Talk: Muriel

Last Name and possible move?

Ok, do we know that Muriel is a Weasley? She seems to make several snide remarks about the family during her appearance in the Deathly Hallows, so possibly not. Either way, I don't think its shown that she's a Prewett either, like the article suggests.

I propose a move to simply Muriel until confirmation is made. - Cavalier One 07:11, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Where is it mentioned thatYaxley is a nephew of Muriel? --Rodolphus 14:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not. An Anon is speculating, and I'm removing. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 15:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

She's DEFINITELY not a Weasley; she's MOLLY'S aunt, and Molly is a PREWETT by birth. As well as this, Muriel says "You Weasleys" and would say "WE Weasleys" if she was one. HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 00:54, August 20, 2012 (UTC)

To confuse matters, the IMDB page lists her as "Muriel Weasley." LupineMoon (talk) 20:50, February 2, 2019 (UTC)

Blood Status

I added that Muriel is most likely a pure-blood, based on her relation to at least two pureblood families, as well as the fact that she seems slightly prejudiced in that regards. Not Death-Eater-degree prejudiced, but slightly. Upon meeting Hermione, she immediately says, "Oh, is this the Muggle-born?" and then insults her (mind, she does the latter with everyone). She also includes Kendra Dumbledore's Muggle-born status in her tirade against the woman, rather unnecessarily. Her being a pure-blood was never confirmed, though, to my knowledge. Oread 05:26, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

There's no "most likely" about it; she IS a Pureblood; she's the aunt of Molly Weasley and thus must be Pureblood; if one of Muriel's parents was a muggleborn, or halfblood, then she, and in turn Molly, would be halfbloods. Molly is a Pureblood; Muriel is, without a doubt, a Pureblood. HarryPotterRules1 00:07, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

Name

We know for a fact which side of the family she came from because Moody calls her Molly's auntie muriel, so she was definately called Prewett. –K.A.J^{•T•C•E•} 11:43, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

How do we know that she is a Prewett she could have been Molly's mothers sister meaning that we dont know her last name. Me_Potter_Fan ^(Talk) 11:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Good point, that shut me up. –K.A.J^{•T•C•E•} 12:10, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Great Aunt or Aunt?

Is there any possibility that Muriel could be Molly's Great-Aunt? Considering that the difference between their ages is about 60 years, it doesn't seem likely that Muriel is the sister of one of Molly's parents. //Carojen

You could be right. Doesn´t Molly refer to Muriel as great auntie while talking to Fleur in book 6?--Rodolphus 16:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Yup. "Our Great-Auntie Muriel"; HBP, Scholastic ed., ch.29, p.623 Nick O'Demus 17:26, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Muriel is Molly's aunt. Moody refers to Muriel's home as "Molly's Auntie Muriel's" in DH4. I believe that when Molly refers to Muriel as "Our Great Auntie Muriel" in HBP29, she is speaking from the perspective of her children, as it is a British practice to refer to family members as "our [whatever]." ★ Starstuff ^{(Owl me!)} 09:46, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I had heard somewhere that she was Molly's great-great-aunt, this is only what i had heard. --Danniesen June 14 2010 07:13

Well, she's not. She's Molly's auntie, and Molly's children's great auntie. Jayden Matthews 09:39, June 14, 2010 (UTC)

Moody referring to her as Molly's Auntie doesn't necessarily prove a thing. The age difference would likely mean that she is Molly's Great-Aunt, and Ron and etc's Great-Grand Aunt; the children may simply call her great-auntie Muriel because it's easier to say than Great-Grandaunt. If Muriel is approximately 60 years older than Molly, Molly's parents would have been impossibly old to have children if Muriel was a sibling to one of them, even if said sibling was ten years younger than Muriel.Miraitrunks766 16:14, August 3, 2011 (UTC)

People sometimes have children in their 40s or marry someone significantly older than themselves.

If Muriel is the sister of Molly's father, then the two could have been around the same age, and Molly's father, like Nott, started a family with a much younger wife when he was in his 60s.

Alternatively, if Molly's grandparents married right out of Hogwarts at 18 and immediately had Muriel c. 1890, then had Molly's father/mother c. 1910-1920 when they were between the ages of 38 and 48, Molly's father/mother would've ended up with a sister two decades or more his/her senior. Then Molly's father/mother could have waited until his/her 40s to have Molly, Gideon, and Fabian.

