A Female Relative[]
Per Ironyak's request, I have moved this to the talk page to be decided. I have, twice now, added that Iolanthe must, per J.K. Rowling's own words, have at least one female relative. For their part, Ironyak keeps removing this and claiming that everyone does have a female relative - a mother. Now, I do not deny that this is true, however Ironyak's train of "logic" contradicts J.K. Rowling's words of "Peverell blood would run through many wizarding families" because her mother's blood is not Peverell blood - it's blood of whatever family she comes from before she married into the family. Only Iolanthe's paternal aunts (of which there are none known), sisters, paternal female cousins (possibly Cadmus's child which led into the Gaunt Family) or daughters would classify as "Peverell blood", hence my edition of "At least one female relative" to the page, based on the following logic:
According to Pottermore, Iolanthe inherited the cloak of invisibility due to a "lack of male heirs in her generation." As far as we know, only her father's uncle, Cadmus, fathered at least one child - who would eventually become the precursor to the Gaunt Family - which would imply, as J.K. Rowling confirmed "Peverell blood would run through many wizarding families", that Iolanthe had at least one other female relative - whether this be a sister, aunt, cousin, daughter - to spread the blood of her father - the PEVERELL blood - to a different family.
May I please have your thoughts on this?--ProfessorMcDumbles (talk) 13:48, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Makes sense to me. Maester Martin (talk) 16:20, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
All of Iolanthe's descendants have Peverell blood that can be traced back to Ignotus Peverell, even though many of them would have differing last names. Same goes for all of Cadmus Peverell's descendants. Your note was that Iolanthe has "At least one female relative" , but she (like everyone) has many female relatives (mother, grandmothers on both sides, great-grandmothers, any female children, grand-children, great-grandchildren, etc, etc, etc) Also there are all the female members of the Cadmus branch of the Peverells, which are all related to her in some way through her father. What is the point of noting that she has "At least one female relative" when this is true for everybody? --Ironyak1 (talk) 20:22, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
It wasn't the last name that was the point - her mother's side of the family is not Peverell blood; it's the blood of whatever family she comes from (e.g. Trumpington or Bottomburp as two examples!) For J.K. Rowling's claim of "Peverell blood would run through many wizarding families" to be true (and, given that she wrote the world, it is!), then Iolanthe has to have a female relative on her father's side - or a daughter - for the Peverell blood to have passed on. It can pass on through her father's siblings (if he has any!), any female Peverell cousins (at least one through Cadmus, who would have had a granddaughter) or any sisters or daughters Iolanthe had. Those are the only four options available. That's why I specified in the reference that "female relative" had to mean aunt, sister, daughter and/or second cousin through Cadmus's line! --ProfessorMcDumbles (talk) 20:58, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Ironyak1 is making a point, though. If either one is an option, then either one could have gotten the cloak, and hence, writing that she's "at least one" female relative like you did seems kind of vague. Maybe you could rephrase it?. Maester Martin (talk) 21:09, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Not true - the Pottermore article states that she got the cloak "from her grandfather due to the lack of any male heirs in her generation" and that the cloak was passed to the "eldest child" of each generations, which means that the only female relatives she could have are aunts (through her father), sisters (who would be younger than her) or a cousin through Cadmus (who didn't have a claim to the cloak as it specifically passed from Ignotus, as the article says) and rules out anyone else inheriting the cloak except her. Then, of course, for Peverell blood to spread into other families, she could have also have had a daughter.--ProfessorMcDumbles (talk) 21:13, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Again, Iolanthe has Peverell blood from her father & grandfather, as does all of her descendants. So what? You didn't says she has "At least one female Peverell relative", just "At least one female relative" which is true of everyone. You seem heavily fixated on the fact that her mother was not of Peverell blood - why is this important? Writing by J. K. Rowling: "The Potter Family" at Pottermore does not say she inherited the cloak directly from her grandfather, only that she inherited his cloak (" In the absence of male heirs, she, the eldest of her generation, had inherited her grandfather’s invisibility cloak.") This was possibly from her dad if the Tale of the Three Brothers is to believed that the original owner passed it down to his son. What is the exact point you are trying to make? --Ironyak1 (talk) 21:43, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
