The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black [Archive] - Page 5

kingwidgit

February 13th, 2006, 7:24 am

The tree seems to be indicating that Sirius parents were first cousins

We figured they must have been related in some way but i never guessed they be so closely related. Sirius was blessed he was so good looking and smart having parents so closely related to each otherMr. and Mrs. Black were second cousins, actually. 'Second cousins' share the same great-grandparent, but different grandparents/parents. In this case, the shared great-grandparent would be Phineas.

We are told Arthur's relationship to Sirius; he's a second cousin once removed---they also share the same common progenitor, a great-great grandparent---Second cousins once removed are not on the same generational line, one is a line above the other {one would appear on line 4 of the tapestry, the other on line 5}. The common progenitor in this case, the great-great grandparent, would also be Phineas.

I'm gonna hazard a guess and say that one of the burn marks on line 3 of the tapestry, will be a female Black who married a Weasley---this would have been Arthur's grandmother. These two burn marks on line 3 of the tapestry are the only ones that could conceivably conceal Arthur's lineage. Had the name(s) not been burned off it would have shown a Weasley child---parent of Arthur. So now the question is, which is Arthur's grandmother? Is it the unknown daughter of "Mr. ? Black & Violetta Bulstrode" or the unknown daughter of "Arcturus Black and Lysandra Yaxley"?

The burn mark on line 4 shows us that Sirius had another "second cousin once removed" burned from the tapestry. However, that person would have been surnamed BLACK--not Weasley, & also would have been an aunt/uncle of Sirius and Regulus, because they would have been a sibling to Mrs. Black.

That tree don't fork much, yeesh!

whizbang121

February 13th, 2006, 7:40 am

I must be missing something. I don't see Regulus or Bellatrix on the original. I know where Bella should be, but why would JKR cross Bella off?

dobby_rocks

February 13th, 2006, 8:20 am

Mr. and Mrs. Black were second cousins, actually. 'Second cousins' share the same great-grandparent, but different grandparents/parents. In this case, the shared great-grandparent would be Phineas.

Thanks
I think i see it clearly now i was thinking they were first becuase they looked to be on the same generation line.

First line with Phineas
2nd line would be his children (Aructurs)
3rd line would be grand kids (Dorea)
4th line would be great grand kids (Sirius's parents)
5th line would be great great Grandkids (Sirius/regulus and cousins)
6th would be great great great Grand kid (Draco/Tonks)

Question is it Sirius mother who is siblings to Tonks Grandmother , wife of Mr. Black or his father
Another question would Siruis parents, parents been 1st cousins?
Also if someone shares a great great great grandparent does that make them 3rd cousins

RavenEye

February 13th, 2006, 8:59 am

Question is it Sirius mother who is siblings to Tonks Grandmother , wife of Mr. Black or his father
Can't tell from the tree - it's whichever parent of Sirius is to the right. The only clue comes from Kreacher being more devoted to Mrs Black than Mr Black: I would think Mrs Black would be more likely to be the heiress and therefore to the left of the tree. Notice also there are fewer burn marks on that side of the tree.
Another question would Siruis parents, parents been 1st cousins?
Not all of them, one from each: a parent of Sirius' mother and a parent of Sirius' father were 1st cousins.
Also if someone shares a great great great grandparent does that make them 3rd cousins
No, that makes them 4th cousins. See wikipedia's cousin chart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_chart)

Essbee

February 13th, 2006, 9:53 am

I'm loving these new revelations! Very, very cool.

kingwidgit

February 13th, 2006, 10:43 am

I must be missing something. I don't see Regulus or Bellatrix on the original. I know where Bella should be, but why would JKR cross Bella off?It appears that the diagonal slant was meant to shade out the left half of the tapestry {obviously} but also to shade out the writing at the very bottom of the tapestry---there appears to be two separate paragraphs 'smudged' out...one is located just directly below where Regulus is, just to the right of the burn mark, though I can't make out his name either---I did see he has at least two names listed though. :agree:
The 'smudged' paragraph extends below where Bella and Rodulphus should appear on the tapestry.
================================
It also appears that ProfLupin was correct:Beginning at the top of the tapestry, reading left to right, we see:
Phineas Nigellus Black [b. 1847]
Elladora Black b. [1850]

Then it switches, reading right to left:
Arcturus Black [b. 1884]
Belvina Burke nee Black [b. 1886]

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. Though line 4 is without dates, for ProfLupin to be correct, the birth order should be reading right to left. Making Mrs. Black the youngest of three siblings...and Mr. Black the eldest of two.

Which means that the birth order for line 5---Sirius's generation--should then read from left to right---which it does. Sirius is older than Regulus.

Then line six would read from right to left...of course their's only Draco, but still.

Phineas-------->
<-------Arcturus
? Black-------->
<------- ? Black
Sirius---------->
<----------Draco Malfoy

:clap: That's a pretty darn good call for a 13 year old Potter fan. :clap:

maebelle

February 13th, 2006, 10:07 pm

I don't know if anyone mentioned this, but on page 113 in OotP is where Sirius is talking about Tonks' mother Andromeda:

"You and Tonks are related?" Harry asked, surprised.
"Oh yeah, her mother, Andromeda, was my favorite cousin," said Sirius, examining the tapestry closely. "No, Andormeda's not on here either, look - "
He pointed to another small round burn mark between two names, Bellatrix and Narcissa.
So, the burn mark between Bellatrix and Narcissa is Andromeda. She married Ted Tonks (muggleborn). Then, Nymphadora Tonks would be below them.

He also mentions Araminta Meliflua (his mother's cousin) and dear Aunt Elladora.

Needia

February 13th, 2006, 10:55 pm

Maybe we can even give him a form with blanks to fill in. We'll see. Believe me, we're doing everything we can.

Steve
The Lexicon

Museums and galleries generally don't object to a pen and piece of paper (it takes them a while to notice cameras too, mind. I wasn't very subtle about it either).

hwyla

February 13th, 2006, 11:43 pm

Museums and galleries generally don't object to a pen and piece of paper (it takes them a while to notice cameras too, mind. I wasn't very subtle about it either).Yes - but this is NOT a museum or gallery - it is an auction house and what they are really auctioning (in this case) is information.

It's not like the winning bid is getting JKRs 'original' drawing of the tree. This is instead a redrawn copy made specifically for this auction. Therefore the actual piece of paper is not what is worth the money (that would have been her ORIGINAL), but instead the information.

I'm glad the Leakey Cauldron is going, but I'm afraid that most of that left side will remain hidden when on display. That only the winning bid will get THAT info.

This new scan has revived my thoughts about there being a Prince/Black relationship hidden off to the left. When the first image came out and that part of the tree was hidden by other papers, I decided that there wouldn't be a connection because JKR wouldn't give away THAT big of a secret pre-book7.

NOW however, that we see an image that has been purposely blurred at JKRs request, it seems there MUST be a secret hidden there that is important to bk7. And I'm betting it has everything to do with Snape and Sirius being related. There are just SO many clues throughout the book that there's a Prince hidden on the tree. And it explains all the comments that #12 belonged to Sirius' MOTHER not Father.

madeye55

February 14th, 2006, 12:39 am

If part of it is blurred, does that mean the person who wins the auction is not allowed to release the information. I would think it silly, especially since it would be their property, correct? Only time will tell. I hope the drawing ends up in the hands of a true fan and not someone who just wants something to 'collect'.

As a history lover, it's great to see all of this background information in the Black tree. Droooooooool.....

NOW however, that we see an image that has been purposely blurred at JKRs request, it seems there MUST be a secret hidden there that is important to bk7. And I'm betting it has everything to do with Snape and Sirius being related. There are just SO many clues throughout the book that there's a Prince hidden on the tree. And it explains all the comments that #12 belonged to Sirius' MOTHER not Father.

I hope we get to see a clear picture of this after it is auctioned off!!

kingwidgit

February 14th, 2006, 1:58 am

Yes - but this is NOT a museum or gallery - it is an auction house and what they are really auctioning (in this case) is information.

It's not like the winning bid is getting JKRs 'original' drawing of the tree. This is instead a redrawn copy made specifically for this auction. Therefore the actual piece of paper is not what is worth the money (that would have been her ORIGINAL), but instead the information.

I'm glad the Leakey Cauldron is going, but I'm afraid that most of that left side will remain hidden when on display. That only the winning bid will get THAT info.I doubt that this will happen. JK, when she drew the little book for the auction last year, allowed it to be photographed when displayed for pre-auction. And once it was auctioned, the top bidder posted pics of it. It raised quite a bit for charity.

I'm sure the same will occur this time as well. Even if a pic isn't taken, I'll settle for the bird's eye view of someone from TLC or Lexicon any day.
This new scan has revived my thoughts about there being a Prince/Black relationship hidden off to the left. When the first image came out and that part of the tree was hidden by other papers, I decided that there wouldn't be a connection because JKR wouldn't give away THAT big of a secret pre-book7.

NOW however, that we see an image that has been purposely blurred at JKRs request, it seems there MUST be a secret hidden there that is important to bk7. And I'm betting it has everything to do with Snape and Sirius being related. There are just SO many clues throughout the book that there's a Prince hidden on the tree. And it explains all the comments that #12 belonged to Sirius' MOTHER not Father.There are two paragraphs at the bottom that are deliberately smudged out, as well as the other names.

If Eileen Prince had ever been on the tapestry, she wouldn't be now, she'd be a burn hole just like Sirius, because she did the unthinkable...she didn't just marry a Muggle-born {like Andromeda did}, she married a Muggle---Tobias Snape.

The tapestry shows the lineage of the Blacks. When a female Black marries {provided its a respectable pure-blood marriage w/no blood traitors} her husband--& offspring {listed as 1s or 1d on the tapestry}---but then the line stops.

Only the male Blacks and their wives/children, continue to be listed generation to generation---unless they're burned off the tapestry. So we can be reasonably certain that Mrs. Black was actually a "Black", who married her second cousin, Mr. Black...like Eleanor and F.D.R., they were cousins {5th cousins, I believe} with the same surname, who married. This means that the burn mark to the right of her name is a Black, not a Prince.

Eileen, were she part of the Black lineage, would have to be the daughter of a female Black and a male Prince, so we would need to see a marriage linked in that fashion, with a burn mark where a child "Eileen" should be. Looking at the tapestry, I don't see "unknown Black/unknown Prince"---burn mark for "Eileen"....all we see are Blacks who've been blasted off the tapestry.

The only other possibility is that Prince isn't a "good pure-blood" wizard family---meaning the it wasn't a worthy or respectable marriage, in which case the female Black=="Eileen's" mother==would have been blasted off it just for the marriage, as Andromeda was for her marriage to Ted Tonks...the marriage wouldn't have been recorded, nor the subsequent offspring---which means we wouldn't see a Prince tied to the Blacks.

I wouldn't be surprised to find Sirius and Severus related...I've thought they were for a long while now. I also wouldn't be surprised to see a Prewett listed as married to a Black. Molly Weasley, a Prewett, was a cousin related by marriage to Sirius.

TheMagicQuill

February 14th, 2006, 2:34 am

If I am not mistaken, James was Pureblood, alas, Lily was a mudblood. If there were not to many Pureblood families, James must have been in some way related to Sirius, the Mslfoys, or even Snape. James had no real reason to hate Snape, we know he was sort of arrogant, but still there were other persons to choose from when it came to bullying. I don't know if it's true, but Harry and Snape could be related. TMQ

silverboadicea

February 14th, 2006, 2:51 am

Harry and Snape, related. I bet they'll love that :D No seriously, I think they probably are. But not closely.

silver ink pot

February 14th, 2006, 4:02 am

It's not like the winning bid is getting JKRs 'original' drawing of the tree. This is instead a redrawn copy made specifically for this auction. Therefore the actual piece of paper is not what is worth the money (that would have been her ORIGINAL), but instead the information.
I think anything handwritten by JKR is valuable, so this piece of paper is indeed worth money - family tree, or no family tree. :tu: It will have the "provenance" of coming from the writer herself, and that's always valuable.

The fact that the owner will be the first to see the "complete" House of Black is even more of an incentive. I'll be curious to see how much it sells for.

hp_lexicon

February 14th, 2006, 1:35 pm

[QUOTE=TonyJoe]Hi steve. If you don't mind me asking (and its of course perfectly ok if you don't want to answer) but was it because of the family tree that you posted Regulus's middle name as Arcturus a while back?

No, the reason I posted that RAB is Regulus is because I had it on extremely good authority. I have never changed my position on that. I still say he is. I just don't say it publically. Well, except right now. Oh no! ARGH!