Of course we don't know whether Muriel is Molly's aunt by blood or marriage. The possibility remains that she was married to the brother of Molly's father or mother and was some years older than him. ★ Starstuff ^{(Owl me!)} 19:14, August 3, 2011 (UTC)

Just to correct someone above who said Molly's parents would be "impossibly old". Armando Dippet, who was three hundred and fifty two years old, was not "old by wizard standards". James Potter's parents were, meaning they were (possibly) over three hundred and fifty two years old at the time he was born...--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 04:06, January 5, 2017 (UTC)

Typo in caption

There is a typo on the picture captioned "Harry Potter, Elphias Dodge and Aunt Mureil sitting at Bill and Fleur's wedding in 1997" I can't figure out how to edit the caption & save the change```` —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wonka2011 (talk • contribs).

Fixed. Editing a caption is easy, simply find the image in edit mode, change the caption, and hit "Publish". Please always sign talk page entries using 4 tildes (~) and start a new section for new issues. -Shorty1982 15:14, September 28, 2011 (UTC)

Aunt by marriage?

I think Muriel might be an Aunt by marriage of Molly. Muriel is described as having "a beaky nose, red-rimmed, bloodshot eyes, and bony fingers."; Molly has none of these features. Molly's been described often enough. This to me, means that Muriel is an aunt by marriage, as Molly would have inherited the "beaky nose, red-rimmed, bloodshot eyes, and bony fingers" if Muriel was an aunt by blood, as one of Molly's parents (mother or father, we're not sure which side Muriel belongs to yet!) would have the "beaky nose, red-rimmed, bloodshot eyes, and bony fingers" too; Molly doesn't have them, thus her parents didn't, so Muriel is an aunt by MARRIAGE, and not blood, as at least ONE of those things would have passed to the sibling as well.

Do you agree?HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 01:01, August 20, 2012 (UTC)

At the time Muriel is described in Deathly Hallows, she is 107, and all of her physical characteristics — "beaky nose, red-rimmed, bloodshot eyes, and bony fingers" — could very well be a product of her advanced age. Time isn't exactly kind to the human body. Even the "beaky nose" could be a result of aging. Nose shape can change dramatically because cartilage tends to break down/weaken as people grow old.

Secondly, blood relatives don't always closely resemble each other, especially not when they're non-lineal. Molly could take strongly after one side of her family, and Muriel could be a blood aunt on the other side, e.g. Molly takes more after her father and Muriel is her mother's sister. ★ S tarstuff^{(Owl me!)} 08:19, August 20, 2012 (UTC)

Molly's Aunt

I know this has been brought up before, but I wanted to clarify.... Muriel is Molly's aunt, isn't she? J. K. Rowling has stated that Ginny was the eighth girl in the Weasley family for generations; Muriel would only be a generation above. Besides, in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 Moody describes Muriel as Molly's aunt. --Don't forget: Elvendork! (It's unisex!) 17:37, February 23, 2013 (UTC)

Muriel is Molly's aunt; I think this is categorically stated in the books. I'd just like to correct you, though: Muriel is two generations above Ginny (she's Ginny's great-aunt, so she'd be the same generation as her grandparents, one generation above Molly); also, Rowling does not say Ginny's the eight Weasley girl in generations: Rowling says that she made her the seventh of the Weasley kids based on "that old tradition of the seventh daughter of a seventh daughter and a seventh son of a seventh son" (she's speaking out-of-universe, here; she's explaining us why she wrote Ginny to be the seventh child -- you can see this, because Ginny is not the seventh daughter, she's the seventh child, as Molly and Arthur had no other six daughters we don't know of). --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 23:48, March 21, 2013 (UTC)

Relation

I think, having re-read the book, I have discovered, for definite, how Muriel is related to Molly. It is by marriage. Muriel says "I've just been instructing the bride on how best to wear my tiara," she shouted at Harry. "Goblin-made, you know, and been in my family for generations".

If Muriel was a blood relative of Molly, she'd just say "in the family"; the fact that she specifically specifies "my family" is, to me, her confirming that she and Molly are not blood relations, only relations through marriage.