The cloak isn't the point - the blood is the point. As J.K. Rowling has confirmed - and I have stated here before - Peverell blood passed into many families. This can only be possible is Iolanthe has either an aunt, sister, cousin or daughter (hence, at least one female relative). So far the only known people with Peverell blood are Cadmus's child, Iolanthe and a child she had. That's not "many families"; that's two - so there has to be a female relation to Iolanthe - whether it be sister, aunt, cousin - who also had Peverell blood to spread it into other families - and, of course, it has to be a girl; Iolanthe only got the cloak because there were no males in her family, as you yourself quoted (ergo, the FEMALE RELATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!). That is why I wrote it in that aprticular term!ProfessorMcDumbles (talk) 22:24, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Cadmus Peverell had many descendants, including the entire House of Gaunt. As such every female Gaunt has Peverell blood and is a female relation of Iolanthe. And? Again, what is the point here? You are arguing the obvious that people who have (great) uncles with children also have varying degrees of cousins, some of which are known to be female. Why is this noteworthy? --Ironyak1 (talk)
- The point I was arguing was that I wanted to put into Iolanthe's infobox - which I stated much earlier on - was that she has to have either an aunt, sister or daughter with Peverell blood (ergo, the "at least one female relative" which I originally added and specified the relations in the infobox and which you removed). The Gaunts did a lot of inbreeding - and the only families we know they're related too are the Riddles and the Stewards, so for J.K. Rowling's words of "Peverell blood would run through many wizarding families" to be true, the rest of the bloodline that spread into "many wizarding families" must come from Iolanthe and/or a female relative (this being a sister, aunt or daughter).--ProfessorMcDumbles (talk) 02:03, August 9, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, I removed it because listing "At least one female relative" is pointless when we already know she has dozens of female relatives (e.g. Gormlaith Gaunt, Lily L. Potter, etc, etc, etc). All her offspring, male and female, have Peverell blood, the same as the descendants of Cadmus. Iolanthe could have had a sister, daughter, an aunt, or younger cousins through Cadmus (either female or younger males of the same generation but born after her father granted her the cloak). There are any number of possibilities, none of which are confirmed, so again, why is this noteworthy? --Ironyak1 (talk) 02:42, August 9, 2019 (UTC)
- Well, first of all, we know that there were no males in her generation at all- a "lack" of males is why she inherited the cloak; that, combined with the fact that Cadmus's children don't have a claim to the cloak - they're not descended from Ignotus - and that the family was one of the "first" to go extinct in the male line implies there's no men left at all by the time Iolanthe has come along. The point is the female relative - whatever that relative may be; aunt, sister, daughter, cousin, etc - notes mentioning as said person is how the female blood enters other families. The Gaunts are so inbred that it can't be that line - so it's either a daughter of Iolanthe, a sister of Iolanthe, or an unknown daughter of Ignotus that passed it on. Ergo, a "female relative" warrants mention in her infobox and/or article. ProfessorMcDumbles (talk) 10:18, August 9, 2019 (UTC)
- It's comparable to putting "unnamed mother" and "unnamed father" in the infobox of a character who's parents have never been seen or mentioned. We know they have to exist but it's not necessary to state the obvious.--Pjayswitch (talk) 14:41, August 9, 2019 (UTC)
Again, you are making some odd claims about how "the female blood enters the line." Cadmus was a Peverell, so all of his descendants, male and female, including the Gaunt family, have some degree of Peverell Blood. So do all of all of Ignotus Peverell's descendants, male and female. There is no need for an aunt, sister or daughter for Iolanthe. If Cadmus and Iolanthe both had 10 generations of sons and grandsons they would all still have Peverell blood, as would all the later female descendants that married into the "many other wizarding families". Whatever notion you have about blood are unconventional and peculiar. --Ironyak1 (talk) 16:29, August 9, 2019 (UTC)