*lightning strikes*

Steve

silver ink pot

February 14th, 2006, 2:17 pm

And thus Lexicon Steve became the eighth Horcrux. :rotfl:

Thanks to the notorious R. A. B. :tu:

Nicole

February 14th, 2006, 2:31 pm

He's planning to memorize every detail. Now that we see the true scope of the page, we can plan exactly what he should hope to see. Maybe we can even give him a form with blanks to fill in. We'll see. Believe me, we're doing everything we can.Would tape recorders be banned there? He could read left to right the info we don't know.

I notice that there are 7 burn holes and 7 lines of text in the lower left corner (at least on the bent portion where it looks like the "number legend" for the burn marks). Number 5 should be Uncle Alphard, 6 is Sirius, and 7 is, of course, Andromeda. Maybe it would list birth/death years for the missing people and an explanation for the blasting.

Then there are five other lines of text, middle bottom...any ideas?

silver ink pot

February 14th, 2006, 2:55 pm

Would tape recorders be banned there? He could read left to right the info we don't know.
It's a great idea, but I just had a funny mental image of this poor guy standing in a crowd of people reading the House of Black out loud to himself into a tape recorder. :rotfl:

Then there are five other lines of text, middle bottom...any ideas?
What if JKR does something really cruel, and those lines are written in Latin? :lol:

I wonder if that paragraph tells more of the earlier history of the House of Black? Maybe going back to the Norman Conquest or something?

It would really be fascinating if she tied them to the Peverell family, as Marvolo did. That was a real family who lived in Derbyshire, where there is a "Snake Pass" and "Peverell Castle." Also, Sir Walter Scott wrote a book called "Peveril of the Peake" about the family.

The "Gaunt" family may trace their line back to "John of Gaunt," whose family was connected to a knight named "Strange" or "LeStrange." :huh:
http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/STRANGE.htm

I wouldn't be surprised to see some real history mentioned in those paragraphs at the bottom. :tu:

Nicole

February 14th, 2006, 4:38 pm

What if JKR does something really cruel, and those lines are written in Latin?:lol:
From comments by Jo, and the "Toujour Pur" in the coat of arms at the top...maybe French, but Latin is less comfortable for her! :p

Even before this version of the tapestry, we were pretty sure Hole #2 would be the girl who married a Weasley. But knowing that Phineas's sister was referred to as "Aunt Elladora" (rather than his great-great-great Auntie) can we be sure where "Uncle Alphard" really was? I don't see him being #4, but could picture him as #3 if Sirius was ignoring the 'level of great-ness' for aunts and uncles.

Both Mr. and Mrs. Black would have dates with their names...that will be interesting. If Mrs. B comes down the far left line and the house did too...and Mrs. B had no brothers...by Black tradition the house would have gone to Mr. Black, or perhaps his eldest brother if he wasn't the eldest himself, but by marrying a Black and retaining the family name for sons--Mrs. Black may not have had to "surrender" the house to any of her male second cousins. [I get a potential idea that Mr. and Mrs. Black may not have married for "love"...and have to wonder about the long-term toxicity effects of love potions. There sure are a lot of early deaths in Line 4, and Line 3 is fishy...]

latiem

February 14th, 2006, 5:28 pm

Okay I definately didn't read all 42 pages of this thread thats just crazy, but I have some things to discuss that I'm sure was mentioned already but here I go:

On the family tree I noticed Phineas Nigellus and Ursala Flint, So that means that Marcus Flint the Slytherin Quiditch Captain is their decendent right?

Also I noticed Violetta Bulstrode, which also means that Millicent Bulstrode is a decendent also.

Which means that Harry, Marcus and Millicent are some type of cousins to eachother.

Also someone above said that Harry and Snape might be related, they would probably be some sort of cousin also.

And what about Charis and Casper Crouch there on the same line as the Dorea and Charles Potter tracing back to the main line of Bullstrode and above that Phinneas.

And why does the name Yexley seem familiar was it mentioned in any of the books.

RavenEye

February 14th, 2006, 5:42 pm

What if JKR does something really cruel, and those lines are written in Latin? :lol:
I think it's more likely that JKR would tell the auction house to cover up the left-hand side of the tree. It's not going to be worth as much if people can copy it down or memorise it beforehand.

I wonder if that paragraph tells more of the earlier history of the House of Black? Maybe going back to the Norman Conquest or something?
Part of it will most likely detail the burn marks and why Mrs Black blasted them from the tapestry.

On the family tree I noticed Phineas Nigellus and Ursala Flint, So that means that Marcus Flint the Slytherin Quiditch Captain is their decendent right?
No, Ursula's name changed to Black on her marriage and cannot therefore be an ancestor of Marcus. She can, however, be a relative.
Also I noticed Violetta Bulstrode, which also means that Millicent Bulstrode is a decendent also.
No, same reason as above.
Which means that Harry, Marcus and Millicent are some type of cousins to eachother.
Also someone above said that Harry and Snape might be related, they would probably be some sort of cousin also.

Quite likely: but then so is everyone to everyone else eventually.
And what about Charis and Casper Crouch there on the same line as the Dorea and Charles Potter tracing back to the main line of Bullstrode and above that Phinneas.
I think Charis and Casper Crouch are the right age to be Barty Crouch Snr's parents.
And why does the name Yexley seem familiar was it mentioned in any of the books.
Yaxley was a Death Eater (possibly huge and blond) and was mentioned in association with the Carrows and Greyback.

snapefy

February 14th, 2006, 6:16 pm

No, the reason I posted that RAB is Regulus is because I had it on extremely good authority. I have never changed my position on that. I still say he is. I just don't say it publically. Well, except right now. Oh no! ARGH!

*lightning strikes*

SteveSirius' brother Regulus specifically, or is it possible there's another Regulus on the tree? After all, there are two Blacks named Sirius (well, one has been burned off...) on the tree.

Evik

February 14th, 2006, 6:18 pm

So now we know that the left side of the Tree is important to the plot, I am starting to believe the theory that Snape and Sirius are cousins (I am not trying to start a discussion on this topic, I am aware of the thread about it, I am just expressing my opinion :)) and that's the reason JKR don't want us to see the left part of the Tree.

I also have the suspicion that the Weasleys will play a role in this as well. They are not on the known part of the Tree and yet we know that they should be somewhere on it.

I wish I were rich so I could by the Tree. :sigh:

snapefy

February 14th, 2006, 6:22 pm

Even before this version of the tapestry, we were pretty sure Hole #2 would be the girl who married a Weasley.Actually, Hole #3 is most likely the Black who married a Weasley. That would make Arthur Sirius's 2nd cousin, once removed like he claimed [OotP6].

Chrysalis

February 14th, 2006, 6:24 pm

snapefy

February 14th, 2006, 6:59 pm

What really suprises me is how MANY names are blurred. I would have hardly thought that Sirius's father's and uncle's names and Violette Bulstrode's husband's name were of any importance...unless there's is a clue in their Christian names.I think that the Black Family Tree is vital to the identity of R.A.B. I wouldn't be surprised if there was another Regulus (probably one of Sirius' uncles) on the tree, and possibly even more names with the initials R.A.B. I also think we'll see how the Avery family ties into the Blacks, which I also think will be vital because an Avery attended Hogwarts with Tom Riddle.

Sorry, back on topic. :D
Though line 4 is without dates, for ProfLupin to be correct, the birth order should be reading right to left. Making Mrs. Black the youngest of three siblings...and Mr. Black the eldest of two.

Which means that the birth order for line 5---Sirius's generation--should then read from left to right---which it does. Sirius is older than Regulus.

Then line six would read from right to left...of course their's only Draco, but still.

Phineas-------->
<-------Arcturus
? Black-------->
<------- ? Black
Sirius---------->
<----------Draco MalfoyThat's an interesting concept, but I find it hard to believe that Phineas Nigellus didn't have his first child until his late 30's. I think Belvina and Arcturus were switched to make better use of the space.

Why do you think Mrs. Black is from the line with 3 siblings, and Mr. Black is from the line with 2 siblings? I'm leaning towards the opposite.

katehutch

February 14th, 2006, 7:16 pm

I think Charis and Casper Crouch are the right age to be Barty Crouch Sr's parents.

I think this has to be correct. During the parting of the ways, Dumbledore reminds Fudge that Barty Jr was the last of the Crouch name. So either Charis' and Caspar's line died out, or Barty Sr. is their child. The daughters wouldn't have the Crouch name.

Nicole

February 14th, 2006, 8:29 pm

Actually, Hole #3 is most likely the Black who married a Weasley. That would make Arthur Sirius's 2nd cousin, once removed like he claimed [OotP6].
I beg to disagree. Hole #3 would make Arthur a cousin once removed, Sirius being then second cousins with the Weasley kids. Hole #3 is an aunt or uncle to Mr. or Mrs. Black (I'm leaning toward Mrs. Black being from the farthest left line, with her ancestors inheriting the house--this would make Kreacher more devoted to her and account for the "house of my fathers" remark of Mrs. Black's portrait), which means #3's children are cousins to Mr. or Mrs. Black. #2 would have children being cousins to Dorea, Callidora, Charis and others on Line 3. #2's grandchildren would be second cousins to Mr. and Mrs. Black (this is Arthur, though he is missing from the Black tree itself) and Sirius is once removed from that. It means Sirius is third cousin to the Weasley kids...

snapefy

February 14th, 2006, 10:51 pm

I beg to disagree. Hole #3 would make Arthur a cousin once removed, Sirius being then second cousins with the Weasley kids. Hole #3 is an aunt or uncle to Mr. or Mrs. Black (I'm leaning toward Mrs. Black being from the farthest left line, with her ancestors inheriting the house--this would make Kreacher more devoted to her and account for the "house of my fathers" remark of Mrs. Black's portrait), which means #3's children are cousins to Mr. or Mrs. Black. #2 would have children being cousins to Dorea, Callidora, Charis and others on Line 3. #2's grandchildren would be second cousins to Mr. and Mrs. Black (this is Arthur, though he is missing from the Black tree itself) and Sirius is once removed from that. It means Sirius is third cousin to the Weasley kids...Oops! Sorry about that! I miscounted my generations. You are correct; Hole #2 is most likely the Black who married a Weasley (unless JKR made the same mistake as me). :blush:

I also believe that the far left line is probably Mrs. Black's line (although, someone could prove me wrong) because I think there are more families tied to the Blacks through that line (like the Averys). However, I don't think that's why Kreacher was more dedicated to Mrs. Black. Kreacher was more devoted to Bellatrix than Sirius, even though Sirius was more rightfully his master. I think Kreacher just spent more time with Mrs. Black.

MissMarauder

February 16th, 2006, 1:58 am

I'm sorry, I just couldn't help it! :blush:

...

I think it is interesting to see Violetta Bulstrode on the chart. We heard about Millicent Bulstrode in book 2. maybe she'll have another part to play in the series? What if she has a relative named R.A. Bulstrode? ...

Why would her relative be RAB when Sirius' already fits so perfectly. Jo wanted to get asked that question only on that day, probably b/c it's so easy. I was shocked when i came online after reading and found that to be a hot topic. I guessed Regulus right away and was expecting something more exciting in forums.

That's off topic though. Do you think the blurred out names have any significance at all? I wonder whether Jo doesn't want to give to much of the story or prized object away. I mean, stuff is blurred out that we already know. Maybe it's just random blurring. Like Jo said don't show everything. And then something else did the blurring. I don't know.

Man...if all purebloods are related, none of them can be too dashing, can they? But somehow Ginny and others keep catching people's eyes. I still really want to know the rest of the tree even if it's not important. I love learning more background of everyone. Can't wait for seven!

FaceofBoe

February 16th, 2006, 2:22 am

I beg to disagree. Hole #3 would make Arthur a cousin once removed, Sirius being then second cousins with the Weasley kids. Hole #3 is an aunt or uncle to Mr. or Mrs. Black (I'm leaning toward Mrs. Black being from the farthest left line, with her ancestors inheriting the house--this would make Kreacher more devoted to her and account for the "house of my fathers" remark of Mrs. Black's portrait), which means #3's children are cousins to Mr. or Mrs. Black. #2 would have children being cousins to Dorea, Callidora, Charis and others on Line 3. #2's grandchildren would be second cousins to Mr. and Mrs. Black (this is Arthur, though he is missing from the Black tree itself) and Sirius is once removed from that. It means Sirius is third cousin to the Weasley kids...

To add to that, it's a practical impossibility for Arthur to be descended from hole 3, because of his age - Arthur is older than Sirius. If Arthur were to have been descended from hole 3, in order for him to be second cousin once-removed, he would have to be younger than Sirius (Violette would have to be Sirius's great-grandmother, and Arthur's great-great-grandmother). The only realistic possibility is hole 2, with Phineas as the shared anscestor.

whizbang121

February 16th, 2006, 3:27 am

That's an interesting concept, but I find it hard to believe that Phineas Nigellus didn't have his first child until his late 30's. I think Belvina and Arcturus were switched to make better use of the space. It's possible that Belvina's birth year is 1876. Blurry..

