are taking the word of Phineas Nigellus - who ought to know - when he asks Dumbledore, in OotP, Chapter 37:

"'Am I to understand' said Phineas Nigellus slowly from Harry's left, 'that my great-great-grandson - the last of the Blacks - is dead?'

'Yes, Phineas,'said Dumbledore."

Now there are technically "Blacks" still alive ~ Bella, Narcissa, Andromeda, and Draco. They are in the gene pool of Phineas Nigellus, yet he says that Sirius was the "Last of the Blacks." That may not seem fair or modern, but that is the canon.

Edited to Add that Draco has not come of age yet, so he can't inherit. :tu: Harry hasn't either, but the will specifically names him as Sirius's heir. The rule seems to be that in the absence of someone with the family name, then age is the next factor for people in the bloodline, whether male or female. Bella is oldest, therefore she inherits.

Let's look at it another way - these inheritance rules are so powerful, that they go beyond the law! For instance, Sirius can live in his mother's house, even though he is still a criminal on the run. Kreacher has to serve him, and the house is his, and he is recognized by the founder of the family line, Phineas, as the heir.

Dumbledore says that Bella might inherit Grimmauld Place unless Kreacher chooses to serve Harry, which means that the will of Sirius has some sort of binding "magical" element to it.

But also, it means that if Sirius had died without a will, there is no doubt that Bella would have inherited, even though she is also a criminal who broke out of jail in Book 5, and was last seen with Voldemort before she went into hiding.

One more thing about "heirs." Remember in Book 2, "Enemies of the Heir, Beware?" I've always wondered why the whole "Heir of Slytherin" thing was so important, and I think now that it is because the ancient wizards chose to base their future on family bloodlines. So Salazar Slytherin magically sealed the Chamber to anyone who wasn't his "heir." The inheritance goes beyond the law, and even beyond death, since Tom Riddle is merely a horcrux shadow in CoS. He's nearly a "dead heir" - rhymes with "dead air." LOL :lol:

So Salazar Slytherin magically sealed the Chamber to anyone who wasn't his "heir."
Well, how did Harry get in then? JKR has told us that Harry is not a descendant of Slytherin...and certainly no "heir"! The Chamber could have only been sealed against those who didn't speak Parseltongue, though I can see how Sal would have expected that only his heirs would have that ability...It just can't hinge on that blood status or Harry could not have accessed the Chamber regardless of being able to speak Parseltongue.

Well, how did Harry get in then? JKR has told us that Harry is not a descendant of Slytherin...and certainly no "heir"! The Chamber could have only been sealed against those who didn't speak Parseltongue, though I can see how Sal would have expected that only his heirs would have that ability...It just can't hinge on that blood status or Harry could not have accessed the Chamber regardless of being able to speak Parseltongue.
__________________
The Chamber had already been "opened" by Tom Riddle before Harry ever got there, is the way I understand it. That is why the "writing on the wall" said "The Chamber of Secrets is Now Open" long before Harry figured out where it was.

McGonagall says in Chapter 9, CoS:

"Slytherin, according to the legend, sealed the CoS so that none would be able to open it until his own true heir arrived at the school. The heir alone would be able to unseal the CoS, unleash the horror within, and use it to purge the school of all who were unworthy to study magic."

Voldemort was possessing Ginny by "pouring his soul into her" according to Tom Riddle. So she opened the Chamber, but only because he was inside her.

Horcrux Tom Riddle was the "Heir of Slytherin," as I understand it, and he "spoke" through Ginny to open the Chamber.

The Chamber had already been "opened" by Tom Riddle before Harry ever got there, is the way I understand it.
Ah, thanks for the explanation, SIP! I totally get what you meant, then. Sorry I misunderstood (and didn't remember very well, either, did I? :blush: )...

Ah, thanks for the explanation, SIP! I totally get what you meant, then. Sorry I misunderstood (and didn't remember very well, either, did I? :blush: )...
No worries! :) I literally stayed confused about the "heir" for years, until someone explained it to me.

Thats not the way I see the chamber of secret's.
I believe that Slytherin didn't think anyone but a pure blood, descended from him, would be able to speak parceltongue. Add to that the fact that so many people didn't believe the chamber existed, and the work that it would take to find the chamber, then you've got yourself down to a very small number of people who would get into it in the first place. Also, the one who reached the chamber would have to be pretty determined to get rid of muggle-born's too...
I don't think, therefore, that it was necessarily sealed to any but the one true heir, only that it was sealed to anyone who wasn't a parcelmouth, couldn't work out where the chamber was, or didn't really care about 'purifying' the school. It was just chance that he was a descendant of slytherin in the end I think.

Thats not the way I see the chamber of secret's.
I believe that Slytherin didn't think anyone but a pure blood, descended from him, would be able to speak parceltongue. Add to that the fact that so many people didn't believe the chamber existed, and the work that it would take to find the chamber, then you've got yourself down to a very small number of people who would get into it in the first place. Also, the one who reached the chamber would have to be pretty determined to get rid of muggle-born's too...
I don't think, therefore, that it was necessarily sealed to any but the one true heir, only that it was sealed to anyone who wasn't a parcelmouth, couldn't work out where the chamber was, or didn't really care about 'purifying' the school. It was just chance that he was a descendant of slytherin in the end I think.

Exactly what I was going to say, but jessi_pixie beat me to it.

The chamber was, in a figure of speach, open, but not really open ALL the time. I'm pretty sure that what Harry did in the bathroom counted as opening it.
Like Jessi said, just think of the difficulty of the task. I know that if I was Slytherin I would have never believed that anybody but my heir could speak Parseltongue AND be able to figure out how to open it.

Let's keep on topic here!

Plenty to talk about with the House of Black.

It's all interrelated though! heirs, family tree's...

On the subject of inheriting Grimmauld Place, I'm quite sure that it is passed to the eldest child of those in current possession, before it is inherited by any other relative. Surely, if Sirius had had any relations closer than cousins, then the order of inheritance, ignoring the will, would have passed it on to them? As it is, siblings are the only relatives closer than cousins appropriate to inheritance, and Regulus was already dead.

Thanks Silver Ink Pot :)

I think if Sirius had any other siblings, or if Regulus or Sirius had had a child that the house would have automatically gone to that person.

Like how Sirius got the house his mother clearly didn’t like him so I doubt she have left the house to him, but he got it because he was the oldest, his mother wasn’t clever enough to attempted to leave the house to one of her relatives she liked

I think if Sirius had any other siblings, or if Regulus or Sirius had had a child that the house would have automatically gone to that person.I would agree with that. :agree:
Like how Sirius got the house his mother clearly didn’t like him so I doubt she have left the house to him, but he got it because he was the oldest, his mother wasn’t clever enough to attempted to leave the house to one of her relatives she liked
Maybe she felt it beneath her to make a will? Or there is some other factor related to last name. Sirius was the last of the Blacks who could have passed on the family name and genes. Is there some clue that would tell us why, if Harry refused to accept Kreacher and Grimmauld Place, Bellatrix would have been the "automatic" (maybe "default" is a better word) heir(ess)?

Like how Sirius got the house his mother clearly didn’t like him so I doubt she have left the house to him, but he got it because he was the oldest, his mother wasn’t clever enough to attempted to leave the house to one of her relatives she likedMaybe she felt it beneath her to make a will? Or there is some other factor related to last name. Maybe tradition? It has always gone to the eldest black and she's reluctant to break the ancient traditions of the "most noble" house of black, no matter who's the new head.

Sirius was the last of the Blacks who could have passed on the family name and genes. Is there some clue that would tell us why, if Harry refused to accept Kreacher and Grimmauld Place, Bellatrix would have been the "automatic" (maybe "default" is a better word) heir(ess)?
I don't think there is any reason to think it would have defaulted to Bellatrix other than Dumbledore's guesses.