Thoughts?--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 16:44, June 19, 2016 (UTC)

But Muriel may have been distinguishing between the Prewetts and the Weasleys. Molly is a Weasley now while Muriel obviously remains a Prewett. Muriel may be a paternal aunt of Molly's who never married and therefore remained a Prewett. A husband is never mentioned and Molly never mentions having any cousins born through Muriel. Had Muriel said "in the family" she could have been seen as referring to the Weasleys. To say "my family" could be to say the Prewett side. I also think it is a bit strange that she would have it to give to the Weasleys if she wasn't a Prewett because wouldn't Muriel's family - Molly's in laws in this case - have the tiara? Muriel's parents would be Molly's great-great Aunt and Uncle in law - why would they be wanting to give their family heirloom to an extended family of in laws? If that's makes any sense. --EmilyMills22 (talk) 17:53, June 19, 2016 (UTC)

Agreed - for that quote she's speaking to Ron and Harry/Barny Weasely so she may be distinguishing between her family the Prewetts, versus those "breed like gnomes" Weaselys, or possibly her family name before she married into the Prewetts. If she said this to a Prewett like Molly then the distinction would be clearer and more supportive of the fact that she married into the Prewett family.

Just to be clear, she's just allowing Fleur to borrow the tiara for the wedding - they return it later and it's mentioned that Muriel said she thought they might have stolen it. Muriel is not all bad - at least she lent it to them at all given that fact that Fleur is French after all ;) --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:47, June 19, 2016 (UTC)

You are aware, Emily, that any blood relative of Muriel (unless it's a child) would be no relation at all of Molly. They wouldn't be "in-law" anything. Muriel's parents, if Muriel married in to the Prewett family, are just Muriel's parents. Nothing more. As for why it's strange -- Muriel probably inherited the Tiara on the death of her parents or as part of her dower if she married. That's what I was saying, Iron. That Muriel married into the family, thus by saying "my family" she referring to blood relatives and not the Prewetts or Weasleys. Nowhere, after all, is it confirmed that she IS a Prewett at all; if she married a sibling of Molly's mother (or is a blood relative of Molly's mother), then saying "my family" is acceptable as her family is neither Prewett nor Weasley. It's an entirely different family.--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 06:16, June 20, 2016 (UTC)

Yes I am aware. I was merely trying to point out that Muriel’s parents would be in laws to some of the Prewetts - for example, they would have been Muriel’s husband’s parents in law – but they would only have a very distant connection to Molly. If Muriel had any other family who still had her maiden name, it would make more sense for them to have the family tiara. However, she could have inherited the tiara in the way you said. But that was just an observation from me – one of many possibilities for whose family the tiara belongs to. Maybe I could have wrote that better in my first reply. But let’s just forget about that - it's not my main point.

My main is point is this: the quote you gave does not confirm who Muriel really is to Molly. Had Muriel been talking to Molly and said “my family” you would have more of a case. But Muriel was talking to Ron and Harry (who is disguised as cousin Barny). Throughout Muriel's entire conversation with Harry and Ron, she distinguishes between herself and the Weasleys a few times. She was surprised to hear Ron had another "cousin" and therefore there was "Another Weasley?" So she could have been referring to the fact that she was a Prewett – the family name the tiara belongs to in this case – while Ron and “Barny” were Weasleys. It may not be confirmed she was born into the Prewett family but it is not confirmed she married into the Prewett family either. The quote does not confirm whether she was born a Prewett or married a Prewett clearly enough. It only confirms Muriel was definitely not another Weasley and happy about it! :) --EmilyMills22 (talk) 17:53, June 19, 2016 (UTC)

To reiterate what Emily said (editting at same time, but beat me to the punch :P I'll just briefly say that when Muriel says "been in my family for centuries" she could either mean:

• My family the Prewetts, versus the Weasleys as she is talking to Ron Weasley and his Weasely "cousin".

OR

• My family (unknown last name) as she married a Prewett and is talking to Ron the son of Molly Prewett.

Either interpretation is reasonable so there is no way IMO to choose if Muriel is Molly's aunt by blood, or an "in-law" along with the rest of her family.

She does play a sizable role in the opposition to Voldemort (house is an arrival point during the Battle of Seven Potters, and a safe house later during the evacuation of the Burrow, Ollivander goes there after Shell Cottage, etc) so whatever her relation is, she seems very loyal to the whole family despite her drawing distinctions at the wedding. #WWMD ;) --Ironyak1 (talk) 10:07, June 20, 2016 (UTC)

Pottermore Update

The latest article on Pottermore states that Muriel is "technically Mrs Weasley's great aunt". That makes Molly her great niece instead of just niece, it makes her the sister of one of Molly's grandparents and it makes her the great-great aunt of Ron, Ginny and co.

