Money, Money, Money
Does it Really Make the Wizarding World go Round?
By You_Won't_Know_Who

You bet!!!!

Money makes the world go around but, surprisingly enough, the individuals who talk openly about it are considered to have no manners and low social position. Is this a case of hypocrisy? I would call it, rather, precaution. Money is a powerful force. People think the love of it is something very bad, indeed "the root of all evil”, as stated in the Bible.1 They are in good company. Sophocles, the ancient Greek playwright, weighed in on the subject:

Of evils upon earth, the worst is money. It is money that sacks cities, and drives men forth from hearth of home; wraps and seduces native intelligence, and breeds a habit of dishonesty. 2

It sounds surprisingly contemporary, doesn't it?

However, Muggles, even if unwilling to admit it, do think and dream about money almost constantly. They have been drawn by the lure of wealth and have fashioned their lives around its pursuit throughout the ages. It is metaphorically expressed by the adage cited above. Certainly many of them would agree with the following statement: "If I were a wizard (or had at least some supernatural powers, which is basically the same) I would be rich and I would have everything I want without any financial trouble."

Would these wishes come true in the wizarding world created by J.K. Rowling? Do wizards have to earn their living or do they work only to have pocket money? What is wizarding money like? What kind of job do wizards do and for what kind of salaries? If there are poor wizards, what are the reasons for their poverty? I'll try to answer these questions based on the novels of J.K. Rowling.

Money matters everywhere and you have to know the prices...

After carefully reading the text, we find out that money in the Harry Potter books is a frequent feature. Just after finding out that he is a wizard, Harry has a new experience connected directly with wizard money. Early in the morning an owl brings Hagrid a daily newspaper.

The owl swooped in and dropped the newspaper on top of Hagrid, who didn't wake up. The owl then fluttered on the floor and began to attack Hagrid's cloak.

˜Don't do that'

Hagrid tried to wave the owl out of the way but it snapped its beak fiercely at him and carried on savaging the coat.

˜Hagrid!' said Harry loudly. ˜There's an owl-'

˜Pay him,' Hagrid grunted into the sofa.

˜What?'

˜He wants payin' fer deliverin' the paper. Look in the pockets.' 3

Hagrid explains to Harry about bronze Knuts, the smallest wizarding coin, and his newspaper costs five of them.4 Wait... at the very beginning Harry doesn't get information about the form of wizarding government or the way magic works but about the money and banking!

Then, Harry learns that the other coins are made of silver and gold and are called respectively Sickles and Galleons. The names of the coins are linked, although not directly, with precious metals ("g" like gold, "s" like silver). A galleon was a type of a large ship. The expenses involved in its construction were enormous; the ships were also famous for their treasure hoards.5 That's why, probably, the most valuable wizarding coin is called so. The sickle is connected strongly with moon phases and may represent a crescent moon, usually slivery-white. “Sickle” is also a word used in the English language New Testament to translate “shekel,” the currency of ancient Judea, (modern day Israel).6

Bronze Knuts are the biggest problem, not only etymologically but also materially. Bronze might refer to a wide range of copper alloys; it's really hard to guess which type of alloy is used by goblins to mint them. The word “Knut” is a variant spelling of “Cnut” or "Canute" meaning “knot.” It was also the name of a Viking ruler whose empire in the 11th century comprised Norway, Denmark and England ’ not a very informative fact, when it comes to a coin.7 Perhaps, being a short, catchy word, it simply sounded right. Or it might signify the attraction of money ’ it knots us surprisingly tightly in no time.



Figure 1. Wizarding money.8

"Seventeen silver Sickles to a Galleon and twenty-nine Knuts to a Sickle, it's easy enough" explains Hagrid, Harry's first mentor.9 Therefore 1 Galleon = 17 Sickles = 493 Knuts. How much is it exactly for the Muggles? There must be an exchange rate, as at least few Muggles have to deal with wizarding money, for example buying their magical children books and other school equipment, like the parents of Hermione. Rowling has estimated the value of one Galleon to be “about five pounds”,10 which works out to more or less US $7.33. Now, it seems to be easy to calculate the prices ’ let's look at some sums, mentioned in the series, converted into dollars.