I would agree with that. :agree:

Maybe she felt it beneath her to make a will? Or there is some other factor related to last name. Sirius was the last of the Blacks who could have passed on the family name and genes. Is there some clue that would tell us why, if Harry refused to accept Kreacher and Grimmauld Place, Bellatrix would have been the "automatic" (maybe "default" is a better word) heir(ess)?
That could be plus she figured he was in Jail tell he died, After thinking about it she might not been able to pass it on to someone else even she wanted to. Sirius was able to because he had no other siblings and he nor his brother had children.

It would make sense that it go to the next oldest family member who was a Black. Just think if it only went to Men in the family it would have gone to Draco

But traditionally, property is handed down from parents to the eldest male, or the eldest female if there is no male offspring. Plus, it could be possible that Sirius' father inherited the house, as it would still be the house of her fathers that way, she just didn't inherit itCommon in muggle tradition, yes. What we see in HP canon is not muggle tradition, it's wizard tradition. In that wizarding tradition we see eldest male Black inheriting...not father to eldest son.

An example would be Mrs. Black.

Let's say she was indeed a 'Black' as Nicole theorizes...her dad would be a Black, and let's say he was the oldest male Black who'd inherited the place, but only had daughters; Mrs. Black would have grown up in that very house. Upon his death, with no sons for male heirs to follow the 'Black family tradition', then the lineage should trace back to that common 'Black' progenitor and descend through another direct-line, to the eldest male Black.

Now, let's say that Mr. Black, husband of Mrs. Black, was that oldest male Black. He would supercede Mrs. Black with the inheritence of the house---even though she'd lived in the house---because that is the tradition, and that is how the will would have been drawn up. The Blacks were obsessed with their pureblood mania and family tradition. {How many house-elves lost their heads when they were too old to work? A tradition started by Phineas's sister, Elladora.}

Is it right? No, I don't think it is.

Is it fair? Not at all.

Is this how it would work? I'm pretty sure, otherwise Bella wouldn't have been in line to inherit through her own father, another male "Black", who could trace his direct-line to that same common progenitor...
Please find the quote in cannon that says it can only be willed to a female or someone out of the if there are no males. Tradition is not law. If this is the case Draco would be the inheritor not Bella.When it is family tradition, observed in a binding magical contract, a wizard's WILL, it is legal and therefore lawful, and must be observed. Even Harry couldn't get out of the binding magical contract of the Triwizard Tournemant, of which he'd never even entered. He was bound by the contract and was compelled to compete.
Is there some clue that would tell us why, if Harry refused to accept Kreacher and Grimmauld Place, Bellatrix would have been the "automatic" (maybe "default" is a better word) heir(ess)?It simply says that she would have been the eldest living relative, as Sirius's cousin, would make it more likely for her to inherit---the eldest 'Black' thing again.

Another thing is that I don't believe blasting people off the tapestry affects the 'eldest male Black' inherits tradition. It's important to note that Sirius, who was blasted off the tapestry, still inherited over Bella.

Another thing is that I don't believe blasting people off the tapestry affects the 'eldest male Black' inherits tradition. It's important to note that Sirius, who was blasted off the tapestry, still inherited over Bella.

I agree blasting Sirius off the Family tree did not make him any less his mothers son or should I say related to his mother. Sure she told Kreacher he wasn’t her son etc but he was still her child, even if she didn’t like him.

Blasting Andromeda off the tree doesn’t change the fact that Mrs. Black Nephew in Law was muggle born. Its probably just a way for her to vent frustration

http://www.mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=jkrtelegraph/telegraph_jkrbookaidclose.jpg Someone scroll to the bottom and look at the family on the right. Tell me that does not say "Potter".

http://www.mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=jkrtelegraph/telegraph_jkrbookaidclose.jpg Someone scroll to the bottom and look at the family on the right. Tell me that does not say "Potter".
Yes it does say Potter

You might check out this theard as well JKR's Black Family Tree: Dorea and Charlus Potter (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=83466)

Its been debated since the tree was posted wether this are James Parents, or distant relative

I'd like to point out that the reaon the house might have gone to Bella over Draco even tho' he's male, would be that she was once a Black while Draco has always been a Malfoy (as far as family trees are concerned). So add that to the fact that she's the eldest and she would be the choice over Draco, despite being female.

I think if Sirius had any other siblings, or if Regulus or Sirius had had a child that the house would have automatically gone to that person.
I agree. Anyone named Black would probably have inherited over Harry, if there was no prior will. But in this case, Sirius didn't have a son, and he had a prior will expressing his wishes.
When it is family tradition, observed in a binding magical contract, a wizard's WILL, it is legal and therefore lawful, and must be observed. Even Harry couldn't get out of the binding magical contract of the Triwizard Tournemant, of which he'd never even entered. He was bound by the contract and was compelled to compete.
Exactly. :tu: It's a good parallel to the Unbreakable Vow, a contract so binding that you die if you break it.
Another thing is that I don't believe blasting people off the tapestry affects the 'eldest male Black' inherits tradition. It's important to note that Sirius, who was blasted off the tapestry, still inherited over Bella.

I agree - another good point. Family name matters over all.

I actually think that regardless if he had will, if Sirius had other siblings, child or his brother had a child, I think the house would have gone to that person regardless what he put in his will.

Yes i was just saying that if they passed down via Male only that Draco would have been next in line, his last name may not be Black, but he would be just as much Black as mother and Aunts were, gene wise that is. Since his mother and aunts would have been half black and half something else(Mothers side of the family) . Draco Malofy/Black

I actually think that regardless if he had will, if Sirius had other siblings, child or his brother had a child, I think the house would have gone to that person regardless what he put in his will.I think so too...I think Sirius took advantage of being "The Last Black" and broke tradition, making his own legally binding contract to Harry. I notice that Harry didn't have a say in that contract either. He just had to accept the house, the gold---and Kreacher { he absolutely did not want}.
Yes i was just saying that if they passed down via Male only that Draco would have been next in line, his last name may not be Black, but he would be just as much Black as mother and Aunts were, gene wise that is. Since his mother and aunts would have been half black and half something else(Mothers side of the family) . Draco Malofy/BlackHe'd actually be considered less of a Black than his mom and aunts...1/2, 1/4, 1/16, 1/32....etc, is how it breaks down.

Besides the point that kingwidget just made about Draco being less of a Black than Bella, there is the fact that Draco doesn't need another house. He's probably the sole heir of Malfoy Manor. :agree:

Bella on the other hand, may be truly furious that she didn't get Grimmauld Place, since she seems to know about it in Chapter 2, HBP. I've commented elsewhere that we have no clue whether there is a "House of Lestrange."

That name does go back into the history of England, however, mentioned during the time of John of Gaunt. I believe his daughter married a Lestrange.

So there is probably a "House of Lestrange" somewhere. It's probably called "The Strange House of Lestrange." It's out on a gloomy moor somewhere. :lol:

I think people are taking the word of Phineas Nigellus - who ought to know - when he asks Dumbledore, in OotP, Chapter 37:

"'Am I to understand' said Phineas Nigellus slowly from Harry's left, 'that my great-great-grandson - the last of the Blacks - is dead?'

'Yes, Phineas,'said Dumbledore."

Now there are technically "Blacks" still alive ~ Bella, Narcissa, Andromeda, and Draco. They are in the gene pool of Phineas Nigellus, yet he says that Sirius was the "Last of the Blacks." That may not seem fair or modern, but that is the canon. Phineas believed Sirius was the last to bear the surname, Black.


Yes i was just saying that if they passed down via Male only that Draco would have been next in line, his last name may not be Black, but he would be just as much Black as mother and Aunts were, gene wise that is. Since his mother and aunts would have been half black and half something else(Mothers side of the family) . Draco Malofy/Black
Unless both Sirius' parents were Blacks, and that has been discussed, then the Black sisters were as much Blacks as Sirius and Regulus. They would all have had common grandparents and their fathers would have been brothers and both Blacks. Since females apparently can inherit, it's seems safe to assume that Sirius' and Regulus' father was older than the father of the Black sisters and thus the estate went to his line. When the line failed, it went to the descendants of his younger brother.
Draco is a generation removed from Sirius and apparently the next male in the family tree. The possibility of Tonks having a brother has also been discussed, and as Andromeda is older than Cissy, any son she might have had would preceed Draco.

