I wouldn't mind seeing more 'companion' books, like the two Rowling did for Comic Relief a couple of years ago. She could possibly create a proper timeline for all the major (and some of the minor) events that occur, or are mentioned, in the Harry Potter reality.

 

Part of that is the difficulty of discussing such things in a children's book, which is how the Harry Potter novels started. Most people don't talk about really nasty things like torture, murder and/or rape with children.

I've assumed that Voldie had his minions to do things for him (hence the nature of minions), and that as such, the DE combined body count was significantly higher than the number killed specifically by Voldie himself. And Voldie was definitely willing to kill with direct action (see the Riddle family or the Potters).

What I really want to know is what else they were doing. What did they do that enabled 'I was under Imperius' to be a viable defense - other than Malfoy handing over a pile of gold. HOw many DE's didn't have the piles of gold and/or secrets to prevent themselves from being thrown into Azkaban or Kissed? How many other alleged Dark supporters or sympathizers were sent off or killed without trials? (hey, if it could happen to Sirius, why assume it couldn't happen to anyone else?) Is this the explanation (or part of it) for the restrictive dark creature laws? Did they get people to give them info on the muggle-borns? Where warded houses were, and how to get inside? Imperio someone into breaking the defenses?

.... and if the DE's and Voldie were claiming they wanted to build a new world, a better world filled with pure-bloods, then why didn't they go out and have families, or bigger families? Other than the Weasley's, we just don't see many magical families with more than one or two children. Shouldn't he have ordered his pure-blooded (or close enough) minions to go forth and spawn mightily that the next generation would be pure-bloods, and therefore 'better'?

 

Actually I'd like to point out that people who believe themselves higher don't always abstain from raping 'lower' beings.

History gives us many examples, from slaveowners raping/impregnating slaves, soldiers raping female captives [religous wars, political wars, race wars, etc.], among others.

I can see why a female pureblood would not 'taint' himself by having sex with a male muggle/half-blood, but males don't neccesarily think this way, due to the nature of their sex organs.

I once read an article that talked about people's reactions to sex and how it differed between the genders. Due to the outward nature of the penis (Immature Readers Laugh), male psychology doesn't regard it as something that can be tainted, something that is boldened by the fact that ejaculation comes out. Rapists often think of it as a weapon. Females tend to emphasize this issue of being 'tainted' due to the recieving nature of their sex organ. You can 'receive' the taint in this way.

Indeed, the fact that Andromeda Black married a muggle seemed to create a shitstorm, although we haven't been given much evidence of a pureblooded male getting together with a nonPureblood female with the exception of James and Lily and Bill and Fleur. Those unions seem to have ceated much less disgust/anger than that of Andromeda and Ted.

Therefore, you can justify the fanon act of Pureblooded Males raping female muggles.

[Thanks to the-Caitiff for pointing out James + Lily)

 

James Potter and Lily Evans, everyone spoke well of them. With the exception of the extreme DE point of view I don't think anyone in canon has given Harry crap over being a half blood. It seems that he almost maintains the pureblood prestige (although some of that is likely due to the whole BWL nonsense.), except in the eyes of the Dursleys and Volde's top minions.

 

While this would be true think about the fact that that would quickly lead to one marrying into your own family, such as a 2nd Cousin, or your Uncle's son. Incest in today's world is considered 'sick' by most of the world, which I would imagine would include voldie and the DE's.

 

While one could argue how severe the incest taboo would be among pure-bloods and just what would be considered incest - I took an anthropology class and it's amazing just how much the sexual taboos of who you should or shouldn't marry/reproduce with. Ancient Egyptian pharoah's married their sisters, aunts or daughters - because a true royal male could only be born from a woman of the royal house. THey also had large harems of Egyptian concubines and lesser wives from other nations that were married as part of treaty negotiations. Some cultures consider the good thing to do for the family/village to be marrying your cousin - it keeps the family line 'strong' and keeps the inheritance within the family. Normally those are 'cross-cousin marriages' - where, for example (let's use the Weasley's because there's a lot of them), Bill's son should marry Charlie's daughter because that will keep the family line strong. Or at least some of the children should do that - eventually the count of cousins of the appropriate gender will run out, and then you have to marry outside the family.

While most places in America outlaw marriage between first cousins, I think there are some states that allow you to marry your second cousin (ick, but apparently legal...) So Ginny's child could marry Bill's grand-child legally in some places. Or if Molly or Arthur had any siblings who became parents...

um, sorry for rambling like that. The point was that the concept of illegally related for marriages differs from place/culture to the next, and we aren't sure what the official pure-blood verict is on how close is too close when you refer to your relatives.

Still, some of them were already married, they wouldn't need to find a suitably pure-blood and not-too-related wife. Lucius Malfoy had his suitably pure-blood wife, why didn't he try for a few more pure-blood heirs (with options of having them serve Voldie if he came back)?


For that matter, why is Nymphadora Tonks an only child? Were there more Diggorys than Cedric? How about more quidditch-mad Woods? Are there other Flitwick's or MacGonnagals out there? Dumbledores other than Albus and Aberforth (both presumably much to old for recent children, but cousins, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, neices/nephews...)

And as mentioned before, are there any other magical Potters? If so, where are they? And if not, what happened?

 

Actually, the idea that marrying your own cousin is bad is an extremely new one. In addition, less than half of all states prohibit first cousin marriage.


Fact: 26 states allow first cousin marriages; Most people can marry their cousin in the US.
Fact: US prohibitions against cousin marriages predate modern genetics. Hmmm.

Fact: The genetic arguement against first cousin marriage is a weak one - children of non-related couples have a 2-3% risk of birth defects, as opposed to first cousins having a 4-6% risk.