ProfLupin

February 16th, 2006, 4:59 am

It's possible that Belvina's birth year is 1876. Blurry..It is 1886, according to the first official look at the Black tapestry....here is a link previously provided by Kingwidgit: Toujours Pur (http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y130/kingwidgit/ToujursPur.jpg)

The second officially released photo is quite grainy and very hard to make out.
It also appears that ProfLupin was correct:
Originally Posted by ProfLupin
Beginning at the top of the tapestry, reading left to right, we see:
Phineas Nigellus Black [b. 1847]
Elladora Black b. [1850]

Then it switches, reading right to left:
Arcturus Black [b. 1884]
Belvina Burke nee Black [b. 1886]

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.
Though line 4 is without dates, for ProfLupin to be correct, the birth order should be reading right to left. Making Mrs. Black the youngest of three siblings...and Mr. Black the eldest of two.

Which means that the birth order for line 5---Sirius's generation--should then read from left to right---which it does. Sirius is older than Regulus.

Then line six would read from right to left...of course their's only Draco, but still.

Phineas-------->
<-------Arcturus
? Black-------->
<------- ? Black
Sirius---------->
<----------Draco Malfoy

:clap: That's a pretty darn good call for a 13 year old Potter fan.:clap: :blush: Gee, thanks!

I would still like to see more of the Tapestry, more dates, just to make my idea more concrete. The fact that Sirius and Regulus are reading the right direction on line five is encouraging.

Does anyone know if there was confirmation about Bellatrix being the oldest of the three sisters or not? If she is, then the direction their names read would also be more evidence.

It is really hard to tell, but it looks like ***nus Black, who married Violetta Bulstrode has '83' in the grainy photo provided by TLC. This too lends credence to the theory of the birth order reading different directions per generational lines. {IF it proves accurate.}

whizbang121

February 16th, 2006, 5:34 am

hwyla

February 16th, 2006, 5:48 am

Family trees DO usually read oldest to youngest, left to right. I don't think we have anywhere enough shown yet to prove this either way. It MAY switch back and forth - VERY unusual and really there isn't any REASON that I can see for why JKR would do this. OR Belvina is just placed there to fill a hole and save space on the paper (at least has a reason to break from the norm). Arcurtus can't be moved any more to the left because of the space needed for his kids - so the tree would just have had to have gotten wider if she put Belvina off to the right where she would normally be found on a family tree.

Quidagis

February 16th, 2006, 12:39 pm

To add to that, it's a practical impossibility for Arthur to be descended from hole 3, because of his age - Arthur is older than Sirius. If Arthur were to have been descended from hole 3, in order for him to be second cousin once-removed, he would have to be younger than Sirius (Violette would have to be Sirius's great-grandmother, and Arthur's great-great-grandmother). The only realistic possibility is hole 2, with Phineas as the shared anscestor.
Hole #4 is also a possibility. That would be Arthur's mother. She'd have been a cousin to Mr. and Mrs. Black's parents, making Arthur and Sirius' parents second cousins.

The age would also fit. The blasted off female was born between 1915 and 1919. Arthur was born some time in the late fourties or early fifties. His mother would have been in her early thirties when he was born.

If Eileen Prince had ever been on the tapestry, she wouldn't be now, she'd be a burn hole just like Sirius, because she did the unthinkable...she didn't just marry a Muggle-born {like Andromeda did}, she married a Muggle---Tobias Snape.

The tapestry shows the lineage of the Blacks. When a female Black marries {provided its a respectable pure-blood marriage w/no blood traitors} her husband--& offspring {listed as 1s or 1d on the tapestry}---but then the line stops.

Only the male Blacks and their wives/children, continue to be listed generation to generation---unless they're burned off the tapestry. So we can be reasonably certain that Mrs. Black was actually a "Black", who married her second cousin, Mr. Black...like Eleanor and F.D.R., they were cousins {5th cousins, I believe} with the same surname, who married. This means that the burn mark to the right of her name is a Black, not a Prince.

Eileen, were she part of the Black lineage, would have to be the daughter of a female Black and a male Prince, so we would need to see a marriage linked in that fashion, with a burn mark where a child "Eileen" should be. Looking at the tapestry, I don't see "unknown Black/unknown Prince"---burn mark for "Eileen"....all we see are Blacks who've been blasted off the tapestry.

The only other possibility is that Prince isn't a "good pure-blood" wizard family---meaning the it wasn't a worthy or respectable marriage, in which case the female Black=="Eileen's" mother==would have been blasted off it just for the marriage, as Andromeda was for her marriage to Ted Tonks...the marriage wouldn't have been recorded, nor the subsequent offspring---which means we wouldn't see a Prince tied to the Blacks.

:agree: :agree: :agree:

So far we haven't seen any non-Black off-spring being blasted off. There are no burn-marks where a 1s or 1d should be.

It also doesn't look as if there were any female Blacks on the hidden/smudged part who had offspring at all (except Mrs. Black). If the interpretation on the Lexicon is right, the only possible female Black/acceptable non-Black marriage in the hidden part is the one to the left of Mr. and Mrs. Black, but they don't seem to have children. That could be a Prince marrying a Black, but the closest possible relation to Snape would have been an uncle or great-uncle. It wouldn't constitute a blood-relationship between Sirius and Snape at any rate.

I'm still not sure though whether it is altogether clear who exactly married into the family and who descended from it in line 3 on the left (There are 4 persons visible). Anyway, there's definitely no couple there with short-cuts for descendants => no married female Black with off-spring.

Odysseus

February 16th, 2006, 1:45 pm

There is so much to say about the Black family heritage, and the significance of Sirius coming from such a family, not to mention that he was related to the Malfoys, Tonks and Molly. What do people think?

To me it very profoundly illustrates the fact that one cannot help our family. DD was eager to stress this to Harry. It shows that pure blood means nothing.

How easy would it be for Sirius to act like the arrogant pureblood, bullying muggles and so on. He was not perfect, but i believe he was good at heart. Thats more than can be said for the Malfoy family.

Quidagis

February 16th, 2006, 1:46 pm

Edit: double post.

ProfLupin

February 16th, 2006, 4:33 pm

Hole #4 is also a possibility. That would be Arthur's mother. She'd have been a cousin to Mr. and Mrs. Black's parents, making Arthur and Sirius' parents second cousins.
This would not be correct, because were Mrs. Black and the burn mark second cousins, this would make Sirius and Arthur third cousins. They are second cousins once removed, which means Arthur would need to be represented by the burn mark. The burn mark does represent a Black, though.

RavenEye

February 16th, 2006, 6:22 pm

This would not be correct, because were Mrs. Black and the burn mark second cousins, this would make Sirius and Arthur third cousins. They are second cousins once removed, which means Arthur would need to be represented by the burn mark. The burn mark does represent a Black, though.
I make it that Arthur would be a second cousin once removed to Sirius if Arthur's mother was burn #4.

For a second cousin once removed, you need a person who is a great-grandparent to one to be a great great-grandparent to the other. If Arthur's mother is burn #4 then Arthur's great-grandfather would be Phineas Nigellus Black. As Sirius' great great-grandfather is Phineas Nigellus Black, then Arthur would be his second cousin once removed.

Third cousins would be two people who share a great-great grandparent.

If Arthur were represented by burn #4, then he would be Sirius' first cousin twice removed.

hwyla

February 17th, 2006, 12:19 am

ProfLupin

February 17th, 2006, 12:54 am

How odd. (Thanks for the pic) Is it common practice for family trees to zig zag this way? I'm not an expert, but the few I've seen seem to move left to right, oldest to youngest on each line.
It actually is uncommon for the generational lines to zig-zag, which is one of the reasons I commented on it. It was odd.

There are still too many holes or smudges to tell if I am correct on this or not. Guess we will find out soon enough.
I make it that Arthur would be a second cousin once removed to Sirius if Arthur's mother was burn #4. Burn mark # 4 represents a second cousin once removed, who has been burned off of the tapestry. Any offspring of the Black represented by burn mark #4 would be on the same generational line as Sirius. So if burn mark #4 is Arthur's mother, an unknown Black, this then makes Arthur a third cousin to Sirius, which is incorrect. Arthur is Sirius's second cousin once removed.

harp230

February 17th, 2006, 3:49 am

Sirius said that he is "something like" his second cousin once removed. So Arthur may or may not be second cousin once removed. Sirius really isnt sure.

dobby_rocks

February 17th, 2006, 4:35 am

Sirius said that he is "something like" his second cousin once removed. So Arthur may or may not be second cousin once removed. Sirius really isnt sure.
That is true, from that we can say Sirius didnt really know what Aruther was to him he guessed 2nd cousins once removed, but it could have acutal been 3rd or something

whizbang121

February 17th, 2006, 5:53 am

Sirius said that he is "something like" his second cousin once removed. So Arthur may or may not be second cousin once removed. Sirius really isnt sure.Hey stranger, Nice to seeya!

That's a good point. And who's marriage is Molly related by? Is it her own or a relative's. When she says, "Our Auntie," telling Fleur about the tiara, is she talking about her aunt, Arthur's or a mutual aunt on a shared branch of the family tree? Is this like the "house of my fathers" clue from Mrs Black?

RavenEye

February 17th, 2006, 9:53 am

Perhaps this chart on wikipedia will help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin

The simplest way to explain is that for Siruis and Arthur to be second cousins once removed then ONE person on the tree (the last ancestor they have in common) is both the great grandparent of one of them and the great-great grandparent of the other.

It would seem that person must be Phineas Nigellus Black as he is Sirius' Great-great grandfather. This means that it is blot #2 (Phineas' CHILD) where the families split off - where a female Black married into the Weasley family.

It can NOT be blot #4 as that blot's 'Black' parent (Arctucus) is NOT any form of grandparent (no matter how many greats are added) to Sirius.
I am claiming Arthur is the child of burn #4 not burn #4 itself.

From the the link: We are looking at the "relationship between two people using their closest common ancestor as a reference point."

The closest common ancestor of burn #4 and Sirius is not Arcturus but Phineas (and Ursula). Arcturus is not an ancestor of Sirius and thus can't be used as a reference point. As Phineas is the subject in question and he is Sirius' great great-grandfather and burn #4's grandfather then any offspring produced by burn #4 would be a second cousin once removed to Sirius.

Burn #2 is exactly the same relationship to Sirius as Arcturus (great great uncle). Both Arcturus and burn #2 are Phineas' children and neither are direct ancestors of Sirius (his ancestors being Phineas' oldest child (or at least the one to the left of burn #2) and Phineas' son who married Violetta).

Thus burn #2 and burn #4 are equal candidates for being direct ancestors of Arthur's: burn #2 would need to be his grandparent while burn #4 would need to be his parent for the relationship to Sirius to 'work'.

Burn mark # 4 represents a second cousin once removed, who has been burned off of the tapestry.
Burn #4 represents a first cousin twice removed to Sirius. The common ancestor to Sirius and burn #4 is Phineas (burn #4's grandparent and Sirius' great great-grandparent).

There aren't any other burn marks on the tree that could realistically account for a marriage to the Weasley family that produced Arthur as a second cousin once removed.
*Burn #1's common ancestor to Sirius would be his or her parent - you can't get a second cousin once removed via a 3x great grandparent.
*Burn #3's most recent common ancestor to Sirius would be Violetta and her husband, they are Sirius' great grandparents. The only way that could work is if Violetta Black is Arthur's great-great grandmother - not really possible due to Arthur's age.
*Burn #5 can be ruled out as you can't get a second cousin once removed through a common ancestor who is a grandparent to one.

Essbee

February 17th, 2006, 4:15 pm

You know, there is no guarantee that all the names on the left will be interesting. I think it's far more probably that one name is interesting, but JK had the entire left half covered up to create more suspense and to keep attention from being focused onto one point/name/burnmark.

kingwidgit

February 17th, 2006, 4:28 pm

Burn #4 represents a first cousin twice removed to Sirius. The common ancestor to Sirius and burn #4 is Phineas (burn #4's grandparent and Sirius' great great-grandparent).You are correct, the offspring of Arcturus, grandchild of Phineas---represented by burn mark #4---would represent a first cousin twice removed from Sirius. The offspring of burn #4 would be a great-grandchild, so therefore a second cousin once removed from Sirius.

I think ProfLupin got just a bit confused and was talking about burn #5---not 4. Any offspring of burn #5 would be on the same generational line as Sirius, and therefore be third cousins.It can NOT be blot #4 as that blot's 'Black' parent (Arctucus) is NOT any form of grandparent (no matter how many greats are added) to Sirius.We do know that Arcturus was a grandparent. He only has daughters---each married---represented on the chart. Which means their offspring wouldn't necessarily make it onto the tapestry, but appear as this: Callidora/Harfand=1s & 1d----burn mark---Charis/Caspar=1s & 2d. {Arcturus's grandchildren}. We don't know the children of burn #4, as the line stops there. It doesn't mean he wasn't a great-grandfather, though.