But it's all academic because it all went to Harry.

I think so too...I think Sirius took advantage of being "The Last Black" and broke tradition, making his own legally binding contract to Harry. Sirius was Harry's godfather, which seems to be understood in the magical world as a legal guardian. As Harry's guardian, it's not a great leap for him to make Harry his legal heir or even adopted son for the purpose of leaving Harry his titles and estate.

I'm very much afraid that we know nothing about what wizarding law has to say about inheritance. Personally I know nothing about UK muggle law either.

As Dumbledore told, the family tradition said that the house should be handed down the direct line to the next male. Draco is no way on the direct line, his mum being Sirius cousin. The direct line ended with Sirius. Having no legal heir he could give it to anyone, godson or not.

Under UK inheritance law a person can normally will their estate where they like. However if a valid will is made and people dependent on the deceased, ie a spouse or young child, are disinherited they can apply for provision from the estate. Some landed families (= to purebloods in HP) might have provisions that the estate be inherited by the next male in line but that doesn't apply to most people. Victorian popular literature is full of obscure male relatives crawling out of the woodwork to dislodge wives and daughters. As it stands today for most people the rules at the beginning apply. Should a person die intestate (no will) then the estate would pass to the spouse and if they were dead would be shared out between the children. If a child has died then their children inherit that share and so on. This assumes the estate is worth less that £125k. If you want to know more check out www.direct.gov.uk and search under intestate.

I have not been able to read all the pages in this thread so if I repeat any questions can someone direct me.
I am puzzled how Phineas Nigellus can be Sirius' great-great grandfather. There appear to be too few generations. His grandchildren seem to have been born during or shortly after the great war. Now that is cutting it fine to become grandparents in the late 1950's or early 60's. What does seem to be apparent is that they were not delaying marriage and parenthood. If Dorea had her first child at 40 then she is old by the standards of the other women on the tree and by the mothers in canon. Molly and Arthur married straight from school, Lily and James were very young. If Callidora is the mother in law of Neville's grandmother they must have been very young mothers as she is only seperated from Neville by 65 years. The relatively short lives surprised me and I can't help wondering how many were carried off by Dark Lords or Aurors. I would be interested to know just how many descendents Phineas has in Hogwarts. Also the tree does not show us all his children and grandchildren nor does it show us his male siblings. I too noticed the name at the bottom of the sheet, it seems to be someone married in with a first name beginning with D and probably belongs to Harry or James generation. Any suggestions. I don't think the Dumbledores are on the tree, they are not Blacks and this seems to concentrate on the male line. I've said enough, I'll stop before I tie myself up in knots. All in all, once again more questions posed than answered and I'm off to reread the books for clues.

What does seem to be apparent is that they were not delaying marriage and parenthood.
Well, maybe the women weren't delaying, but Phineas was 37 when his son Arcturus was born, and 39 when his daughter Belvina was born. Arcturus was 31 when Callidora was born, and 35 when Charis was born. Unfortunately, we are not able to compare the women's ages: 1) people marrying into the family have no dates and 2) dates we do have for women do not include the dates for their children.

Looks like Dorea had 2 or more siblings, maybe she was the youngest child?

Looks like Dorea had 2 or more siblings, maybe she was the youngest child?
Beginning at the top of the tapestry, reading left to right, we see:
Phineas Nigellus Black 47]
Elladora Black b. [1850]

Then it switches, reading right to left:
Arcturus Black 84]
Belvina Burke nee Black 86]

Then it switches again, at least for Arcturus's line, reading left to right:
Callidora Longbottom nee Black b. [1915]
Charis Crouch nee Black b. [1919]

There does appear to be a pattern. The tapestry is reading the birth order one way for a particular generation, and the opposite way for the next generation. The only problem is we do not get to see the other side of the tapestry, the part that is covered, to tell if this pattern continues or not.

At this point, I am leaning towards the thought that Dorea is the youngest child of Mr. -?- Black and Violetta Bulstrode.



*Shameless self-promotion = I will be 13 in just a few hours.:cool:

Maybe we'll get lucky, and who ever wins it at the auction will scan it and post it somewhere for us. :clap: :drool: ;)

It seems we are no further along than knowing what Sirius said in OotP: that nearly all pure-blood wizarding families were somehow related. Also, we know that Harry inherited everything from the house, no ifs, ands, or buts. Even Dumbledore said that Sirius knew what he was doing. I don't think there is much to learn by guessing who would have received everything if Harry hadn't, cause Dumbledore already said that it would have gone to Bella.

Here is something interesting to think about:
Nearly all pure-blood wizarding families are related somehow, and we can see evidence of that on this family tree up for auction. So, where are the Gaunts in here? This would mean Voldemort would be related. Hepzibah Smith may also be related. Here is my question:
How can this family tree lead us to the Horcruxes?

There does appear to be a pattern. The tapestry is reading the birth order one way for a particular generation, and the opposite way for the next generation. The only problem is we do not get to see the other side of the tapestry, the part that is covered, to tell if this pattern continues or not.
*takes Occam's Razor to this*
No, I think JKR just put Belvina and Arcturus the wrong way round.

This particular version is really unlikely to lead us to any Horcrux (with the exception of confirming Regulus' middle initial). The reason I say this is because we can figure that several of the people hidden under the other papers are unlikely lead to a horcrux.

Tier 1 - Phineas' generation - hidden name on left is apparantly unmarried and so must just be a Black - you can tell by the position of what little text we can see, it will be centered as if it is alone, not centered as if it was combined with another name (a second name with it would take it too far to the left for the tier to be centered on the paper).

Every name of this generation then (that isn't a blot) is taken care of - no hidden marriages to a Miss or Mr. Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff

Tier 2 - Arcturus' generation - again, based on visually centering everything up on paper - there are two names hidden by the other papers - the one immediately to the left of Bulstrode would be her husband Mr. Black (their line continues on down to Sirius). The second hidden person on this tier (all the way to the left) will be blot #2. This is the correct generation for the Black that married a Weasly for Arthur and Sirius to be second cousins.

So - for this generation at least, we know where every spot leads.

Tier 3 - the generation that married Potter, Longbottom & Crouch - immediately off to the hidden left is blot #3. You can read a very tiny #3 not hidden by the paper (or at least you could before The Leaky Cauldron redid their site today and messed up the link to the close-up page - hopefully this will return soon). Further to the left, will be a Black Male and his wife who would be Sirius' grandparents.

I should note tho' that to center up this tier on the paper, there is probably another Black (probably single) even further left (altho' it may be a an additional couple - hard to tell, all depends on how long the names are)

As long as this person on the far left was single, then no spot for Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff (or Gryffindor) to marry into the family. IF that spot is filled with a couple then I don't expect the name marrying in to be a long one (space constraints) which also rules out the founder names

Tier 4 - totally hidden - will be the generation of Sirius' parents, the parents of the Black sisters and possibly Uncle Alphard (altho' he could also really be a 'Great Uncle' and so be blot #4 - he's unlikely to be blot #3 as that one is right next to the Black who married a Potter and so too close for Sirius to point out and Harry not notice his own last name).

That's gives us a tier with two couples and a single man (most likely Uncle Alphard was single to leave his money to his nephew). Note that we can tell from the paper that this particular tier is NOT centered on the page. If it was we would be able to see a bit of the horizontal line, since we can see part of a name ( Dru__?___ ), This name is most likely either Sirius' mother or his Aunt (mother of the Black sisters).

Anyway, we are left with very few spots where a founder's name could pop into the tree. Pretty much, the only possibility would be under one of the blots. And the people that were blasted (the blots) probably didn't have much to do with the Black family from the moment they married the wrong person or did whatever they did to earn their blasting.

These blots are unlikely to have left much at the Black house at all. So unlikely to find anything at #12 of theirs that would provide a clue to what object the MaybeRavenclaw/MaybeGryffindor horcrux might be. Or a description of the Hufflepuff Cup, which Harry really doesn't need, since he saw it in the memory of Hezzie Smith.