It's still not clear whether she is a Prewett. She could be the aunt of Molly's mother. But if we take Pottermore's word, we need to make some changes to several pages! --Kates39 (talk) 15:55, December 9, 2016 (UTC)

This appears to be confirmation of this line:

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 29 (The Phoenix Lament) - "Our Great-Auntie Muriel,” said Mrs. Weasley after a long pause, “has a very beautiful tiara — goblin-made — which I am sure I could persuade her to lend you for the wedding."

but goes against:

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 8 (The Wedding) - (Hermione speaking to Ron) "Your Great-Aunt Muriel doesn’t agree, I just met her upstairs while she was giving Fleur the tiara."

and

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 16 (Godric's Hollow) - (Harry to Hermione) "Ginny’s great-aunt. At the wedding. The one who said you had skinny ankles."

Which are the only uses of Great-Aunt and not just Aunt or Auntie that I could find. Lots of conflicting info and still not sure if Pottermore got this right or not to be honest. --Ironyak1 (talk) 17:40, December 9, 2016 (UTC)

The fact that Pottermore put the word "technically" at the start of the sentence is interesting. A lot of people call their great-great and so on relatives just their great relative to shorten it.

The first quote that you gave, which appears to be confirmation, is said by Molly herself while the other two were spoken by Hermione and Harry who are not part of the family. Since Muriel is Molly's great aunt, it makes sense that she would just say "great aunt" and everyone follow suit. I keep thinking about the word technically, which makes me think Pottermore are confirming that she is in fact Molly's great aunt and everyone just kind of went with what she says. Anyone else have any thoughts? -Kates39 (talk) 16:56, December 9, 2016 (UTC)

Quite frankly, I think they've got it wrong. Stuff from the "Features" section at Pottermore is written by the Pottermore team, and not necessarily proof-read by Rowling.

That first quote seems to be the only one that supports Muriel being Molly's great-aunt in the novels. Then again, if you think about it, it's not much support to begin with: Molly's talking to Fleur in that scene, and by "our great-aunt", she's tacitly including Fleur in the family, among her children, saying that Muriel shall now be Fleur's great-aunt too (thus expressing her certainty that the wedding will, indeed, take place; Molly had, immediately before, suggested Fleur wouldn't want to marry her now maimed son). It's a show of affection.

A similar thing happens during the Epilogue, in which Ron refers to his father as "Granddad Weasley" to Rose, even though it's clear from context that he is not referring to Septimus Weasley. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 17:52, December 11, 2016 (UTC)

I agree that the Pottermore team articles are not all "JKR approved" and that Molly in HBP may be talking from her kids perspective. On the other hand, Muriel is 60 years older than Molly which is more indicative (but not conclusive) of a great-aunt than a sister of her parent's generation.

There is also the problem of choosing which Pottermore info to believe and which not to. Without clear evidence to refute, it seems "Pottermore says so" would tip the balance between two possible interpretations? --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:15, December 11, 2016 (UTC)

Hey guys! Sorry to bring this back up again but have we reached an agreement yet? Should we accept what Pottermore have said? I think we should because it is the most clear out of every statement for who she is. I think it is simpler to go with what Pottermore says until we have clear evidence that they were wrong, otherwise we will have to start the complicated process of picking what articles to believe. What Pottermore says should go above individual interpretations until Rowling says otherwise. We use birthdays among other things from Pottermore which haven't appeared to be confirmed by Rowling so I think this should be the same. --Kates39 (talk) 17:04, December 14, 2016 (UTC)

I agree that the Pottermore article is the tipping point for choosing an interpretation and as it fits with the 60 year gap between them, Muriel is more likely Molly's Great-Aunt. Without solid evidence to contradict them, Pottermore is the authoritative source. IMHO --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:21, December 14, 2016 (UTC)

Alrighty, then, I have to concur. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 18:28, December 14, 2016 (UTC)

The major thing that decides it is if Lancelot is also an ancestor of Malafda. If so, then Pottermore is wrong (as the second cousin of Molly would be a third cousin instead to account for Lancelot and Muriel sharing grandparents.)--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 04:03, January 5, 2017 (UTC)