It says that Molly is a prewett and a pureblood. Her brother's were aurors and obviously must of had some money. Wouldn't they have had a Dowry to make Arthur marry Molly, since there laws are so ass backwards. ANd if there are no Prewetts left as Im pretty sure it says could that mean the Weasley's have money, but are not informed of it or dont use it. Thoughts?

 

Who's to say that her brothers were the only other Prewetts. Also, Arthur doesn't strike me as the needs a drowery kind of guy. And I don't know how much Aurors make.

 

*clap clap Jolly good!

 

I don't think it worked.... at least for Molly.

 

I think that she spent it all on baby food. Seriouisly, with that many kids...

 

They spent it all buying love potions for G***y to feed to Harry...

 

Or maybe they got cheated when they decided to hire someone to fix up the Burrow. Or the exorsist that they hired just stole all of their money.

 

Do you even realize how many purely fanon things you're basing this off of?
The idea that if you're pureblood and not a Weasley, you have money. The idea that getting married uses ancient marriage laws. The claims of dowries for buying brides or compensating families. The idea that aurors get paid well. (Do you consider most cops 'rich'?) The idea there are no Prewetts left (We know her brothers Gideon and Fabian died. We don't know anything about that family, just that there's not one in the current Hogwarts generation, though we've not even heard all of those names.) I think it was Apprentices Gentry Green that claimed Molly's sister was Pansy Parkinson's mom. Which is possible for all we know.

Even according to the lexicon, it seems likely that Arthur and Molly eloped.

Might as well be asking why didn't Hedwig turn into a phoenix and save Sirius, Harry's real father.

 

What's your point? I think that its the fact that if a family is a pureblood, then they have been around for a long, long time, and they should have some sort of heirloom or something that they can sell or whatever to get some cash.

 

The Weasleys aren't even Pureblood. JK defines pureblood as a family that has no links to muggles whatsoever. The Weasleys have relation who is a muggle accountant.
Also, nonjon, it's highly likely that aurors get paid well, as it is a highly skilled job.

 

Err... I'm pretty sure the Weasleys are pureblood. Even Draco calls them as such when he claims them a 'disgrace' to pureblood. You can't be 'blood traitors' without having the blood to begin with.

Lexicon's Blood Status lists these known pureblood families:
Black family (now died out with the death of Sirius Black)
Crouch family (now died out with the deaths of Barty Crouch Sr. and Jr.)
Gaunt family
Lestrange family (married into by Bellatrix Black)
Longbottom family (Neville)
Malfoy family (Lucius - Draco)
Weasley family

The Gaunt family, if I recall correctly actually was nearly broke and selling off the family heirlooms. The Longbottoms may or may not be wealthy. I mean Neville was tossed out a window, collects gum wrappers, has a toad for a pet, and got a remembrall. None of these things seem to indicate affluence to me.

Malfoy's are rich and flaunt it. Potters were well-off too. Blacks had a Noble and Ancient House in London. Not necessarily a dozen castles and abbeys around the islands. For all we know, these families could be getting wealthier simply because they're getting smaller. Maybe 3 or 4 branches of Potters were killed off a generation or two ago, bringing all their smaller fortunes together into a respectable one. How many Malfoys are there other than the three we know? How many were there before? It could be anything.

When I think rich, I think the people that don't have to work. The pompous gits who can sit on their arse and have so much money, that doing nothing, their money makes them more money. Crouches, Longbottoms, other families like Bones or Prewetts. These are all working class people. Maybe they're all gajillionaires behind closed doors, but not necessarily.

And yes, aurors are skilled. But think of the aurors in canon. Kingsley, Mad-eye, Tonks, Dawlish. They're cops basically. Maybe closer to some sort of military special forces, but if that's true then who are the cops? None of these people are poor, but they don't seem rich to me. Sure they all could be. Every wizard could be sitting on piles of gold.

But Potters and Malfoys are the only two canons ever had, as far as I know.

 

If pureblood means no ties to muggles what so ever, then there are no purebloods. All the families have had squibs, or someone who went and married some who wasn't pureblood. And when that happens, they get blasted off the family tree.

Aurors are like the SWAT. The department of Magical Law Enforcement has regular guys to be the cops equivilant. It said so in OotP.

 

while aurors may be well pained along with other proffesions dosent make relatives of those people rich. most people who earn a lot of money spend a lot of money living at or increasingly over there means. And being an old family dosent make you rich, careful management and not a lot of people to divide the fortune to makes you rich. I think both of those are something anyone related to Molly wouldn't have.

 

Actually, they are pureblood, the distant relation who is emplyed as a muggle accountant is a squib... Ron told us this... remember?