Also assumedly, these blots are mostly 'good' people - so they are less likely to have info about horcrux locations that Albus didn't think of either. Unfortuantely for more hiding places, the info is more likely to come from someone who has heard stories of Tom's life.

Personally - I think the best guesses left so far for us would be - Hogwarts, Riddle Mansion, Tom's Orphange and Borgin & Burke's - all of which Harry already knows could have been significant to Tom

*takes Occam's Razor to this*
No, I think JKR just put Belvina and Arcturus the wrong way round.I would apply the K.I.S.S. {Keep It Simple Stupid} rule as well, except that it does appear to be a pattern. I guess we'll have to wait and see the birthdate revealed for Mr. -?- Black [and Dorea's siblings] to be positive, one way or the other.

I think JKR just switched them because that way left the most room on the paper. She really couldn't put Arcturus and wife in the same position as Belvina and her husband. Arcturus' kid's tier doesn't have room to move further left. So, to place them in age order (the NORMAL way a family tree is made up) she would have left Arcturus exactly where he was and had to extend the tree further off to the right, yet leave a blank hole in the middle.

It's important to remember the USUSAL way a family tree would be written. Eldest first on the left, with each progressively younger sibling adding on to the right. Belvina just fills up an available hole, instead of widening the table.

I think black comming from such a dark family signifies that light can come even from the dark...possibly a forshadowing that draco can't live up to his father and his families expectations....

I don't think there is much to learn by guessing who would have received everything if Harry hadn't, cause Dumbledore already said that it would have gone to Bella.
But even that can be a clue. Bella's father was thus the younger brother of Mr. Black, who must have inherited the house despite Mrs. Black shrieking about "the house of my fathers"...By tradition, the house would go to the eldest Black male and would thus disregard older sisters. Since Bella's father did not inherit the house, he must have had an older brother--Sirius's father.
Belvina just fills up an available hole, instead of widening the table.
I agree.

Every name of this generation then (that isn't a blot) is taken care of - no hidden marriages to a Miss or Mr. Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff

Firstly, the Black Family Tree that Jo's releasing only goes back to the early to mid 1800s. When we take into account what we learned about the Black Family Tapestry in OotP is that it dates back to the Middle Ages (according to Wikipedia, this dates from the 5th Century until approx. 1517...so we could use this time span to speculate that the tapestry dates back to. This means that just because we don't see on the tree that Jo is putting up for an auction the names Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff doesn't mean this excludes the conversion of the two lines at some time earlier in the Black family. Furthermore, Hufflepuff's descendants were down to the Smith line and as Slytherin's last descendant, Voldemort's last name was Riddle and his mother's family was Gaunt. Since we know the founders lived over a thousand years ago, I wouldn't count them out of any line just because their names don't appear.

Here's an interesting page about the star "Arcturus," which is associated with the "Big Bear" and the constellation "Bootes." There's too much to quote, so I'll just post a few tidbits that seem important:

http://www.crystalinks.com/arcturus.html



. . . Arcturus is the fourth brightest star in the sky: only Sirius, Canopus and Alpha Centauri outshine this orange giant. It is a variable star in the last stages of its life.

. . . Bootes is the cultivator or Ploughman who drives the Bears, Ursa Major and Ursa Minor around the Pole Star, Polaris. The bears, tied to the Polar Axis, are pulling a plough behind them, tilling the heavenly fields "in order that the rotations of the heavens should never cease".

Manilius 1st century AD writes "they will be kings under kings and ministers of state, and be charged with the guardianship of the people, custodianship of great houses and treasures, who confine their business to the care of another's home so that the wealth of monarchs and temple finances will be in their keeping".

Any type of occupation that requires planning is influenced by Bootes. These people are the driving force behind government and large corporations. They are the planners and designers, the movers and shakers, who "make the world go round". Bootes symbolizes the elder, the sage, the wise old man who is interested in principles and underlying causes, theories, ideologies, and how the past effects the future. (Conservative) politicians, economists, draftsmen, architects, designers of all kinds.


"Lysandra" is named after "Lysander" - a character from "A Midsummer's Night's Dream" by Shakespeare:

http://www.sparknotes.com/shakespeare/msnd/terms/char_4.html

Lysander - A young man of Athens, in love with Hermia. Lysander’s relationship with Hermia invokes the theme of love’s difficulty: he cannot marry her openly because Egeus, her father, wishes her to wed Demetrius; when Lysander and Hermia run away into the forest, Lysander becomes the victim of misapplied magic and wakes up in love with Helena.

:huh: Does that imply a love potion, perhaps? :evil:

The name "Charis" is from the Iliad of Homer:

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:xLJdFGRcjAsJ:messagenet.com/myths/ppt/Charis_1.html+charis+mythology&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&ie=UTF-8

Charis
Kharis
One of the Charites, i.e. Graces; the wife of the lord of the Sea, Hephaistos (Hephaestus).

Iliad, book 18, line 382

Charis,
lovely goddess with the splendid veil, came forward—
she was wife to the celebrated crippled god.

That's all I have time for right now - I'll be back later: this is fun! :D

"Lysandra" is named after "Lysander" - a character from "A Midsummer's Night's Dream" by Shakespeare:

http://www.sparknotes.com/shakespeare/msnd/terms/char_4.html



:huh: Does that imply a love potion, perhaps? :evil:The real world Lysander was a Spartan commander. Died 395 B.C. He ended the Peloponnesian war by conquering Athens.

. . Arcturus is the fourth brightest star in the sky: only Sirius, Canopus and Alpha Centauri outshine this orange giant. It is a variable star in the last stages of its life.

. . . Bootes is the cultivator or Ploughman who drives the Bears, Ursa Major and Ursa Minor around the Pole Star, Polaris. The bears, tied to the Polar Axis, are pulling a plough behind them, tilling the heavenly fields "in order that the rotations of the heavens should never cease".

Manilius 1st century AD writes "they will be kings under kings and ministers of state, and be charged with the guardianship of the people, custodianship of great houses and treasures, who confine their business to the care of another's home so that the wealth of monarchs and temple finances will be in their keeping".
I do love this quote, it actually gives weight to a lot of theories out there (mainly mine, written above)...that the Blacks could be related to one or more of the founding fathers. After all, considering that all of the purebloods are somehow interrelated, it is not a stretch to think that in over a thousand years, the Black line married into or with one of the founding Father's lines.

I know I have seen reference before to the fact that the Blacks seem to have a penchant for constellations/stars in their names. Maybe they can give us hints.

I like "they will be kinds under kings...and charged with the guardianship of the people"--sounds a lot like this lines up with the four houses, the four founders "custodianship of great houses and treasures, who confine their business to the care of another's home so that the wealth of monarchs and temples finances will be in their keeping"--custodians of great houses and treasures--what about the treasures of the founders of four great houses? Regulas took the locket, the locket is confined withint "the noble house of Black." Oh, great research SIP :tu:

Firstly, the Black Family Tree that Jo's releasing only goes back to the early to mid 1800s. When we take into account what we learned about the Black Family Tapestry in OotP is that it dates back to the Middle Ages (according to Wikipedia, this dates from the 5th Century until approx. 1517...so we could use this time span to speculate that the tapestry dates back to. This means that just because we don't see on the tree that Jo is putting up for an auction the names Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff doesn't mean this excludes the conversion of the two lines at some time earlier in the Black family. Furthermore, Hufflepuff's descendants were down to the Smith line and as Slytherin's last descendant, Voldemort's last name was Riddle and his mother's family was Gaunt. Since we know the founders lived over a thousand years ago, I wouldn't count them out of any line just because their names don't appear.All true - but I was responding to a post just before mine (sorry - I should have quoted it to make it clear). The post suggested that seeing the rest of THIS family tree that was drawn by JKR would give us clues to the horcruxes.

Yes, the Blacks may very well BE related to ANY founder (altho' Slytherin is unlikely since Tom is supposed to be the last of that line) farther back in time - but JKR didn't make it part of her backstory when making up the tree. I think IF she was going to throw that into the story (a Ravenclaw, Gryffindor or Hufflepuff ancestor) then she would have taken the family tree back to as far as that person, then. IF she hasn't made it part of her backstory notes, then I doubt it happens in her story.