Tonks is Phineas's great-great-great granddaughter...she's not on the Tapestry either. Neither is her mother, Andromeda {burn #7}, who was a great-great granddaughter of Phineas.

As long as a common progenitor remains, in this case Phineas, then it is possible for burn #2, #3, #4---to be the lineage of Arthur.

I think I stated previously it would be #3...but it could be any of those three listed above.

Quidagis

February 17th, 2006, 5:07 pm

As long as a common progenitor remains, in this case Phineas, then it is possible for burn #2, #3, #4---to be the lineage of Arthur.
I forgot about #3, but you're right, it's a possibility. This would mean that #3 is Arthur's great-grandmother. The only problem is the age, because Arthur can't be born after the mid-fifties.

The father of #3 was possibly born much earlier than Belvina and Arcturus, as Phineas was end 30 when they were born. (I admit I don't read that much into the fact that Belvina and Arcturus swapped places on the tree, the elder being on the right of the younger sibling. It's the only instance on that tree at any rate...). If we assume 20-year generation steps, it would suffice for #3 to be born around 1890. That's possible, though it is a bit close.

silver ink pot

February 17th, 2006, 6:04 pm

Sirius said that he is "something like" his second cousin once removed. So Arthur may or may not be second cousin once removed. Sirius really isnt sure.
I think that's a good point. :agree: We can't take Sirius's word as gospel.

The reason Sirius doesn't know is because the Weasleys didn't know him until after he escaped from Azkaban:

http://www.jkrowling.org/textonly/en/faq_view.cfm?id=65

Section: F.A.Q.
Why didn't Fred and George notice Peter Pettigrew on the Marauder's Map before ("Prisoner of Azkaban")?

It would not have mattered if they had. Unless somebody was very familiar with the story of Sirius Black (and after all, Sirius was not Mr. and Mrs. Weasley's best friend – indeed, they never knew him until after he escaped from Azkaban), Fred and George would be unlikely to know or remember that Peter Pettigrew was the person Sirius had (supposedly) murdered.

FaceofBoe

February 17th, 2006, 8:06 pm

I forgot about #3, but you're right, it's a possibility. This would mean that #3 is Arthur's great-grandmother. The only problem is the age, because Arthur can't be born after the mid-fifties.

The father of #3 was possibly born much earlier than Belvina and Arcturus, as Phineas was end 30 when they were born. (I admit I don't read that much into the fact that Belvina and Arcturus swapped places on the tree, the elder being on the right of the younger sibling. It's the only instance on that tree at any rate...). If we assume 20-year generation steps, it would suffice for #3 to be born around 1890. That's possible, though it is a bit close.

Actually, I think it's impossible.

If Sirius is Arthur's second cousin once-removed (the only canon we have to go on - I don't see why JKR would have Sirius say something incorrect in this instance, even if he is working it out on the spot), then that means Violetta must be Sirius's great-grandmother (as we know she is), and Arthur's great-great-grandmother (she can't be Arthur's grandmother, because that would make Arthur and Sirius first cousins once-removed).

That accepted, let's look at the dates. On the second generational line, it seems that the dates go from right-to-left in terms of age. So at the oldest, Violetta's husband would have been born in 1888. Let's say all of their descendents had their kids at 18 (though it was probably much older). Violetta's child (#3, Arthur's great-granparent) would have been born in 1905 (15 years before their sibling Dorea); Arthur's grandparent would have been born in 1923; and Arthur's parent would have been born in 1941. If Arthur was born when this parent was 18, this would mean Arthur was born in 1959 - but we know that's not the case, because that's when Sirius, James etc. were born. So if Arthur and Sirius are second cousins once-removed, it's a practical impossibility for Arthur to be descended from #3.

Quidagis

February 17th, 2006, 8:55 pm

Actually, I think it's impossible.

If Sirius is Arthur's second cousin once-removed (the only canon we have to go on - I don't see why JKR would have Sirius say something incorrect in this instance, even if he is working it out on the spot), then that means Violetta must be Sirius's great-grandmother (as we know she is), and Arthur's great-great-grandmother (she can't be Arthur's grandmother, because that would make Arthur and Sirius first cousins once-removed).

That accepted, let's look at the dates. On the second generational line, it seems that the dates go from right-to-left in terms of age. So at the oldest, Violetta's husband would have been born in 1888. Let's say all of their descendents had their kids at 18 (though it was probably much older). Violetta's child (#3, Arthur's great-granparent) would have been born in 1905 (15 years before their sibling Dorea); Arthur's grandparent would have been born in 1923; and Arthur's parent would have been born in 1941. If Arthur was born when this parent was 18, this would mean Arthur was born in 1959 - but we know that's not the case, because that's when Sirius, James etc. were born. So if Arthur and Sirius are second cousins once-removed, it's a practical impossibility for Arthur to be descended from #3.

That's correct if you assume that the birth dates of the siblings of Belvina and Arcturus are ordered that way, which I doubt. But I admit that about 30 years age-difference between siblings (in the next line, with Dorea) is pretty much. (It's not unheard-of, although it usually happens when men have children with another wife later in life.)

#3 is a bit of a stretch at any rate, but I don't think we can rule it out altogether.

nazquiter

February 17th, 2006, 9:04 pm

if all the highest pure blood families r in the family tree of the blacks then where is DUMBLEDORE in it and i think the answer to that might be that he never got married to a pure, but i think it is a mystery that Dumbledore hasnt got any desendents.

whizbang121

February 17th, 2006, 9:04 pm

I think that's a good point. :agree: We can't take Sirius's word as gospel. and Arthur's something like my second cousin once removed. Only when he's not being precise. :)

but i think it is a mystery that Dumbledore hasnt got any desendents.

No one's been introduced as such. Who knows. Maybe Mrs Figg is his great grand neice.

kingwidgit

February 17th, 2006, 11:19 pm

I forgot about #3, but you're right, it's a possibility. This would mean that #3 is Arthur's great-grandmother. The only problem is the age, because Arthur can't be born after the mid-fifties.
Actually, Phineas's wife, Ursula Flint Black, would be Arthur's great-grandmother...and Sirius's great-great grandmother.

Burn #2, if this is Arthur's line, would be Arthur's grandmother. If Arthur's lineage is represented by either burn #3 or burn #4, this would be mother of Arthur. Arthur would be on the 4th generational line, Sirius on the 5th.

Is there enough wiggle room for ages is the question. If burn #4 represents Arthur's mother, she would have been born between 1915 & 1919 {in between siblings}. The dates would be consistent.

If the tapestry continues to read oldest to youngest on that line...then burn #3 would have also been born prior to 1920. Again, consistent with age allowance.

Burn #2 would represent a grandmother to Arthur...we don't know if the ages reading right to left continue that entire generational line or not. Even if it does not, the dates may still be consistent to allow for it to be Arthur's grandmother...the siblings to the right of the burn mark are born 1884 & 1886...so it is possible.

I know that the new tapestry has '45 listed for the sibling directly next to burn #2...this isn't even possible. If it were 1945, well Phineas would have been dead 19 years...if it's 1845, well then that would be a miracle, because Phineas wasn't born until 1847...I know this is a magical world, but he can't have fathered children before he was even born.

I'm gonna agree with ProfLupin and say the Black---husband of Violetta Bulstrode---was born 1883, I don't believe the "45" is accurate at all.

If it is 1883, then that would be consistent with the generational line reading eldest to youngest, right to left.

Three more days yet, and hopefully we'll know for sure.

FaceofBoe

February 18th, 2006, 12:18 am

If Arthur's lineage is represented by either burn #3 or burn #4, this would be mother of Arthur. Arthur would be on the 4th generational line, Sirius on the 5th.

But if Arthur's mother is burn #3, this would mean Arthur and Sirius are linked through Violetta and her husband - they would be their nearest common anscestors. Violetta would be Arthur's grandmother, and Sirius's great-grandmother - which would make Sirius and Arthur first cousins once-removed, not second cousins once-removed as Sirius said in OotP.

kingwidgit

February 18th, 2006, 3:41 am

But if Arthur's mother is burn #3, this would mean Arthur and Sirius are linked through Violetta and her husband - they would be their nearest common anscestors. Violetta would be Arthur's grandmother, and Sirius's great-grandmother - which would make Sirius and Arthur first cousins once-removed, not second cousins once-removed as Sirius said in OotP.You're right, I didn't think of that...which means that Arthur's lineage is tied to either burn #2--his grandmother, or burn #4, his mother.

Nicole

February 18th, 2006, 12:38 pm

I know that the new tapestry has '45 listed for the sibling directly next to burn #2...this isn't even possible. If it were 1945, well Phineas would have been dead 19 years...if it's 1845, well then that would be a miracle, because Phineas wasn't born until 1847...I know this is a magical world, but he can't have fathered children before he was even born.
Are we looking at the same blurry photo? I see the "45" above burn mark #2, meaning a sibling of Phineas (currently speculated to have been named Sirius) appears to have the dates 1845 - 1853 (but could be 1863...or even 1953 or 1883), not the male child of Phineas to the left of the burn mark. None of the burn marks have dates that I can see (though the one in question, #2, does have a thin smudge below it, it is crooked/slanted and not thick enough to contain dates). And I can't read the dates for the son of Phineas listed farthest left...am I missing a chance to see a better pic?

whizbang121

February 18th, 2006, 3:05 pm

Do we know it's a son on the farthest left?

kingwidgit

February 18th, 2006, 4:22 pm

Are we looking at the same blurry photo? I see the "45" above burn mark #2, meaning a sibling of Phineas (currently speculated to have been named Sirius) appears to have the dates 1845 - 1853 (but could be 1863...or even 1953 or 1883), not the male child of Phineas to the left of the burn mark. None of the burn marks have dates that I can see (though the one in question, #2, does have a thin smudge below it, it is crooked/slanted and not thick enough to contain dates). And I can't read the dates for the son of Phineas listed farthest left...am I missing a chance to see a better pic?Nope, we're not talking about the burn mark on Phineas's generational line, which appears directly to the left of Elladora.

I'm talking about on the second generational line, Phineas's children. Directly to the right of burn #2 is a male Black ***nus married to Violetta Bulstrode. It gives a partial date for that son of Phineas's. His birthdate can't be 45 at all...1845 is before the birth of Phineas...1945 is 19 years after the death of Phineas.

This is the cleaned up version released by TLC {Lexicon}. It looks like 83 to me in this crop of the Tapestry.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y130/kingwidgit/blackfamilytreecleanedcrop.jpg

And this is the redone version, again released by TLC {Lexicon}. It's showing 45.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y130/kingwidgit/blackfamilytreeredonecrop.jpg

Do we know it's a son on the farthest left?While we do know of two Black females burned from the family tree---Andromeda and the unknown Black linked to Arthur, we don't know which burn mark represents daughters---with the exception of Andromeda, as her burn mark appears between her sisters.

FaceofBoe

February 18th, 2006, 4:42 pm

I think it looks like a 98 or 93. Very hard to make out, though.

Or maybe 88, looking at it again.

Albireo

February 18th, 2006, 6:22 pm

Hi to everyone,
I'm the Italian fan who sent that scan and re-made the tree that's now on the Lexicon (except for the coat of arms). Before starting with speculation, my apologies for the bad quality scan.. actually I couldn't do any better, the picture is only 10x7 cm :p
However... in the re-made picture there are some mistakes (that you fond out already for sure!), which I post right here together with other things:
1- first of all, the pic shows erroneously a "XXXX" date of death for Bellatrix, which of course it's a mistake of mine (I just copied and pasted another one).
2- I interpreted Phineas' brother Sirius' dates as 1845-1853, and omitted to say to the Lexicon to add an '?' to the pic... sorry! By the way, I'm quite sure about them, also because he didn't have any son or daughter (if he had they'd have been Black, consequently on the tree).
3- All the dates are from the previous picture, except for Sirius' and "-nus Black" ones.
4- Narcissa's mother name is Druella, I'm positively sure (not Drusilla, Drusila or Denela) =P

And now... let the speculation begin! I tried with Photoshop & Photopaint to clean the blurred part of the tree... and I found some interesting new bits of information. Before starting with news, I noticed that the blurring was kind of "directional", meaning that every letter is duplicated (because the lack of focusing) and placed on the letter next to it. The best way to decipher the script is to shrink the blurred names and put them on focus O_O! I tried this procedure with most of them, but only few of them were sort of "readable".... :(
- Before any other name, I tried to shrink and unblur Regulus' spot (in this way I could know if my cleaning procedure was effective or not): I found out that his date of death is definitely crossed out, unlike any of the others (you can get a glimpse of the pen stroke on the blurred image too).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8b/Bft_Speculation3.jpg
- After cleaning his spot, I think that "-nus Black" is actually Magnus Black. Here's why: on the left of that 'n' there is a little black circle, and below a blurred sign that completes the 'g' letter. The 'M' is quite clear too.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/30/BftSpeculation2.jpg
- Sirius' and Regulus' father name begins (maybe) with 'I' or 'J'.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/29/BftSpeculation4.jpg
- The first of Phineas' sons (on the far left) probably begins with 'S', maybe Simon??.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b7/BftSpeculation5.jpg

- ?Magnus? and Violetta's son showed on the left of "Burned Black #3" is probably named Joanna or something like that. Another son of the same couple, the far left one, begins with F, and his wife has a really short name which partially fuses with his one (because of the directional horizontal blurring and the line that unites them together).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/BftSpeculation1.jpg

All this stuff is pure speculative and very likely, when the real thing will come out (as I hope it will in three days...), it’ll all be proved pure nonsense, but well... I think it was worth a try, right?