Fact: It is estimated that 20 percent of all couples worldwide are first cousins. It is also estimated that 80 percent of all marriages historically have been between first cousins!

Fact: There is no religious basis for not marrying your cousin either. Leviticus 18 lists all forbidden sexual relationships. Cousin relationships are not included. In fact, God commanded many cousins to marry, including Zelophehad's 5 daughters, Eleazar's daughters, Jacob (who married both Rachel and Leah, first cousins), and Isaac and Rebekkah (first cousins once removed). All were ancestors of Jesus Christ.

Fact: And finally, several admired/notable figures in history have married their own cousin, including FDR, Einstein, and...suprise suprise Charles Darwin.

Using this information, we can conclude that the taboo against marrying cousins originated during the Cold War period, after World War II.

Seeing as the Wizarding World is vastly behind the muggle world in philosophy, morals, and the like, it isn't that hard to imagine them marrying first cousins.

Another thing: there is nothing in canon that suggests that purebloods are actually marrying their own first cousin. We just get that impression from loud mouth Ron and Science!Hermione, who proclaim them inbred scum. (I don't even think that is canon, though) They probably are marrying third or fourth.

Unless they are marrying their sisters, there is very little to suggest that purebloods are actually suffering from inbreeding depression. (Go look the term up).

My favorite theory regarding the entire situation is that purebloods do, in fact, marry closely (up to first) and prevent any disorders using some kind of charm. It would explain why we haven't see a Special Education Teacher at Hogwarts, or any mention at all of genetic disorders.

That and it's hard for Wizards to reproduce. Would also explain why the population is so low.

 

Yes they do, such as the common cold. Although they did say that someone invented a cure for that.

 

Ever heard the phrase ignorance is bliss? I'd rather be ignorant of the Founders and Grindlewald, so my imagination can make it up for me. Nine times out of 10, the way an author portrays something in a picture or movie is worse than my image of that person. Seriously, how badly was your image of Dumbledore ruined by the movies? Harry? Hermione? To me, Dumbledore will always be a slightly "off" man in his 140s with extremely weird robes.

On the other bit of discussion, purebloods probably aren't squicked by marrying between the families, since birth defects are rare unless you count squibs. Their natural magic probably prevents *most* birth defects. Besides, it's almost a pureblood tradition. As far back as they can remember (and I'm mostly pulling this out of my ass), it's been going on. No one has ever told them that it's wrong.

 

Fact: 80% of all facts are made up.

I don't think 20% of all marriages are first cousins or 80% have been.

I won't claim to be an expert on the subject but I don't personally know any maried first cousins. Unless it's more common in 3rd world countries?

 

I know three first cousin couples, and none of them are stereotypical "southern rednecks". Their kids are fairly normal physically. I even dated a woman whose parents were cousins. It isn't unheard of in the USA, just uncommon and laughed at.

Would I marry my cousin? Probably not although I haven't seen two of my female cousins in a few years. If true love waits for me in a relative, I don't think I'd resist all that much, just enough to be sure.

 

Voldemort: Mentally utterly insane throwing off crucio at the slightest annoyance or mentally sane but having a dark lord image to keep up?

 

Depends if the writer does Voldemort well or not.

 

Is the "Black Family Tree" considered Canon? If so, then the Weasleys are probably the most inbred family in the books, considering we have Molly's familial line (Prewett) and Arthur's familial line (Weasley) being connected to Phineas Nigellus as great grandchildren and grandchildren, respectively, making them first cousins (once removed).

It'd be interesting to see a family tree for all of the major pureblood families (Black, Potter, Weasley, Longbottom, Crouch) going back farther than 5 generations. I'd bet there's a lot more inbreeding than we know about, simply because most of the pureblood families don't seem to have many children. This is a good idea amongst the "darker" families, since it prevents fighting between heirs, but the Weasleys will outlast all of them because of numbers alone.

Of interesting note is that if you assume Charlus Potter is Harry's grandfather, Ignatius Prewett is Ginny's Grandfather, and Septimus Weasley is Ginny's other Grandfather, and the dates match up, then Harry and Ginny are both first cousins and first cousins (once removed).

 

I don't much like the Black Family Tree as given by JKR. What ever happened to wizards living longer than muggles? If the tree is right, the Black Family seems to have a lot of murder or accident victims. They're not even living as long as most muggles.

 

Which is exactly my point. Why bother writing out the reasons behind their prejudices towards muggles/halfbloods when you can say "He raped a muggle. He's baaad!"

James was apparently an only child
Draco is an only child
Neville is an only child
Barty Crouch Jr was an only child

It seems that most if not all of the purebloods had very few children, which makes it very easy to wipe out/be lost due to daughters marrying out.

 

My theory as to why pure bloods have so few children. It's a simple matter of prestige, and power. The only son of a powerful family is much more powerful, than one of five. These pureblood families need a single heir to the family wealth, power and name.

Back to Voldemort. I think the reason he was so feared, in part, wasn't the number of people he killed, but the power of the one's he did. Can't you see a hero of the light having just defeated three death eaters all by himself, standing on a field of victory, only to have Voldemort walk on stage, and kill him as though he was nothing. People's fear of Voldemort stemmed from the knowledg that if he ever came after them, then they wouldn't survive. That's why Harry is The Boy Who Lived. Because Voldemort tried to kill him and failed. Voldemort brought down the mighty, and if you stood in his way he would kill you.

Also, something that hasn't been brought up, is the Dark Mark. It's like coming home to your family and finding police tape blocking your way. Voldemort was very good when it came to terror tactics, he made the wizarding world afraid of everything associated with him, from his name to his mark.