She has a convoluted story and her notes are of supreme importance to keeping her facts straight. Why would she leave something out of her notes if it was going to be important?

I will admit that she might do exactly that to HIDE an important clue so we don't see it until the book comes out. So I will admit that one of the founders could be hidden back before Phineas. But, again - the question was posed that seeing the whole piece of paper up for auction would give us info about a horcrux.

When we take into account what we learned about the Black Family Tapestry in OotP is that it dates back to the Middle Ages (according to Wikipedia, this dates from the 5th Century until approx. 1517...so we could use this time span to speculate that the tapestry dates back to.
I've never heard of the Middle Ages spanning that early a period before. Normally they're taken in England as spanning from the Norman Conquest (1066) to the start of the Tudor Period (1485).

When we take into account what we learned about the Black Family Tapestry in OotP is that it dates back to the Middle Ages (according to Wikipedia, this dates from the 5th Century until approx. 1517...so we could use this time span to speculate that the tapestry dates back to.I've never heard of the Middle Ages spanning that early a period before. Normally they're taken in England as spanning from the Norman Conquest (1066) to the start of the Tudor Period (1485).Yes - 5th century would fall in what is normally called the 'dark ages' I believe. The 'dark ages' began with the Fall of Rome. However - it seems that in recent times the 'dark ages' must have become included into the 'middle ages', since Wikipedia isn't the only site that does this.

Apparently now-a-days (unlike when I learned history) the 'middle' in middle ages means the time between the Fall of Rome and the Reformation. Whereas before (when I learned it) the 'middle' meant the time between the 'dark ages' (when learning was being lost and manuscripts being safely hidden away in islands of civilization) and the renaissance (the return or rebirth of learning)

I have something to add to silver ink pot's brilliant list.

Violetta (real name: Aloisia Wagner) was a woman, who was born in Germany in 1906. She had no legs or arms.
She performed in sideshows as a singer, including Coney Island's Dreamland.

Ursula is the villainess from the Disney animated movie The Little Mermaid. From her waist up, she has the body of an overweight female human, and from the waist down she has the tentacles of an octopus.

Ursula means "small female bear" in Latin

Ursula is also a Christian saint. You can read her story here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Ursula)

Flint (or flintstone) is a hard, sedimentary cryptocrystalline silicate rock with a glassy appearance. Flint is usually dark-grey, blue, black, or deep brown in colour. It occurs chiefly as nodules and masses in chalks and limestones.

Casper is a male's given name of Persian origin meaning "Master of the Treasure". It is one of the traditional names assigned by folklore to the anonymous Magi (=shaman, sorcerer, or wizard) mentioned in the Gospel of Matthew account of the Nativity of Jesus.

That's all I have found. :)

Yes - 5th century would fall in what is normally called the 'dark ages' I believe. The 'dark ages' began with the Fall of Rome. However - it seems that in recent times the 'dark ages' must have become included into the 'middle ages', since Wikipedia isn't the only site that does this.

Apparently now-a-days (unlike when I learned history) the 'middle' in middle ages means the time between the Fall of Rome and the Reformation. Whereas before (when I learned it) the 'middle' meant the time between the 'dark ages' (when learning was being lost and manuscripts being safely hidden away in islands of civilization) and the renaissance (the return or rebirth of learning)
Fascinating! :tu: :) I just realized that I've always used the terms "Dark Ages" and "Middle Ages" interchangeably, without even thinking about the dates. Of course, being an American, I think my European History skills are sometimes sorely lacking.

I like "they will be kinds under kings...and charged with the guardianship of the people"--sounds a lot like this lines up with the four houses, the four founders "custodianship of great houses and treasures, who confine their business to the care of another's home so that the wealth of monarchs and temples finances will be in their keeping"--custodians of great houses and treasures--what about the treasures of the founders of four great houses? Regulas took the locket, the locket is confined withint "the noble house of Black." Oh, great research SIP
Thank you! :)

The real world Lysander was a Spartan commander. Died 395 B.C. He ended the Peloponnesian war by conquering Athens.
Whoops! I meant to include that last night! Sorry . . .

Actually my first impression was that the Spartan meaning was the most important, but since we know that JKR reads alot of Shakespeare and says she is "obsessed" with MacBeth, it stands to reason she might be referring to the "love potion" aspect of A Midsummer Night's Dream - another play about the supernatural.

Continuing with the Family Names:

"Belvina Burke " -
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:vc_I9OnPPQYJ:www.ancestry.com/search/SurnamePage.aspx%3Fhtml%3Db%26ln%3DBelvin%26source code%3D13304+belvin&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=6&ie=UTF-8

Belvin:
English of Welsh origin: Anglicized form of Welsh ab elfyn ‘son of Elfyn’.

Burke reminds me of "Burke's Peerage," the famous list used to trace people back to royalty. :)
http://www.burkes-peerage.com/
http://www.burkes-peerage.com/story.htm

Sir Bernard Burke held this position until his death in 1892 and was, in addition, Registrar of the Order of St. Patrick, Keeper of the State papers of Ireland from 1867-1892, and a Governor and Trustee of the National Gallery of Ireland. He was a Barrister-at-Law of the Middle Temple. Under his able direction many editions of the Peerage were produced and also several editions of Burke’s Landed Gentry, although the latter never became an annual work. Sir Bernard Burke’s output of genealogical and heraldic works was very great.

He dealt with the whole question of heraldry and produced three or four editions of a General Armory designed to include all British coats of arms of which he could find any record. This book has been invaluable not only to the heraldic enquirer, but also, unfortunately, to the heraldic stationer, who has found therein the means of gratifying the vanity of many persons whose claims to arms would never be recognized by the Heralds themselves.

Obviously, her name is meant to imply that she was either important to the family tree, or that she herself was obsessed with ancestry, in that "Pureblood Wizarding" way. :tu:

Shameless self-promotion = I will be 13 in just a few hours.
:birthday: Happy Birthday!!!!

Happy Birthday!!!!
Thank you.

Belvina could also be a modified version of the surname Blevins, which was originally a given name. Blevins is derived from the Welsh given name Bleddyn which meant "wolf cub".

Fascinating! :tu: :) I just realized that I've always used the terms "Dark Ages" and "Middle Ages" interchangeably, without even thinking about the dates. Of course, being an American, I think my European History skills are sometimes sorely lacking.Both Webster's Unabridged and the Concise Oxford dictionaries give for the Middle Ages as first choise from about 5th century and from about 11th as second choise. I'm too lazy to quote details.
Whoops! I meant to include that last night! Sorry . . .

Actually my first impression was that the Spartan meaning was the most important, but since we know that JKR reads alot of Shakespeare and says she is "obsessed" with MacBeth, it stands to reason she might be referring to the "love potion" aspect of A Midsummer Night's Dream - another play about the supernatural.As long as we know nothing about this Lysandra except that she got married and had children, I will neither argue with you or speculate myself.:D

Short off-topic - Just a quick note about the 'Dark Ages'.

First let me say I'm not a true scholar of the time period - I just 'play' in a medieval group - I may know more than many of you about the period, but I'm no expert.

I think the term 'dark ages' is little used these days among scholars and that is why that time is now encompased within the middle ages. When I was young and in school they only spoke of it as the time when all learning was disappearing. As I understand it there was a mini ice age for part of it, quite a few famine periods and a LOT of fighting over WHO would control which part of Britan.

This was while there were still Angles fighting Saxons fighting Vikings fighting Picts fighting Jutes. Not literally of course, but it was kind of every community for themselves. And the quiet, religious communities took off to an isolated island to keep treasures (like the Book of Kells) 'safe'. The impression given was that little of worth came from then.

However, that wasn't true. This is most probably the REAL time of King Arthur - or at least the beginning of the stories that would eventually be taken over to Normandy and romanticised into the stories most know today. For instance Lancelot didn't exist in the early stories - so there wasn't a big story of his and Gwenfawr's (Guineverre's real spelling in Welsh) betrayal of Arthur.