Albireo

Nicole

February 18th, 2006, 6:38 pm

Nope, we're not talking about the burn mark on Phineas's generational line, which appears directly to the left of Elladora.See, my copy of the photo doesn't have any burn marks left of Elladora on her line, only one to the right of her name.
I'm talking about on the second generational line, Phineas's children. Directly to the right of burn #2 is a male Black ***nus married to Violetta Bulstrode. It gives a partial date for that son of Phineas's. His birthdate can't be 45 at all...1845 is before the birth of Phineas...1945 is 19 years after the death of Phineas.I totally agree. (And I would have understood sooner if he had been referred to as Violetta's husband...:blush: )
This is the cleaned up version released by TLC {Lexicon}. It looks like 83 to me in this crop of the Tapestry.I don't trust that interpretation, either. But keep in mind that the part of the date we see is the death date, and not the birthdate. He certainly could have died in 1983. And this is the redone version, again released by TLC {Lexicon}. It's showing 45. No reason why Violetta's hubby could not have died in 1945...maybe his code name was Grindelwald. :evil: (Just kidding, I don't expect Grindelwald to have been a Black.)

it was worth a try, right?
Yes, it was. And now we have your disclaimer!

hwyla

February 19th, 2006, 9:11 am

Do we know it's a son on the farthest left? Well we really have two choices. Either we can assume that this one is a male (child of Phineas on the farthest left of tree) simply because the line continues down the generations amd so 'should' be 'Blacks' because it's the Black Family Tree.

OR if this child was female (and so would not normally have kept the name Black or continued on the tree) then we can assume that JKR 'may' have done that 'branch' purely to show the ancestors of Sirius' mom branching off and coming back into the Black family - after all she HAS put Draco's name on the tree even tho' he's not a 'Black'. Draco is treated differently than all the other children born to 'Black' daughters. If she can do it for one (Draco) then she might do it for another if their ancestory was important enough to the story.

Nicole

February 19th, 2006, 1:03 pm

If she can do it for one (Draco) then she might do it for another if their ancestory was important enough to the story.
That's true. :agree: I do think, though, that we are going to see the eldest male child of Phineas on the left most side. Mrs. Black claims Grimmauld Place as the house of her fathers, Severus says Sirius lives in his mother's house, Kreacher was always more devoted to her than to her husband....it all fits if the house did come from Mrs. Black's side.

whizbang121

February 20th, 2006, 2:26 am

....it all fits if the house did come from Mrs. Black's side.
Good points.

Tince

February 20th, 2006, 3:36 am

Mrs. Black claims Grimmauld Place as the house of her fathers, Severus says Sirius lives in his mother's house, Kreacher was always more devoted to her than to her husband....it all fits if the house did come from Mrs. Black's side.
I'm not sure if you have heard or not, but right when the family tree picture had been published, there was thoughts that maybe Sirius' mother and father were Blacks. They were distant cousins and married, so technically it was the house of her father's because she was a Black and married a Black. I'm not sure if you were alluding to this or not.. :shrug:

silver ink pot

February 20th, 2006, 3:59 am

Essbee

February 20th, 2006, 1:50 pm

How long is it now before this thing goes under the hammer?

Mundungus Fletc

February 20th, 2006, 2:14 pm

The auction preview is tonight and the auction tomorrow. It looks from Leaky's account that the tree will not be revealed in its entirety tonight so there is something worth bidding for.

Nicole

February 20th, 2006, 2:24 pm

I'm not sure if you have heard or not, but right when the family tree picture had been published, there was thoughts that maybe Sirius' mother and father were Blacks. They were distant cousins and married, so technically it was the house of her father's because she was a Black and married a Black. I'm not sure if you were alluding to this or not.. I have wondered about it since OotP was published. This just confirms the suspicion that Mr. and Mrs. Black were relatives before marrying (second cousins isn't exactly "distant", but certainly not a taboo marriage in Britain). It also appears that if Mrs. Black had only sisters, the house was going to be "inherited" by one of her second cousins (or maybe her father's brother if he had one--one that didn't get blasted off the tapestry, anyway!). Now, maybe she fell in love with one of her second cousins (and he fell for her, too), but I wonder if the possession of the house of her fathers didn't play a role in choosing a mate--a mate who would be inheriting the house by default of being a male Black (possibly the oldest of their generation).

whizbang121

February 20th, 2006, 8:54 pm

Nicole

February 20th, 2006, 9:24 pm

I don't know if this has come up before, but I am looking at the tree with a friend and she says that Dorea and Charlus can't be James' parents because they were mugglelovers, and they would have been blasted off, if not when they were married then certainly when they took in Sirius.Additionally, Dorea died at age 57 which is hardly "elderly" and JKR said James's parents were elderly when they died....And it's just inconceivable that Sirius would not have made mention that he and James were cousins once removed...or that he and Harry were second cousins. Charlus Potter may be a distant relative of Harry's, but probably isn't even an uncle and certainly not his grandfather!

FaceofBoe

February 20th, 2006, 10:20 pm

Hem hem! ;)

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/#article:8383

So, #4 married Septimus Weasley, which is why they were burned off. That sounds like Arthur's parents (though she'd have been in mid-late 30s when he was born), despite what Leaky are saying - it would make Sirius and Arthur second cousins once-removed, which is what Sirius said in OotP.

Full info:

http://www.hp-lexicon.org/whats_new.html

Marika

February 20th, 2006, 10:25 pm

Finally a prove that Bella (1951) is older than Narcissa (1955)!
And I through that Regulus died in 1980 but apparently he died in 1979 (well... nearly the same).

FaceofBoe

February 20th, 2006, 10:36 pm

Cygnus being born in 1989 also confirms that the ages go right-to-left on the second generational line.

Nicole

February 20th, 2006, 10:49 pm

Full info:
Thanks for the heads up, Boe!

My, my, my. Poor Walburga lost a son and husband in the same year...

I wonder what the five lines of text in the middle at the bottom say...

FaceofBoe

February 20th, 2006, 10:51 pm

Interesting also that Sirius's parents were second cousins.

And Lucretia marrying Ignatius Prewett (Percy's middle name!) explains "Molly's my cousin by marriage".

Nicole

February 20th, 2006, 10:53 pm

Cygnus being born in 1989 also confirms that the ages go right-to-left on the second generational line.:huh: What are you talking about? The left-most name on Line 2 is a Sirius, born 1877--the earliest of his siblings. Cygnus was born in 1889...

I have my home-made chart handy...the blurry photo provided the layout and the Lexicon has filled in the names!

So...Ernie MacMillan probably is a pureblood, even by pureblood standards--only took 9 generations, too. :D

FaceofBoe

February 20th, 2006, 11:01 pm

:huh: What are you talking about? The left-most name on Line 2 is a Sirius, born 1877--the earliest of his siblings. Cygnus was born in 1889...

That's true - the Sirius date must be a mistake then, because the rest of the siblings on that line go from right-to-left. Arcturus 1884, Belvina 1886, Cygnus 1889. Or maybe Jo had to do that to fit everyone on, since Orion and Walburga married each other.

Nicole

February 20th, 2006, 11:18 pm

maybe Jo had to do that to fit everyone on, since Orion and Walburga married each other.
I think that's the reason. :agree:

What happened to Walburga's cousin, Araminta Meliflua? :huh: The only cousin of hers that I see is Dorea Black Potter's son...maybe Sirius wasn't being precise with that one...like referring to "Aunt" Elladora when she was his great-great-great aunt.

Here's my current home-made chart: http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b7/Perenelle/theblacktree.jpg

Alorra Spinnet

February 21st, 2006, 12:27 am

FaceofBoe

February 21st, 2006, 12:38 am

Someone on Leaky pointed out a problem with the family tree - Cygnus, Ballatrix's father, was only 13 when Bellatrix was born. I think Aberforth must have written the dates down wrong. Either that or Jo made a mistake. Maybe it should read 1928 rather than 1938.

Same with Arcturus - he'd have been 14 when his daughter Lucretia was born. Pollux would have been 13 when daughter Walburga was born. There's something very wrong about all this - I think JKR messed up her maths. Maybe Dorea and Charlus are Harry's grandparents after all, if she's this bad. ;)

silver ink pot

February 21st, 2006, 12:43 am

Nicole: I can't see your chart - did it blow out the margins or something?

Potency posted the following on the Development of Snape thread ~ Thank you, Potency! :tu: :)

On the Leaky Website, someone attended the auction and wrote down the burnt out marks from the Black tapestry...No Princes on there...

Quote:
* 1 (Phineus' youngest sibling) Isla Black, who 'married muggle Bob Hitchens'.
* 2 (Phineus' 2nd child) another Phineus, who 'supported muggle rights'
* 3 (Dorea's brother) Marius, 'a squib'. That really cut me up, it's hard to explain, what a life for him - not!
* 4 This you'll love: Callidora and Charis' sister: Cedrella, who 'married Septimus Weasley'. She'd have been born around 1918, so Septimus is probably an uncle of Arthur, and of course a 7th son. She was struck off just for marrying a blood traitor Weasley.
* 5 Alphard, who 'gave gold to his runaway nephew'
* 6 Sirius, who 'ran away'
* 7 Andromeda, who 'married muggle Ted Tonks'

Of course, that doesn't mean that there are NO princes on there..just that those aren't the burnt marks that we know about.

Okay, here is more info from the lexicon:

Quote:
Thanks for visiting the Harry Potter Lexicon!

February 20, 2006

Here's our report of the Black Family Tree, thanks to Aberforth!

Key 1 - Phineus' youngest sibling was Isla Black, who married muggle Bob Hitchens.

Key 2 - his 2nd child was another Phineus, who 'supported Muggle rights.

His 3rd child, who married Violetta, was Cygnus (1889-1943).

Their children were:
1 Pollux (1912-1990) who married Irma Crabbe
2 Cassiopeia (1915-92)
3 (Key 3) Marius, 'a squib'
4 Dorea

Pollux and Irma's children were:
1 Walburga (1925-85) - Sirius' ghastly mother
2 ((Key 5) Alphard, who 'gave gold to his runaway nephew'
3 Cygnus (1938-92) who married Druella Rosier and fathered the 3 sisters, Bellatrix(1951- ), Andromeda (Key 7) who married muggle Ted Tonks, and Narcissa

Now back up to Phineus' oldest son, and he is another Sirius (1877-1952) who married Hesper Gamp [nod to Dickens?] Their children were:
1 Arcturus (1901-91) who married Melania MacMillan
2 Lycoris (1904-65) - not sure M or F
3 Regulus (1906-59)

Arcturus and Melania had 2 children:
1 Lucretia (1915-92) who married Ignatius Prewett
2 Orion (1929-79) who married Walburga and fathered Sirius (Key 6, who 'ran away') and Regulus (1961-79)

The piece de resistance is Key 4, the sister to Callidora and Charis:
Cedrella, scrubbed because she 'married Septimus Weasley')

I don't know if this has come up before, but I am looking at the tree with a friend and she says that Dorea and Charlus can't be James' parents because they were mugglelovers, and they would have been blasted off, if not when they were married then certainly when they took in Sirius.
Two problems with that theory. First, there is no canon that Dorea or Charlus were "muggle lovers." I guess your friend is thinking along those lines because James married a muggleborn, but he married her after his parents died, right? So we have no way of knowing whether they approved or disapproved of Lily.

Secondly, I strongly doubt that the Blacks knew where Sirius was in the summer after he ran away. They might not have even known the Potters all that well, relations or not.