If you are rich you could perhaps afford the cursed opal necklace, which was on display at Borgin and Burkes for some time11 and was finally bought, probably by Lucius Malfoy or his son; it would cost approximately US$10,995.00. I wouldn't call it an ideal purchase though, as the curse seems to still be working (what's the use of a necklace that you can't touch, let alone wear?) but the price is impressive. If you were lucky and skilled enough to win the Triwizard Tournament, you would receive 1000 Galleons12 or US $7,330.00 as a winning prize. Not bad for any teenager, not only an underage wizard, but still you wouldn't be able to get the necklace. However, compare the winnings to the savings of the Weasley twins, wagered by them on the outcome of the Quidditch World Cup, (37 Galleons, 15 Sickles, and 3 Knuts13 – the sum would amount to US $272.52) and you understand why some members of the Weasley family (Ron for example) consider themselves poor. If these were one year's savings, they would have to save at least three years and seven months to scrape up 1000 Galleons. Compare it also to an average wage for US workers in the private sector- $520 a week (for 2002). 14

Independent and influential goblins ’ who are they?

The first venue Hagrid and Harry visit after arriving to London's hidden wizarding centre is Gringotts ’ the one and only wizarding bank – situated in Diagon Alley. The building is quite impressive: snowy-white from the outside (probably, like the interior, made of white marble) with burnished bronze front doors, which lead to a second pair of doors, silver this time, with a dire warning engraved on them:

Enter, stranger, but take heed

Of what awaits the sin of greed,

For those who take but do not earn,

Must pay most dearly in their turn,

So if you seek beneath our floors

A treasure that was never yours,

Thief, you have been warned, beware

Of finding more than treasure there.15

The Gringotts doorman wears a scarlet-and-gold uniform and is a goblin.

My first impression was that goblins were some kind of dwarfish wizards and immediately I thought about "gnomes of Zürich", an idiom coined in 1956 by British politician Harold Wilson, describing powerful Swiss bankers who, in his opinion, led secretive policies and tried to push the pound down.16 In the Potterverse, gnomes are quite different creatures; they live in gardens and are too dense to remember not to come out of their holes when an underage wizard tries to get rid of them.17 So again, who or what are goblins? Are they powerful? Why did Hagrid warn Harry to "never mess with goblins"?18

They live side by side with wizards, are highly intelligent but, surprisingly, have been categorized by wizards as beasts or "magical creatures who are deemed to have near-human intelligence" (a derogative term used by Umbridge for describing centaurs19). Let's have a look at them. Their appearance is hardly welcoming; short and squat, goblins have long fingers and feet. Some of them have slanted dark eyes, pointed beards, noses and ears.20 They have their own language, Gobbledegook, and some wizards speak it (e.g.Barty Crouch Senior).21 But the most important fact is that they are more than able to stand up to wizards. History has recorded goblin rebellions, mostly in the seventeen and eighteen century, which were described as "bloody" and "vicious".22 Goblins fought against discrimination and prejudice.23 They were always the aggrieved party, fighting for their own freedoms, which wizards "have been denying them for centuries", according to Remus Lupin.24



Figure 2: A goblin from "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" movie.25

These creatures are at best friendly but highly independent, cunning and perfectly capable of looking after their own business. What's more, goblins employ wizards, for example as curse breakers. Arthur Weasley's eldest son, Bill, works for Gringotts in such a capacity.26 They are clearly much more independent of wizards than it is generally believed or admitted. After all, the whole wizarding community is presented only from wizards' point of view, and they are blind to the simple truth that some of the "creatures" can think for themselves. Wizards let goblins influence their world, but goblins still lack real political power. Isn't this unwise? They have what takes to govern themselves but instead, goblins are governed by the biased Ministry for Magic. What if goblins decided to turn against them once again? There are still some subversive goblin groups who work in secret against the Ministry, according to the Daily Prophet.27 The return of Voldemort has wrought enough havoc to create long queues at Gringotts;28 think what would happen if goblins decided for some reason to close the bank and declare insolvency. I'm not surprised that the rumors about the former Minister for Magic, Cornelius Fudge, plotting ways to wrest control of the money supply and the economy from the goblins while in office were so widespread.29 I'm only astounded that they emerged in The Quibbler, an equivalent of a Muggle tabloid. This particular ‘conspiracy theory' makes perfect sense, at least for me. The fact that Dumbledore wanted Bill Weasley to persuade some goblins to come over to the side of the Order30 speaks very favorably about his intelligence and ability to foresee troubles waiting to happen. In my opinion, goblins are definitely that kind of trouble.

It's true that in times of relative peace and quiet wizards can and do cooperate with goblins – there is a Goblin Liaison Office, headed by Dirk Creswell, a good friend and a former student of Horace Slughorn,31 – but only as long as goblins want to cooperate with wizards. What kind of advantages do goblins get from this kind of alliance? I think one of them might be some relative stability and security of their own world. In times of trouble it's better to seek the allies, not new enemies. Voldemort hasn't spared goblins who have been unwilling to cooperate with him and was known for killing an entire goblin family "somewhere near Nottingham."32 Also goblins might need wizards who are more adept at finding hidden treasures (presumably the main resource of goblins' precious metals store) and breaking curses, cast, I imagine, mainly by other wizards. But the balance is tricky and it seems that there are plenty of unresolved conflicts which can sour or even jeopardize their cooperation.