And not just the art of story managed to live through the 'dark ages'. That's the time of the Book of Kells with it's amazing drawn knotwork and also the Sutton Hoo hoard.

So mainly - what was once called the 'dark ages' is no longer called that I suppose because so much 'learning' was NOT really lost. But to the 'common person, in general it was.

Sorry to go off-topic on everyone. It's a wondrous, gorgeous time period. But VASTLY different from the time of stone castles and gothic cathedrals.

http://csis.pace.edu/grendel/projs4a/sutton.htm
http://www.snake.net/people/paul/kells/thumbnails

All true - but I was responding to a post just before mine (sorry - I should have quoted it to make it clear). The post suggested that seeing the rest of THIS family tree that was drawn by JKR would give us clues to the horcruxes.

Ah, I see, I just wanted to point that out, anyway, and I just used you as a means to do it! :D

Yes, the Blacks may very well BE related to ANY founder (altho' Slytherin is unlikely since Tom is supposed to be the last of that line) farther back in time - but JKR didn't make it part of her backstory when making up the tree. I think IF she was going to throw that into the story (a Ravenclaw, Gryffindor or Hufflepuff ancestor) then she would have taken the family tree back to as far as that person, then. IF she hasn't made it part of her backstory notes, then I doubt it happens in her story.

She has a convoluted story and her notes are of supreme importance to keeping her facts straight. Why would she leave something out of her notes if it was going to be important?

I don't necessarily think that she is going to, in the last book, reveal that x, y, and z are, surprise, surprise, related to every founding father! That's a bit of a stretch, you're right. I think, too, that she would have included important information like that in her own notes.

Everyone, thanks for the contributions about the Dark/Middle Ages. I wasn't too sure of the dates myself, so it's good to hear that everyone is coming up with similar information....

Feel free to shred this, but below is a possible extension for the tree up for auction. I was trying to get Mrs. Black to inherit the house, but it looks like there was a brother who married a Dru___a (doesn't seem like a masculine name), so though the image says Mr. and Mrs. Black are interchangeable, it must be Mr. Black who is a direct descendant of Phineas (despite Mrs. Black shrieking about the house of her fathers...).

There could be fewer generations in the line on the left (descendants of Phineas's brother--which I have assumed is a brother), but that's where I placed the Weasley marriage and fewer generations would nix the "second cousin once removed" between Arthur and Sirius. And to maintain the "great-greatgrandfather/grandson" statements by both Sirius and Phineas, there can not be fewer generations in the direct line of descent. [It just doesn't seem to make Mrs. Black all that old at her time of death...]

Obviously, the siblings along the conjectured line are for illustration only--don't know how many of them existed except the one that must have married a Weasley...

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b7/Perenelle/Blacktree1.jpg

Special thanks to silver ink pot and kingwidgit for their input!

About the "interchangeable" one, remember that Phineas has to be Sirius's great-great-grandfather.

About the "interchangeable" one, remember that Phineas has to be Sirius's great-great-grandfather.
It appears that Nicole has accounted for that.

Mr. and Mrs. Black are on the same generational line, through two differing lines descending from Phineas.

Mr. Black/Mrs. Black are each listed as great-grandson/great-granddaughter, making their offspring great-great grandchildren.

could someone help me out? i'm confused on why the potter/longbottom references are "floating" on the picture of the family tree. are they really connected or just there? sorry if this is a dumb question.

could someone help me out? i'm confused on why the potter/longbottom references are "floating" on the picture of the family tree. are they really connected or just there? sorry if this is a dumb question.
They are likely to be given that both are pureblood families and the Blacks were only allowed to marry purebloods (if they wanted an inheritence). The question is how closely related to Harry are the Potters depicted on the tree and likewise with Neville and the Longbottoms.

They are likely to be given that both are pureblood families and the Blacks were only allowed to marry purebloods (if they wanted an inheritence). The question is how closely related to Harry are the Potters depicted on the tree and likewise with Neville and the Longbottoms.Yup, good explanation. Same with the Weasleys.

This new information just opens up so many new possibilities! I'm loving it.

I hope that JK or the auction house show us just a little bit more of it. Or that whoever buys it lets us see!

I'd like to suggest another possibility for a connection between Dumbledore and the Blacks. I know the subject has been discussed before, but it seems nobody has come up with this yet. What if that first blot, Phineas youngest sibling, was a sister and got blasted off for marrying Dumbledore? I know it's not very likely, but we know next to nothing about Dumbledore's past, so I thought it might be a possibility.

I like the idea that Dumbledore had a wife at some point, but I get the feeling he didn't. JK says he was very lonely, because he had no equal. I imagine it'd be very hard to be Dumbledore's wife.

I like the idea that Dumbledore had a wife at some point, but I get the feeling he didn't. JK says he was very lonely, because he had no equal. I imagine it'd be very hard to be Dumbledore's wife.


:agree: I don't picture him ever having a wife.

We know so little about Dumbledore's heritage it's hard to connect him to anything (probably another reason he's so lonely). If he's pureblood, or has a pureblood parent like Harry, it's likely that he's connected to the Black family tree somehow, but it looks like the only way we'll ever find that out is if Aberforth plays a bigger role in book 7 and somehow reveals that information to Harry or its somehow relevant to a Horcrux search.

I wonder if any of these people appear in any History of Magic textbooks. Harry needs to read more :).

I fear this tree is only going to give us so much information about the interrelations of all of the pureblood families that we currently know about. There have been generations upon generations of purebloods marrying within themselves. We only get to see a few. So we are assuming that they are all interrelated as of the past few generations and not anytime before. Not to mention that people have been blasted off of the tree for being "disreputable" to the family...I know we are trying to account for them, but we really have no idea how to relate them to the rest of the family.

Nicole, SIP and kingwidgit, thanks for the visual. I'm going to copy it down and see what I can come up with...

Nice Job, Nicole! It turned out well! :)

And you do show that Phineas is the Great-Great Grandfather of Sirius and Regulus. :agree:

I just realized something, too. :lol: "Ursula" married Phineas - the name "Ursula" means "She-Bear." Their son's name is "Arcturus" means "bear driver" or "bear keeper."

Sirius, of course, was a "bear-like dog." :)

I think the family tree will be a great misdirection, just as the Lion-man was. Way back then everybody figured that the half-blood prince would be Godric Gryffindor himself. Then we got a description of an old lion looking man to throw us off the scent. Very clever, isn't it? :)

Good work, you three. :tu: It helps a lot.

I don't think Dumbledore was ever married, too. It's hard to imagine him having a wife. The possible ways he could be related to the Black family is either through Aberforth (the blasted hole number 1 could be Aberforth's wife), or another sibling (if he has any).

Do you think Peter Pettigrew's relatives are somewhere on the Black Family Tree as well? We don't know anything about his family, but I assume that he should be a pure-blood as he's a Death Eater.

Will we ever see the whole Black Family Tree ???

There's a preview of the auction on Friday - I expect we'll learn about the rest then (even if people aren't allowed to take photos I'm sure someone will take notes)

Will we ever see the whole Black Family Tree ???


If JK.Rowling publishes a HP encyclopedia, we will ;)
In the meantime, I think we have to 'guess'.
And could someone tell me which time period the tree shows (Or at least, the information we have shows)?

...Do you think Peter Pettigrew's relatives are somewhere on the Black Family Tree as well? We don't know anything about his family, but I assume that he should be a pure-blood as he's a Death Eater.Well, before bk6/HBP was released, JKR was discussing how rare a muggle-born Death Eater would be (in response to whether Snape was a pure-blood). She didn't say it was impossible, just that Voldy would need a really good reason to accept a muggle-born as a Death Eater. Because of this answer many figure Peter is probably a muggle-born - mostly because no one can think of a BETTER reason to accept a muggle-born, than if he was willing to hand over the one who the prophecy said could beat Voldy.

To those who are questioning whether Albus married a 'Black' who was blasted off - I think it would be a bit strange since Phineas doesn't seem to have any problems dealing with Albus now that he's a portrait.