Nicole

February 21st, 2006, 1:32 am

Nicole: I can't see your chart - did it blow out the margins or something?
I can see it, and it's smaller than the last version (with less info known)--it's hard to read in that post. I'm sure Leaky or Lexicon will have a nicer one soon...
Someone on Leaky pointed out a problem with the family tree - Cygnus, Ballatrix's father, was only 13 when Bellatrix was born. I think Aberforth must have written the dates down wrong. Either that or Jo made a mistake. Maybe it should read 1928 rather than 1938.

Same with Arcturus - he'd have been 14 when his daughter Lucretia was born. Pollux would have been 13 when daughter Walburga was born. There's something very wrong about all this - I think JKR messed up her maths. Maybe Dorea and Charlus are Harry's grandparents after all, if she's this bad. I agree that the dates seem messed up...not sure who's at fault, though.

Hpfan17512

February 21st, 2006, 2:23 am

I think that the Black family is one of the coolest things in the book because it is so interesting to uncover all of this information about one family.

whizbang121

February 21st, 2006, 3:17 am

This one from grrliz

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/summersky/HP%20sigs%20and%20avs/houseofblackgrrlizcrop.gif

eta: cropped chart

SilverArrow

February 21st, 2006, 3:23 am

A very interesting chart.

whizbang121

February 21st, 2006, 3:41 am

Cygnus is the Swan. Remember Cho's patronus? :eyebrows:

ComicBookWorm

February 21st, 2006, 3:43 am

whizbang121

February 21st, 2006, 3:52 am

No Princes, but there's an Irma Crabbe

dobby_rocks

February 21st, 2006, 3:56 am

This must be a very small part of the Black Family tree, in the book Harry notices that it goes back to the 1500's this is like the tail end. Intresting none the less nice chart

grrliz

February 21st, 2006, 3:57 am

If that is James on the chart, then he and Sirius are first cousins once removed. It would have been a big oversight not to refer to him as a cousin.

I'm not saying it's impossible at this point since some of the other dates are wonky.She may be keeping this information that James and Sirius are that closely related for some other reason, though, the way she waited to mention Sirius' connection to other notable family members (Bellatrix, the Malfoy branch, etc.). To what point or purpose? I'm not sure yet, obviously, but this might be deliberate misdirection rather than mathematical and geneological oversight. JKR has hinted that there's more to Harry's christening than meets the eye, and a close family relationship between Sirius and James might play into this. [Harry will be undoubtedly outraged if this ever prooves true, of course, but this is just rampant guesswork anyway.]

Something caused the tree that Whiz uploaded to get all distorted, so I attached the non-distorted original. :)

whizbang121

February 21st, 2006, 4:08 am

Something caused the tree that Whiz uploaded to get all distorted, so I attached the non-distorted original. :)

:blush: I tried to enlarge it. But I gave up and cropped the edges a bit instead. :D

Excellent chart. Wish it did go back further, but ..... :whistle:

janusincantus

February 21st, 2006, 4:38 am

If that is James on the chart, then he and Sirius are first cousins once removed. It would have been a big oversight not to refer to him as a cousin.In a way, it is not that big an oversight as Sirius clearly told all the pureblood families are inevitably related to each other. I wouldn't call a first cousin once removed exactly a very close relative. We are talking about the cousins of one's parents, aren't we? I don't even remember all the names of my parents' cousins (and yet, they are not that many).

What is more strange is that we didn't see Harry asking anything about a Potter that appears in the tree (or did we?).

whizbang121

February 21st, 2006, 4:47 am

What is more strange is that we didn't see Harry asking anything about a Potter that appears in the tree (or did we?).
The frustrating thing is that Harry never seems to ask questions about his family. grrrr.....

MoonysAngel

February 21st, 2006, 5:14 am

Molly Prewett Weasley being Sirius' cousin by marriage--would Ignatius be her father or an uncle?

silver ink pot

February 21st, 2006, 5:29 am

Molly Prewett Weasley being Sirius' cousin by marriage--would Ignatius be her father or an uncle?
He could be either - but I'm betting that's her father. :agree:

Nicole: I can see your chart now. :) Very nice!

Grrliz: Great job on your chart as well! :tu::) What about the Lexicon entry about Cedrella's Husband, Septimus Weasley? It's listed almost as a footnote on the HPLexicon (I quoted it in my post, above).
http://www.hp-lexicon.org/whats_new.html
The piece de resistance is Key 4, the sister to Callidora and Charis:
Cedrella, scrubbed because she 'married Septimus Weasley')

ProfLupin

February 21st, 2006, 5:45 am

No Princes, but there's an Irma CrabbeHmmm...as in a relative of Vincent Crabbe, a great-aunt perhaps? Interesting.

I am a bit disappointed that my theory did not pan out, but oh well.

Have looked up Walburga, which lists St. Walburga (http://www.walburga.org/arch_walburga.html): St. Walburga (d. 779) was born in England of a family of the local aristocracy. At an early age, she was entrusted to the care of the Benedictine nuns in Wimbourne (present-day Dorset) where she eventually made monastic profession.

And here is the etymology of the name: Means "rule of the fortress" from the Germanic elements wald "rule" and burg "fortress". This was the name of an 8th-century saint from England who did missionary work in Germany.

Ludo Bagman played for the Wimbourne Wasps.

whizbang121

February 21st, 2006, 5:51 am

Molly Prewett Weasley being Sirius' cousin by marriage--would Ignatius be her father or an uncle?
I don't think he can be her father because then she'd be a Black on her mother's side, rather than related by marriage. Ignatius must have been a relative of her father's.

grrliz

February 21st, 2006, 6:00 am

At least we know where Percy got his middle name from. :D

SIP, I left off Septimus Weasley for the sole reason that he wouldn't fit! :D

whizbang121

February 21st, 2006, 6:06 am

Three sisters and a cousin married Potter, Longbottom, Weasley and Crouch, right in a row.

runnersgw

February 21st, 2006, 6:06 am

To get the nice picture of everything filled in from the Lexicon, go to this link:

Black Family Tree (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/blackfamilytree.html)

silver ink pot

February 21st, 2006, 6:16 am

I am thrilled to see all the final connections. I was also glad to see that I was right about Sirius' father's name. It just made sense to me. Sirius, the dog, follows Orion, the hunter. Although if Sirius has the traditional father's name as his middle name, what a set of initials. :nc:
Alorra: I missed your post earlier - how funny! :rotfl: Not only would that be, um, descriptive, but it is a pun. :) Sirius (the dog animagus named for the dog star) whose mother is, to put it mildly, rather a "witch" with a capital "B" if you know what I mean. Of course a "B-otch" is also a female of the canine species. :lol:

SIP, I left off Septimus Weasley for the sole reason that he wouldn't fit!
Fair enough! :) You need more parchment or tapestry or something. :tu:

runnersgw: Actually, your link took me to the incomplete Black Family Tree. Grrliz and Nicole have actually filled in the blanks.

hwyla

February 21st, 2006, 6:29 am

Well - it's a bit frustrating on some of the dates. If Sirius' mom was really botn in '25 then her father was only 13 at the time - I'm betting the date is wrong - more likely '35 since she had a brother born in '38.

BUT it looks like Orion (Sirius' dad) was possibly in the same year at school with Hagrid and Eileen Prince (Sept'40-June'47 or Sept'41-June'48) Anyway, two or three years behind Tom

And I'd have to say that I'm shocked to see Bella born in '51 - that means she was NEVER at school with Snape to be part of a 'gang' of Slytherins. That would seem then to imply that Sirius must have been speaking about once they were out of school - which doesn't make sense with his comment about not having seen Bella after he was either 15 or a 5th year (Harry's age in bk5/OotP).

But then again '51 might be an incorrect date too - as then HER father had a kid at 13 also (maybe it's part of the Black family 'recklessness' - I'm just a bit shocked that JKR would have teenaged pregnancies). I think some wrong dates are more likely.

Don't know what to make of that unless Snape was hanging out at Bella's home or #12 the summer before 5th year? That's a bit surprising since Lucius, Narcissa and Bella would have left Hogwarts a few years previously.

------------

Ignatius Prewitt cannot be Molly's father tho' - if he was than Sirius and Molly would be 'cousins' not 'cousins by marriage', since Ignatius' wife Lucretia would have been the sister of Sirius' father Orion - I'd say then that Ignatius is Molly's uncle.

I must say that I'm a bit disappointed - no BIG hidden secret behind the blur that I can see

whizbang121

February 21st, 2006, 6:34 am

Wonder if anyone was able to get a photo of it.

silver ink pot

February 21st, 2006, 6:51 am

That would seem then to imply that Sirius must have been speaking about once they were out of school - which doesn't make sense with his comment about not having seen Bella after he was either 15 or a 5th year (Harry's age in bk5/OotP).
Don't you think that's because Bella got married to Lestrange, and she and Sirius just didn't see eachother anymore? Bella would have been 24-25 at that time, since she is ten years older. So I think it makes perfect sense - Sirius means that he didn't see her around at family gatherings anymore. People have just always assumed that he meant school, but there's no actual canon except that ridiculous (and false) remark about the "gang of Slytherins."

ProfLupin

February 21st, 2006, 7:24 am

Name etymologies.

Isla: feminine of Islay; From the name of the island Islay, which lies off of the west coast of Scotland.

Hester: medieval form of Esther; Possibly means "star" in Persian. Alternatively it could be a Hebrew form of ISHTAR, the name of a Persian goddess. The Book of Esther in the Old Testament tells of Queen Esther, the Jewish wife of the king of Persia, who saves many Jews from persecution.

Cygnus: Swan or the Northern Cross; This was interesting: Star fields along the northern summer Milky Way along the Northern Cross in the constellation Cygnus. The bright stars show their natural colors. A wider view of this region is here. Closer views are available of the North American and Pelican nebulae, the Butterfly nebula, the Veil nebula, and the Coathanger asterism.

Melania: form of Melanie; Derived from Greek μελαινα (melaina) meaning "black, dark". This was the name of a Roman saint who gave all her wealth to charity in the 5th century.

Lycoris: plant species {spider lilies}; In many of the languages and local dialects of China, Lycoris species have common names that translate as "stone garlic", referring to their onion-like bulbs which are, however, quite inedible. All species are poisonous, containing the alkaloid lycorine: L. radiata is called chung kwai fa in Cantonese, implying the grim jest that anyone who eats it in mistake for garlic will fall prey to Chung Kwai, who captures ghosts.

Pollux: Roman form of Greek Πολυδευκης (Polydeukes), which means "very sweet" from Greek πολυς (polys) "much" and δευκης (deukes) "sweet". In mythology he was the twin brother of Castor and a son of Zeus. The constellation Gemini, which represents the two brothers, contains a star by this name. {I wonder if Honeydukes ties in somewhere}.

Irma: Short form of names beginning with the Germanic element irmen, which means "whole, universal".

Cassiopeia: Latinized form of Greek Κασσιοπεια (Kassiopeia) or Κασσιεπεια (Kassiepeia), possibly meaning "cassia juice". In Greek myth Cassiopeia was the wife of Cepheus and the mother of Andromeda. She was changed into a constellation and placed in the northern sky after she died. The constellation: Cassiopeia, the Queen, is visible in the Northern Hemisphere all year long. Cassiopeia is known as the Celestial W when below the pole and the Celestia M when above it. Cassiopeia is bound to her chair and forever circles the pole with her head downward. A fitting punishment by the Nereids (Sea Nymphys) for her boast of being more beautiful than all the Nereids. Cassiopeia was the wife of Cepheus and mother of Andromeda.

Marius: Roman family name which was derived either from MARS, the name of the Roman god of War, or else from the Latin root mas, maris meaning "male".

Cedrella: I think this may be the combining of two names---Cedric & Cinderella---so here is the etymology of both names:
Cedric: Invented by Sir Walter Scott for a character in his novel 'Ivanhoe'. Apparently he based it on the actual name Cerdic, of unknown meaning, the name of the legendary founder of the kingdom of Wessex. Cedric is also sometimes said to mean "bounty spectacle" from the Welsh name Cedrych, or "lord of wars" in Old English, but these theories are not likely true.
Cinderella: From the French name Cendrillon which means "little ashes". This is best known as the main character in the fairy tale 'Cinderella'.

Lucretia: Feminine form of the Roman family name Lucretius, which is of unknown meaning. In Roman legend Lucretia was a maiden who was raped by the son of the king of Rome. This caused a great uproar among the Roman citizens, and the monarchy was overthrown. This name was also borne by a saint and martyr from Spain. Housed at Palau de la Llotja, Barcelona, Spain, 'Dying Lucretia' or 'Lucrecia moribunda' dates from 1804, though it was 30 years later that the artist translated it into marble. According to legend, St. Lucretia of Mérida was converted from Islam to Christianity and subsequently persecuted by the Moors, until finally being martyred in 859.

Ignatius: From the Roman family name Egnatius, which was possibly derived from Latin ignis "fire". This was the name of several early saints, including the third bishop of Antioch who was thrown to wild beasts by emperor Trajan, and by Saint Ignatius Loyola, founder of the Jesuits.

Orion: Meaning unknown, but possibly related to Greek ‘οριον (horion) "boundary, limit" or ουρον (ouron) "urine". This is the name of a constellation, which gets its name from a legendary Greek hunter killed by a scorpion sent by Artemis.

The constellation is perhaps second only to the Big Dipper in Ursa Major; the constellation of Orion is one of the most recognizable patterns of stars in the northern sky. Orion, the hunter, stands by the river Eridanus and is accompanied by his faithful dogs, Canis Major and Canis Minor. Together they hunt various celestial animals, including Lepus, the rabbit, and Taurus, the bull. According to Greek mythology, Orion was in love with Merope, one of the Seven Sisters who form the Pleiades, but Merope would have nothing to do with him. Orion's tragic life ended when he stepped on Scorpius, the scorpion. The gods felt sorry for him, so they put him and his dogs in the sky as constellations. They also put all of the animals he hunted up there near him. Scorpius, however, was placed on the opposite side of the sky so Orion would never be hurt by it again.

To add info for Merope: a star in the Constellation Pleiades. This is the seventh of the sisters. She alone, married a mortal man and she repents of it, Sisyphus, and hid her face in shame at being the only one not married to a god and from shame at the deed, she alone of the sisters hides herself in the sky (there is some dispute over whether it is Merope or Electra that hides herself, i.e. the star does not shine). Her husband, Sisyphus, son of Æolus, grandson of Deucalion (the Greek Noah), and great-grandson of Prometheus. Sisyphus founded the city of Ephyre (Corinth) and later revealed Zeus's rape of Ægina to her father Asopus (a river), for which Zeus condemned him to roll a huge stone up a hill in Hades, only to have it roll back down each time the task was nearly done.

*Yipes, my parents are going to ground me, must go, school tomorrow!

ComicBookWorm

February 21st, 2006, 7:27 am

We are talking about the cousins of one's parents, aren't we? I don't even remember all the names of my parents' cousins (and yet, they are not that many).
I was very close to my first cousins once removed. They were my playmates. Besides Draco is Sirius's first cousin once removed and he was mentioned.

Ok, I just got something off the tapestry. Regulus was 18 when he bit the dust, so if we were to assume he was RAB, he was definitely of age, so his accomplice had to be underage or Kreacher (as many of us have assumed).

Albireo

February 21st, 2006, 7:47 am

I've completed the tree. You can see it at http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/12/Black_family_tree.jpg

ComicBookWorm

February 21st, 2006, 7:49 am

The Lexicon has a copy of it up now.

whizbang121

February 21st, 2006, 7:55 am

Nice work, ProfLupin. Lots of references to death, and one to a lily, though a poisonous one.

Sirius is the Grim (reaper?) the harbinger of death. Is the scion of the Black family somehow connected to death itself, and will Harry inherit that too? I still wonder if part of the reason Harry survived the death curse has something to do with Sirius being his godfather.

I've completed the tree. You can see it at http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/12/Black_family_tree.jpg

Everyone's working hard at it.

Definitely need more room to work in. Blacks don't have short first names. :lol:

ComicBookWorm

February 21st, 2006, 7:58 am

To add info for Merope: a star in the Constellation Pleiades. This is the seventh of the sisters. She alone, married a mortal man and she repents of it,This is my favorite line from the excellent analysis.

LadyofthePensieve

February 21st, 2006, 8:06 am

How could Severus Snape belong to the gang of Slytherins (in Hogwarts) which included Bellatrix Black (born in 1951!!) when he is around 8 (born in 1959 or 1960) years younger than her?
In Gof chapter 27 Sirius made this statement.
There is something fishy with Sirius`conclusion.

dobby_rocks

February 21st, 2006, 8:30 am

I didn’t figure there would be anything big, if it was I doubt Jo would have revealed it the public till after book 7

As far as the Snape/Bella thing, maybe Jo just made a mistake.

Alex_Loony

February 21st, 2006, 8:34 am

The Black's house is so interesting. But i think Sirius need teach Kreacher more carefully if he dont want to be dieeee!
But unfortunatelly, he died.
Oh my God!

hwyla

February 21st, 2006, 8:35 am

Don't you think that's because Bella got married to Lestrange, and she and Sirius just didn't see eachother anymore? Bella would have been 24-25 at that time, since she is ten years older. So I think it makes perfect sense - Sirius means that he didn't see her around at family gatherings anymore. People have just always assumed that he meant school, but there's no actual canon except that ridiculous (and false) remark about the "gang of Slytherins."No - I actually think it's because that was the year he left his family. If he ran away from his parents (because they were 'dark'), why would he keep up contact with Bella? He never sees her again because he never goes to see his family again.

One thing I find interesting is that #12 could NEVER have actually belonged to EITHER of Sirius' parents. They must have lived there with Sirius' grandfather (no idea what to make of the 'mother's house' comment) since BOTH grandfathers outlived BOTH of Sirius' parents. Very interesting that the house would probably only have sat empty for 4 years not the 10 we thought before.

About the 'mother's house' comment. Perhaps #12 was originally Elladora's home (the elf-heads)? She apparently didn't marry, so it was left to nephew Cygnus??? That's about the only way I see it coming down Sirius' maternal Black line. But it's strange, since Cygnus was the youngest

LadyofthePensieve

February 21st, 2006, 8:38 am

dobby_rocks

February 21st, 2006, 8:51 am

Hi Dobby-Rocks,

I´m sure that JKR didn´t make a mistake. She worked out every single character years before the first book was became released.

And she knows everybody of her story.
.

That is true, yet she has said she has made mistakes with numbers before, like the Weaslys brothers that she isnt good with math, i'm not bashing i'm not good at math either.

that is intresting about Siruis grandfathers, both out lived his parents you think one of them would have lived at #12, the house was pretty dirty, but i guess even after 4 years it would be dirty. Perhaps Siruis parents were given that house and his grandparents lived else where

Albireo

February 21st, 2006, 10:47 am

The Lexicon has a copy of it up now.

well.. not exactly. they just added names to my previous drawing :p . You can clearly see the different layouts looking at the dates.

Ashkins

February 21st, 2006, 12:58 pm

silver ink pot

February 21st, 2006, 1:35 pm

Bravo, Prof. Lupin! :clap: That was alot of research! :tu: And I hope you don't get grounded for staying up late!

Orion: Meaning unknown, but possibly related to Greek ‘οριον (horion) "boundary, limit" or ουρον (ouron) "urine". This is the name of a constellation, which gets its name from a legendary Greek hunter killed by a scorpion sent by Artemis.

The constellation is perhaps second only to the Big Dipper in Ursa Major; the constellation of Orion is one of the most recognizable patterns of stars in the northern sky. Orion, the hunter, stands by the river Eridanus and is accompanied by his faithful dogs, Canis Major and Canis Minor. Together they hunt various celestial animals, including Lepus, the rabbit, and Taurus, the bull. According to Greek mythology, Orion was in love with Merope, one of the Seven Sisters who form the Pleiades, but Merope would have nothing to do with him. Orion's tragic life ended when he stepped on Scorpius, the scorpion. The gods felt sorry for him, so they put him and his dogs in the sky as constellations. They also put all of the animals he hunted up there near him. Scorpius, however, was placed on the opposite side of the sky so Orion would never be hurt by it again.
Wow - that's really something! But I've never read about Orion being in love with Merope before - fascinating.

It's interesting that Orion is the hunter, and Sirius is supposed to be like his hunting dog. We think that Sirius was vastly different from his parents, but maybe not.
Lycoris: plant species {spider lilies}; In many of the languages and local dialects of China, Lycoris species have common names that translate as "stone garlic", referring to their onion-like bulbs which are, however, quite inedible. All species are poisonous, containing the alkaloid lycorine: L. radiata is called chung kwai fa in Cantonese, implying the grim jest that anyone who eats it in mistake for garlic will fall prey to Chung Kwai, who captures ghosts.
:) That reminds me of Luna's "gurdy root" that looks like a big smelly onion.
How could Severus Snape belong to the gang of Slytherins (in Hogwarts) which included Bellatrix Black (born in 1951!!) when he is around 8 (born in 1959 or 1960) years younger than her?
In Gof chapter 27 Sirius made this statement.
There is something fishy with Sirius`conclusion.
There surely is! :agree: Sirius is just inaccurate, or he doesn't know what he is talking about. When he says all that, he is in the cave near Hogwarts looking at the shadows on the wall, and trying to interpret everything - a scene right out of Plato: he sees the "shadows" of reality, but not the truth. He makes wrong comments about Snape (never a DE but in a "gang" of DEs),Mr. Crouch, Karkaroff (thought he was the "reason" Moody was at Hogwarts), and Bertha Jorkins (too stupid to be in the Ministry, meanwhile she figured out Mr. Crouch's deception when everyone else missed it). So I don't think Sirius is a reliable narrator in that scene.

Hmmmmm - the fact that Pollux Black and Arcturus Black both died in the early 1990s is interesting. I wonder if either of the grandmothers are still alive. I'm very intrigued about Irma Crabbe, just because she has the same name as Irma Pince - why two Irma's who might be close in age? :huh:

Sinistra

February 21st, 2006, 2:48 pm

Callidora (Black) Longbottom (1915-present?)
Daughter of Arcturus and Lysandra Black.
Two siblings: sister Charis and Cedrella (disowned for her marriage to a Weasley) (BFT).
Married to Harfang Longbottom (BFT).
Children: One son and one daughter (BFT).
Name origins: Callidora is a parasite that preys on moths and butterflies. Greek for "gift of beauty."

Could this be Neville's grandmother? The age is right, one son is right, and she is still living. Also her uncompromising character and upright bearing are very "Black"-like.
This would make Sirius and Neville third cousins. (I think).

Alonna

February 21st, 2006, 3:06 pm

Serpentine

February 21st, 2006, 3:06 pm

I don't think that Callidora could be Neville's grandmother, as far as I recall her name is Augusta. But she may well know Callidora. Maybe Harfang was Augusta's brother? (Wasn't Harfang mentioned somewhere in the books too? Somehow that name seems familiar...)

Irma Crabbe / Irma Pince is interesting too... hmm, both very "crabby" names. :huh: And the mere fact that the Potters (James' parents apparently?) haven't been blasted off... wonder how Harry could have overlooked them, never asking about or even mentioning them in spite of their being on the tapestry? Bellatrix and Draco were in the same area of the tapestry, I'd think it'd be hard to overlook the name Potter while looking around thereabouts.

Septimus Weasley is also highly intriguing, what with the Roman emperor Septimus Severus whose story brought up by Inkwolf matches Snape's so nicely. Dumbledore too seems interesting in that regard, his hair used to be auburn and he seems to share the Weasley obsession with odd watches... :huh: I wonder whether the Weasleys have a family tree that may shed more light on things, or if Harry will take a closer look at the "Wizarding Genealogy" in 12 Grimmauld Place while looking for the locket. He really should! :agree:

hwyla

February 21st, 2006, 3:14 pm

I have to say I was a bit concerned at first at the ages some of the family has been when they had children, then I looked at the years very well. In the late 1800s and early 1900s it was common to get married and have children very early because of the spread of disease. Although wizards don't get affected by muggle diseases there are wizard ailments that I am sure were going around at the same time.If the 13 year old fathers had been in that time period, then I would not find it unusual. But they aren't. One has a child in 1925 and the other in 1951.

I've never heard of marrying young because of the fear of an epidemic, but it wasn't unheard of in rural areas. In America - think of Jerry Lee Lewis (singer, musician) who shocked the general public in the '50s by marrying his 13-year old cousin. VERY rare and probably shocking - certainly in the '50s I would think. However - that may be more for 1950s America than England. Hopefully some nice British poster will tell us what the affect there would have been.

Additionally, back when it wasn't unusual for a 13 year-old to be wed, it was also something that was more likely to happen with 'girls' not boys. Mostly, because 'girls' supposedly didn't need to learn anything more after about that age, but boys would need to have finished their apprenticeships and begun earning money. A boy from a rich family (like the Blacks) might would not have had to wait.

However, in this case, Pollux (at least) should not have been 'pushed' to marry young and have children, as he had 2 older male cousins, a grandfather and great uncle - all capable of continuing the name. It IS interesting that he becomes a father in the same year Phineas dies (1925) - but since he's not in the line-up of elder males, it seems an unlikely reason to marry Pollux off - unless his own father Cygnus (the youngest son in his generation) suddenly feels mortal and in need of seeing his own line continued in a hurry?

OR Phineas had an illness that took a while to kill him and he promised that whichever grandson had the first male child would be the one to inherit #12? Thereby jumping ahead of the 'usual' Black inheritance line.