Of course the 'blastings' may not have happened back at the time the marriage actually would have taken place, so Phineas might not actually care that his sister married a 'muggle-lover'.

In fact, I've suggested before that I think ALL the blastings came after Sirius was a child. Since he knew someone was blasted off for marrying a Weasley, it seems likely that at one time he could read the name Weasley on the tapestry. I've always figured it was Sirius' mom who did all the blastings.

And could someone tell me which time period the tree shows (Or at least, the information we have shows)?The first generation shown includes Phineas Nigellus 1847 - 1925 and Elladora 1850 - 1931. In the third we have Dorea 1920 - 1977, Callidora 1915 - and Charis 1919 - 1973. No fourth generation dates given except maybe in the hidden left part.

None of Blacks seem particularly longlived. Too bad none of them married into the Marchbanks family. ;)

In fact, I've suggested before that I think ALL the blastings came after Sirius was a child. Since he knew someone was blasted off for marrying a Weasley, it seems likely that at one time he could read the name Weasley on the tapestry. I've always figured it was Sirius' mom who did all the blastings.
I'd be inclined to agree with you there. I got the feeling from reading it that she brought in Sirius and Regulus to show them as she did it, like teaching them a lesson of what happens to muggle-lovers.

Ah yes, as more and more interbreeding happened, it seems that Sirius and Regulus' mom kind of lost it and disowned half of the Black family (or at least a good portion of it). Sirius' words do suggest that his mother was the one who disowned other members, although I would be interested if Sirius' grandparents had been as big of "purebloodists" as his mother was.

Serpentina, I agree with you. Lots of misdirection by Jo, but it'll be fun to speculate anyway ;)

I don't think that the rest of the Black family was as obsessed with the purity blood as Sirius's mother was. We have been led to believe by Sirius that the entire Black family was full of nothing but pureblood nutcases. The fact that Regulus tried to back out of being a deatheater because he didn't agree with how far Voldemort was going to purify the magical world shows that he had to be raised with some kind of moral compass. I think that most of Sirius's comments about his family should be taken with a grain of salt because by OotP, Sirius hated his family so much, he was incapable of saying anything positive about them, even if it was true.

Harry must be realted to all the wizards at his school if you think about it. Imagine everyone you know being somehow related to you....... weird

I think that most of Sirius's comments about his family should be taken with a grain of salt because by OotP, Sirius hated his family so much, he was incapable of saying anything positive about them, even if it was true.
Good point. He is probably correct about most of his relatives, but his comments could be exaggerated a bit.

On a different note, I have noticed that in PS/SS, Hagrid says that he borrows the motor-bike from young Sirius Black. I think this could mean that Sirius's father's first name was also Sirius. Why else would Hagrid say "young" Sirius Black?

Why else would Hagrid say "young" Sirius Black?
Sirius father could have still been alive at the time, we don't know when he died or how or why. But Sirius was young {at least to Hagrid}, only about 22 at the time.

Harry must be realted to all the wizards at his school if you think about it. Imagine everyone you know being somehow related to you....... weird

Geneticists say everyone in the world is, at the most distant, a 50th cousin of everyone else. :D

Sirius father could have still been alive at the time, we don't know when he died or how or why. But Sirius was young {at least to Hagrid}, only about 22 at the time.
That's not what I meant. I think that if there's only one Sirius Black than why would Hagrid point out that he's the young one? And that leads me to the idea that maybe Sirius's father's name was Sirius Black as well and that Hagrid said young Sirius Black in order to make it clear which one he borrowed the motor bike from. (which assumes that Sirius's father was still alive at that time).

That's not what I meant. I think that if there's only one Sirius Black than why would Hagrid point out that he's the young one? And that leads me to the idea that maybe Sirius's father's name was Sirius Black as well and that Hagrid said young Sirius Black in order to make it clear which one he borrowed the motor bike from. (which assumes that Sirius's father was still alive at that time).
For some reason I doubt Sirius’s father’s name was Sirius. I think Hagrid called him young simple because he was that; young, at 21 or 22 years old that is young. Hagrid would have been in his 40’s possible 50’s at the time

I'd like to suggest another possibility for a connection between Dumbledore and the Blacks. I know the subject has been discussed before, but it seems nobody has come up with this yet. What if that first blot, Phineas youngest sibling, was a sister and got blasted off for marrying Dumbledore? I know it's not very likely, but we know next to nothing about Dumbledore's past, so I thought it might be a possibility.
Interesting thought. A friend just suggested, (not entirely with a straight face), that the unknown sibling to Phineas' left and the burn mark to the right of Eladora are Aberforth and Albus respectively and they're using assumed names. Phineas and Albus are close in age.

For some reason I doubt Sirius’s father’s name was Sirius. I think Hagrid called him young simple because he was that; young, at 21 or 22 years old that is young. Hagrid would have been in his 40’s possible 50’s at the time
That's what I think, as well. To Hagrid, Sirius is just a boy, especially since he's known him at Hogwarts. I think what it is supposed to distinguish Sirius (in the future of the series) as the "young" Sirius, as opposed to the "older" Sirius in Book three. Maybe she did that so people wouldn't be confused, only it seems to be confusing people anyway. :lol:
There's a preview of the auction on Friday - I expect we'll learn about the rest then (even if people aren't allowed to take photos I'm sure someone will take notes)
Surely the fans will be lining up to see it, and someone will draw a sketch! :clap: That's so exciting!!!

That's what I think, as well. To Hagrid, Sirius is just a boy, especially since he's known him at Hogwarts. I think what it is supposed to distinguish Sirius (in the future of the series) as the "young" Sirius, as opposed to the "older" Sirius in Book three. Maybe she did that so people wouldn't be confused, only it seems to be confusing people anyway. :lol:

Yes also even if Sirius was a jr. or named after his father, I cant see his father being one to fly a muggle enchanted Motorcycle. Grant it Sirius isn’t even old in book 3 , he was probably 33 at the time and that’s hardly old either but yeah, he was pretty much a young kid back when he let Hagrid use motorcycle

That's always what I think is interesting, Sirius and Lupin are NOT old by the time we see them in PoA, and neither is Snape. They are all in their early thirties (granted, Lupin has his "furry little problem that makes him seem older, Sirius is gaunt and hallow due to his incarceration in Azkaban, and Snape is just described as greasy with a hooked nose...hmmm). Anyway, that is still young, so I agree that I think Jo was trying to distinguish Sirius as being much younger than and of the other characters.

whizbang...if Phineas and Albus are close in age (which I agree they are), I wonder when Phineas was actually headmaster. We know that 50 years ago, Armando Dippet was the headmaster...and after that Dumbledore. That means Phineas would have had to have been headmaster before Dippet...so did he die young (by wizarding standards, at least)?? Or did he retire and die later?

I also wonder if Dumbledore and Phineas are related. Do you think Jo would really give a clue like that? :huh:

whizbang...if Phineas and Albus are close in age (which I agree they are), I wonder when Phineas was actually headmaster. We know that 50 years ago, Armando Dippet was the headmaster...and after that Dumbledore. That means Phineas would have had to have been headmaster before Dippet...so did he die young (by wizarding standards, at least)?? Or did he retire and die later?Phineas, born 1847, died in 1926; obviously he preceded Dumbledore as Headmaster, as Dumbledore didn't become Headmaster until after Dippet---mid '40s to mid '50s. He, Phineas, would've preceded Dippet too.
I also wonder if Dumbledore and Aberforth are related. Do you think Jo would really give a clue like that?Jo has stated that Dumbledore and Aberforth are brothers...Albus is thought to have been born in 1843, I believe...

Were you meaning to say Phineas instead of Aberforth? I know people are trying to link the Blacks to the Dumbledores, but are coming to a stumbling block with the surnames...whizbang mentioned the possible use of pseudonyms/aliases...but I don't think so.

However, it is possible that the mother of Dumbledore and Aberforth could have been widowed with two sons, remarried, and had four other children, all of which would be blood relation to the Dumbledores---and yet have a different surname.