So, Pollux tried to beat out the others by marrying young - but had a daughter instead? If so, then it doesn't make sense that he didn't try again immediately - unless Alphard was born before Orion - in which case then #12 DID go to Pollux???

Mundungus Fletc

February 21st, 2006, 3:17 pm

The age of consent to marriage in Britain has been sixteen since 1885. Since I regard it as highly unlikely JKR is referring to children born out of wedlock I think we have to assume her sums are wrong (and not for the first time)

Lincendiere

February 21st, 2006, 3:21 pm

just a funny quote (I really like it) :

extract of the LITANY IN HONOUR OF
SAINT WALBURGA :

"St. Walburga, lily of purity,
Pray for us. "

hwyla

February 21st, 2006, 3:22 pm

Callidora is not the same as Neville's grandmother because we already know that Neville's grandmother is named Augusta as it is mentioned in HBP. Callidora is more likely to be the wife of Great Uncle Algie who gave Trevor to Neville.Since her huisband's name on the tree is Harfang, I doubt it. Considering her generation's relationship to Draco (that's the line for Great-Grandparents), it seems that IF Callidora and Harfang lead to Neville, then it's because their son married Augusta.

Have we ever been told explictly that Great Uncle Algie's last name was Longbottom? IF not then perhaps he's Augusta's brother? (who then would not show up here)

Sinistra

February 21st, 2006, 3:58 pm

My bad, I forgot we had Augusta's name. (Insert D'oh! smiley here)

Callista could be Augusta's sister-in-law. But that would be a relationship by marriage only. Callista being Neville's great-grandmother is also possible, but Augusta seemed to fit being born in 1915.

crazy_megan

February 21st, 2006, 4:06 pm

This might have been covered, I only skimmed this thread a bit...

But is it possible that these were arranged marriages? Hence the reason why the ages are so young when they have kids? Perhaps overbearing parents wanting to continue the family tree and force the children into proper pureblood marriages?

It would make sense, given that the Blacks and other traditional purebloods are very aristocratic and bent on traditions. Arranged marriages often occured in such families and I can only imagine that in a more sheltered area like the wizarding world it would be easier to get away with arranged marriages, even if it was no longer accepted by the vast majority of society.

Rell

February 21st, 2006, 4:27 pm

crazy_megan: That's a very good point. The Blacks would do this to preserve their family, and to forge alliances with other pureblood families.

silver ink pot

February 21st, 2006, 4:37 pm

crazy megan: I think you have a good point there! :agree:

JKR has never said it, and it isn't in the canon, but if a family's goal is to ensure a "Pureblood" marriage, then certainly they would be looking around from the day their children were born.

It's a parallel to Jane Austen, too - one of JKR's favorite writers. In Pride and Prejudice, Lady Catherine de Berg comes to visit Elizabeth Bennet just on the hint that her nephew might be considering a marriage "beneath him." She tells Elizabeth that her own daughter is "destined" to marry Mr. Darcy, and that she and his mother planned it all while they were "in their cradles."

Pride and Prejudice, Chapter 56

http://www.bartleby.com/303/2/56.html

‘This is not to be borne. Miss Bennet, I insist on being satisfied. Has he, has my nephew, made you an offer of marriage?’
‘Your Ladyship has declared it to be impossible.’
‘It ought to be so; it must be so while he retains the use of his reason. But your arts and allurements may, in a moment of infatuation, have made him forget what he owes to himself and to all his family. You may have drawn him in.’
‘If I have I shall be the last person to confess it.’
‘Miss Bennet, do you know who I am? I have not been accustomed to such language as this. I am almost the nearest relation he has in the world, and am entitled to know all his dearest concerns.’
‘But you are not entitled to know mine; nor will such behaviour as this ever induce me to be explicit.’
‘Let me be rightly understood. This match, to which you have the presumption to aspire, can never take place. No, never. Mr. Darcy is engaged to my daughter. Now, what have you to say?’
‘Only this,—that if he is so, you can have no reason to suppose he will make an offer to me.’
Lady Catherine hesitated for a moment, and then replied,—
‘The engagement between them is of a peculiar kind. From their infancy, they have been intended for each other. It was the favourite wish of his mother, as well as of hers. While in their cradles we planned the union; and now, at the moment when the wishes of both sisters would be accomplished, in their marriage, to be prevented by a young woman of inferior birth, of no importance in the world, and wholly unallied to the family! Do you pay no regard to the wishes of his friends? To his tacit engagement with Miss De Bourgh? Are you lost to every feeling of propriety and delicacy? Have you not heard me say that from his earliest hours he was destined for his cousin?’
‘Yes; and I had heard it before. But what is that to me? If there is no other objection to my marrying your nephew, I shall certainly not be kept from it by knowing that his mother and aunt wished him to marry Miss De Bourgh. You both did as much as you could in planning the marriage. Its completion depended on others. If Mr. Darcy is neither by honour nor inclination confined to his cousin, why is not he to make another choice? And if I am that choice, why may not I accept him?’
‘Because honour, decorum, prudence, nay interest, forbid it. Yes, Miss Bennet, interest; for do not expect to be noticed by his family or friends, if you wilfully act against the inclinations of all. You will be censured, slighted, and despised by every one connected with him. Your alliance will be a disgrace; your name will never even be mentioned by any of us.’
‘These are heavy misfortunes,’ replied Elizabeth. ‘But the wife of Mr. Darcy must have such extraordinary sources of happiness necessarily attached to her situation, that she could, upon the whole, have no cause to repine.’ 46
‘Obstinate, headstrong girl! I am ashamed of you! Is this your gratitude for my attentions to you last spring? Is nothing due to me on that score? Let us sit down. You are to understand, Miss Bennet, that I came here with the determined resolution of carrying my purpose; nor will I be dissuaded from it. I have not been used to submit to any person’s whims. I have not been in the habit of brooking disappointment.’
‘That will make your Ladyship’s situation at present more pitiable; but it will have no effect on me.’
‘I will not be interrupted! Hear me in silence. My daughter and my nephew are formed for each other. They are descended, on the maternal side, from the same noble line; and, on the father’s, from respectable, honourable, and ancient, though untitled, families. Their fortune on both sides is splendid. They are destined for each other by the voice of every member of their respective houses; and what is to divide them?—the upstart pretensions of a young woman without family, connections, or fortune! Is this to be endured? But it must not, shall not be! If you were sensible of your own good, you would not wish to quit the sphere in which you have been brought up.’
‘In marrying your nephew, I should not consider myself as quitting that sphere. He is a gentleman; I a gentleman’s daughter; so far we are equal.’
‘True. You are a gentleman’s daughter. But what was your mother? Who are your uncles and aunts? Do not imagine me ignorant of their condition.’
‘Whatever my connection may be,’ said Elizabeth, ‘if your nephew does not object to them, they can be nothing to you.’
‘Tell me, once for all, are you engaged to him?’
Though Elizabeth would not, for the mere purpose of obliging Lady Catherine, have answered this question, she could not but say, after a moment’s deliberation,—
‘I am not.’
Lady Catherine seemed pleased.
‘And will you promise me never to enter into such an engagement?’ ‘I will make no promise of the kind.’
‘Miss Bennet, I am shocked and astonished. I expected to find a more reasonable young woman. But do not deceive yourself into a belief that I will ever recede. I shall not go away till you have given me the assurance I require.’
‘And I certainly never shall give it. I am not be to intimidated into anything so wholly unreasonable. Your Ladyship wants Mr. Darcy to marry your daughter; but would my giving you the wished-for promise make their marriage at all more probable? Supposing him to be attached to me, would my refusing to accept his hand make him wish to bestow it on his cousin? Allow me to say, Lady Catherine, that the arguments with which you have supported this extraordinary application have been as frivolous as the application was ill-judged. You have widely mistaken my character, if you think I can be worked on by such persuasions as these. How far your nephew might approve of your interference in his affairs, I cannot tell; but you have certainly no right to concern yourself in mine. I must beg, therefore, to be importuned no further on the subject.’
‘Not so hasty, if you please. I have by no means done. To all the objections I have already urged I have still another to add. I am no stranger to the particulars of your youngest sister’s infamous elopement. I know it all; that the young man’s marrying her was a patched-up business, at the expense of your father and uncle. And is such a girl to be my nephew’s sister? Is her husband, who is the son of his late father’s steward, to be his brother? Heaven and earth!—of what are you thinking? Are the shades of Pemberley to be thus polluted?’
‘You can now have nothing further to say,’ she resentfully answered. ‘You have insulted me in every possible method. I must beg to return to the house.’
And she rose as she spoke. Lady Catherine rose also, and they turned back. Her Ladyship was highly incensed.
‘You have no regard, then, for the honour and credit of my nephew! Unfeeling, selfish girl! Do you not consider that a connection with you must disgrace him in the eyes of everybody?’
‘Lady Catherine, I have nothing further to say. You know my sentiments.’ 65
‘You are then resolved to have him?
‘I have said no such thing. I am only resolved to act in that manner which will, in my own opinion, constitute my happiness, without reference to you, or to any person so wholly unconnected with me.’
‘It is well. You refuse, then, to oblige me. You refuse to obey the claims of duty, honour, and gratitude. You are determined to ruin him in the opinion of all his friends, and make him the contempt of the world.’
‘Neither duty, nor honour, nor gratitude,’ replied Elizabeth, ‘has any possible claim on me, in the present instance. No principle of either would be violated by my marriage with Mr. Darcy. And with regard to the resentment of his family, or the indignation of the world, if the former were excited by his marrying me, it would not give me one moment’s concern—and the world in general would have too much sense to join in the scorn.’

kingwidgit

February 21st, 2006, 4:42 pm

The Gypsies of Romania continue to practice 'Child Bride' marriages...girls/boys as young as 12 marry. My aunt is a Gypsy from Romania, she married my uncle at 14---though it was years before she revealed her actual age {her 48th birthday to be exact...actually her 44th}, he thought her 18 when he married her.

Also, if the marriage is arranged by parents, does age of consent '16' matter? In America, despite age of consent 'normally 18', parents can sign for their children to marry at any age...and this is in spite of many laws which place age of consent for sex at 16 {and 18 in other states, such as Oregon}. Teen sex is literally outlawed, though obviously not prevented. Boys/men who impregnate girlfriends and wives under the age of 18 can be---and are---prosecuted and face up to 3 years in prison for the crime.

While I find it a bit odd that JK has introduced these young marriages, especially when she's left teen sex out of the books, I don't really find it terribly disturbing.

It really appears to be a maths problem, as Mundungus pointed out.

Rell

February 21st, 2006, 4:45 pm

While I find it a bit odd that JK has introduced these young marriages, especially when she's left teen sex out of the books, I don't really find it terribly disturbing.
During the middle ages, a child might get married and not even live in the same house as her husband for several years. The marriage was really for political purposes.

hwyla

February 21st, 2006, 5:06 pm

I do have a problem with the idea that Pollux had a kid at 13 because he was married off to have kids young. First - Pollux's father is a youngest son. So, Pollux is not really in the 'heir' line-up of the Black's (only his own father's heir). Additionally, there wasn't any danger at the time that the line would 'die' out. Pollux has two older cousins (who ARE in the 'heir' line-up since they are sons of the eldest son of Phineas) and his own father and Uncle are still easily capable of having more children.

All that said - Pollux's generation DID have children EARLY for some reason. Not only does Pollux have a child at 13, but his elder cousin Arcturus has a child at 14. WHAT was happening in the wizarding world that might be a reason for this??? I really don't think it's about heirs, since neither of them had a son, yet there isn't yet an indication that they rushed to have more children hoping for sons. There IS a possibility that Pollux did rush - since we don't know when Alphard was born. But it's also possible that he wasn't born for years later.

I think it's possible that it was over inheriting #12 IF Phineas planned to NOT leave the house to follow the line-up (much like Sirius did). He COULD have made a will that left #12 to the first of his grandsons to have a son. But Arcturus had his first child 10 years before Phineas' death (at a relatively young mid-70s). In fact only 3 years after Pollux was born.

SO - unless Phineas changed his will specifically because of Pollux's birth, then it makes little sense that Arcturus had a child so young in response to a changed will. Besides, since he was 11 years older than Pollux, why have a kid at 14 himself, just because of inheritance? He could easily have waited until 18 or even 20 and Pollux would have still been too young to 'compete'.

WHY suddenly young fathers? Their own fathers were approx 23 and 24 when they had their first kids and Phineas' first child wasn't born until he was 30.

One thing that IS surprising I think is that at least Pollux was having his first kid while Phineas was apparently headmaster (possibly the same for Arcturus, but since we don't know how long Phineas was headmaster, we don't know)

I will say that nothing in canon so far has given us a reason for such young parenthoods.