Were you meaning to say Phineas instead of Aberforth? I know people are trying to link the Blacks to the Dumbledores, but are coming to a stumbling block with the surnames...whizbang mentioned the possible use of pseudonyms/aliases...but I don't think so.

However, it is possible that the mother of Dumbledore and Aberforth could have been widowed with two sons, remarried, and had four other children, all of which would be blood relation to the Dumbledores---and yet have a different surname.

Yes, yes, I'll go back and change my post, that's what I meant: Phineas and Dumbledore. Sorry :blush:

I wonder why Phineas died so young? Doubt it's a plot point, but I am still curious.

I wonder why Phineas died so young? Doubt it's a plot point, but I am still curious.
He died of crotchetiness ! {is that a word?}
Seriously, have you noticed the death rate of wizards who dabble in the Dark Arts?

He died of crotchetiness ! {is that a word?}
Seriously, have you noticed the death rate of wizards who dabble in the Dark Arts?

:rotfl: hold on, give me a minute..:rotfl: okay, now I am better. Interesting...yeah, I don't think anyone who dabbles in the dark arts lives too long, nor do Aurors. Was Phineas a dark arts lover? Well, he wasn't blasted off of the tapestry. I know for sure that he was the "least popular headmaster ever" according to the books.

He died of crotchetiness ! {is that a word?}
Seriously, have you noticed the death rate of wizards who dabble in the Dark Arts?
I love Phineas, so I'm not sure he was a Dabbler. :) He was Headmaster, and Dumbledore still speaks to him, and I trust Dumbledore.

I love Phineas, so I'm not sure he was a Dabbler. :) He was Headmaster, and Dumbledore still speaks to him, and I trust Dumbledore.Maybe not...but the House of Black, #12 Grimmauld Place...it was full of Dark Objects, a house that clearly belonged to Dark Wizards, and full of Dark mementos of a family obsessed on their purebloodedness. If it once belonged to Phineas, and passed down through his line, as we're led to believe, then he at least got a toe or two of his wet.

It's really a bit difficult to tell if Phineas really was 'dark'. The info we get that all of the Black family has been 'dark' is from Sirius. But look at Phineas' children. One gets 'blasted' (the one we can't see who married a Weasley) and one (Arcturus) who leads to the seemingly 'good' side of the family tree. Arcturus' children marry 'good' (Longbottom), or at least 'legal' (Crouch) or to being blasted. That's half of Phineas' children we can SEE who don't especially lead to 'dark' wizards (there appears to probably be a 4th child.

I think it's important to realize that Sirius is apparently discounting a good many of his relatives when he discusses the 'darkness' of his family. If HALF of Phineas children apparently turn out to lean to the 'good' side, then I think it's questionable to assume Phineas was 'dark'. I tend to think that he was somewhat neutral - believing in letting others find their own way. Not especially 'light' but not 'dark' either.

As I've mentioned before - the blast marks MAY have only occured during Sirius' lifetime. He's aware that one of the blast marks represents someone who married a Weasley. To me, the fact that Sirius knew there was a Weasley hidden by that blast mark implies that he may have been able to 'read' the name Weasley as a child. If so, then it's probable that the blastings were done by Mrs. Black (either in response to Sirius being sorted into Gryffindor, Andromeda marrying a muggle-born or even to Sirius refusing to come home after 5th year).

This would tend to suggest that the family pre-Mrs Black MAY have been more tolerant of different choices. That the 'darkness' really isn't throughout the ENTIRE family, but was particularly emphasized by Sirius' parents and a few others (Araminta - who wanted to HUNT muggles, 'perhaps' Elladora who hung elf heads on the wall - altho' that could really be more just not thinking of them as 'beings' not exactly 'dark' considering the wizarding world doesn't look on them as equals)

That's what I think, as well. To Hagrid, Sirius is just a boy, especially since he's known him at Hogwarts. I think what it is supposed to distinguish Sirius (in the future of the series) as the "young" Sirius, as opposed to the "older" Sirius in Book three. Maybe she did that so people wouldn't be confused, only it seems to be confusing people anyway. :lol:
But in PS/SS we are not supposed to know that Sirius will re-appear in the third book, are we?

Never mind. It was just an idea (wrong, obviously).

There was some 12 years between those two mentions of Sirius. So someone in his early 20s would be young Sirius. Someone in his mid 30s would not.

hwyla, I agree with your assessment that the burns probably came during Sirius' lifetime. I also think that parts of the family got darker over time. It's mighty convenient in supporting Sirius' statements that we only see the dark families on the tapestry since all of the decent ones got scorched off. I think part of the reason we get this impression that the whole Black family is evil is because Sirius spends so much time trying to explain away that part of his family. He doesn't concentrate on the good that's come of his family: like Tonks, the Weasleys, the Longbottoms. Instead, we hear a great deal about Narcissa and the Lestranges.

As for Phineas, he lived many generations ago. Between his death and when we see the house, a lot could have changed. We have no evidence that the house has stayed exactly the same for the past 70 years. In addition, it's quite possible as certain parts of the family married other purebloods who were "dark," that these lines were the ones that changed to dark magic, and the rest of the family that is "respectable" got disowned, even though they represent what the Black family originally was like.

We know that those who have been blasted off the Black family Tapestry are considered "Blood Traitors" or "Muggle Lovers" by the other members of the Family. They don't have to be Dark Wizards to remain on the tapestry.

Phineas was a Slytherin. Chances are, he had a fair amount of Pure Blood Pride. I'll be he favored the Pure Blood Students over all the others while he was headmaster, which would have gained him a fair amount of unpopularity among muggle born students, half-blood students, and pure bloods who don't buy into the Pure Blood Mania. In fact, I'd guess that the only ones who really liked him were the Slytherins. (He reminds me of Snape in that respect really). I'll be he married a nice pure blood lady, and had nice pure blood children, and he probably gave a nice amount of money to the Ministry. He had a respectable position as Hogwarts Headmaster. I'll be he did a lot to keep the Black family name in a prominent place in wizarding society.

Thus, he wouldn't have been blasted off the Tapestry. It doesn't mean he was a dark wizard. You can favor Pure Bloods and not be a dark wizard.

I agree with you FirefightingMuggle.
The Blacks hold their pride in the fact that they are pure-blood. The blasts from the tapestry show those who have strayed from this notion. This doesn't necessarily mean that the names left delved into the dark arts.

Im guessing that as the years passed, and the pure-blood lines thined out, the idea of the dark arts and everything voldemort stood for was appealing to people like the Blacks. They supported him because of his pure-blood stance, not because of his dark arts power. Sirius said his parents suppported LV because they thought he had the right idea.

Does anyone think Eileen Price could be a Black?

why not?

You can favor Pure Bloods and not be a dark wizard.
I think Fudge is another example.
"You are blinded" said Dumbledore, his voice rising now, the aura of power around him palpable, his eyes blazing once more, "by the love of the office you hold, Cornelius! You place too much importance, and you always have done, on the so-called purity of blood! You fail to recognize that it matters not what someone is born, but what they grow to be!

We know that those who have been blasted off the Black family Tapestry are considered "Blood Traitors" or "Muggle Lovers" by the other members of the Family. They don't have to be Dark Wizards to remain on the tapestry.
Right - Phineas married a pureblood and that's all that matters. The tapestry tells us nothing about good or bad, or dark and light.

Does anyone think Eileen Prince could be a Black?
She could be related somehow - but she wouldn't be on there due to her Muggle marriage to Mr. Snape.

Nothing in canon to back this up, but I suspect that Snape was related to Dumbledore. He reminds me so much of Mordred.

Well, I don't know if it's been discussed, and I may be completely wrong but in Nicole's extention of the tree, if Phineus' male sibling(to the left) married, I think the wife's name should have been written to the right of his name, considering the format of other marriages.

When I first saw this Rowling's tree, I tried to relate the known characters as Phineus' descendants and never thought of his brother. I think it was as I thought, His brother never married.

Rowling may have changed the format, like the order of siblings.(which I think may be related to their time of marriages).