Why metal coins? Are they any better?

Goblins not only run Gringotts and administer wizarding money, they also mint it, as they are renowned for being very capable metalsmiths.33 Each coin is stamped with a serial number identifying the goblin who cast it.34 This helps to identify the minter as well as prevent, I suppose, any possible frauds. Why do wizards and goblins still use the metal-only money system, quite outdated and cumbersome from Muggles' point of view, apart from a few coin collectors? First, some short historical overview which might help us understand the system. Muggles had their gold coins too and stopped using them not so long ago.

Gold and silver were an important part of business and trade as far back as the early civilizations of Sumer (a land situated, like the biblical Paradise, between the rivers Euphrates and Tigris, now the territory of Iraq) and were in usage from that time to the early twentieth century causing many crises and wars because of their rarity. With a proper amount of gold, kings could be crowned or toppled, battles won or lost, empires created or destroyed.

The great French historian Fernand Braudel wrote that the precious metals were "the lifeblood of Mediterranean trade in the 2nd millennium BC",35 initially traded simply by weight in the form of ingots – bars of metal, usually rectangular in shape;36 this could then be cut up into small chunks or drawn into wire. It is possible that the name of the wizarding bank came exactly from this word "ingot", although it isn't confirmed by J.K. Rowling.

The Romans, for whom gold coins became the main way of paying their legions, also adopted the custom of striking the emperor's head or other symbolical pictures on their gold aureus coins.37



Figure 3: Gold coins from ancient times: reverse and obverse of Celtic Gold Stater of Cunobelin.38

It's hard to believe but practically all gold mined during the 19th century was turned into coins – Sovereigns in Britain and Australia, Eagles in the United States, Marks in Germany, Roubles in Russia, Crowns in Austria, Florins in Hungary and Napoleons in France accounted for over 13,000 tonnes (418 million troy oz) in the classic period of the gold standard prior to World War I.39 But after 1914, governments started to husband their gold, the minting of gold coinage largely stopped and coins were often called in. "In 1933 during the Great Depression, the U.S. recalled all gold and gold coins from their citizens. After that, the era of almost universal gold coinage was over."40 Other countries followed suit.

Although they fixed their exchange rates against the dollar, the value of which remained defined in terms of gold, it was a temporary issue. "In the early 1970s the system of fixed exchange rates started to break down as a result of growing international inflation and the United States abandoned the link with gold in 1973." 41

Finally, gold gave way to paper for good and not without reasons; paper money was lighter and smaller than gold or silver, cheaper and easier to produce and to use. This change might sound like a serious monetary crash, but in fact the process was rather slow and there were many advantages to such an innovation. The break with precious metals helped to make money a more accessible entity, promoting international trade and exchange and making the life of whole countries as well as every single Muggle definitely easier. It's not been the end of the career of gold, however. Today, gold is still perceived by many people as something ‘real', having not only a significant face value but also being the tangible example of wealth and riches. People invest in gold in times of trouble. Some national currencies (Polish currency among them) are called "gold" as a reminder of their past.

So, why weren't wizards tempted to follow suit and ask goblins to produce paper or plastic money? Perhaps because they simply didn't need to do it. Gold money is heavy and cumbersome, yes, but who would care if you could Apparate, Disapparate, and generally perform many helpful spells (Levitation spells among them)? If you are afraid of theft, hide your purse under an Invisibility Cloak. Fear of shortages of gold supply? Apparently, there are plenty of hidden treasures to be found by skilled wizards so the lack of precious metals, felt so keenly by Muggles throughout centuries, has never been a problem in the wizarding world. By the way, could you imagine the look on goblins' faces if you asked them to produce ‘paper money'?

Wizarding professions and trades ’ how do they earn money? Why some of them are poor?

First, I would like to ask a logical question about the workings of magic: If you can transfigure anything into anything, for example you can conjure up any sort of food or clothes you want, why bother to buy anything and have any money at all?

A fact: there are plenty of wizarding shops and wizards do buy commodities like robes, potion ingredients, books and stationery. Why?

Apparently magic isn't as simple as that. In the first place, you probably can't get something from absolutely nothing, out of thin air, as Muggles say. There are almost certainly some laws or rules of exchange, and there are some magical limits. J.K Rowling in one of her interviews has stated: "There is legislation about what you can conjure and what you can't. Something that you conjure out of thin air will not last. This is a rule I set down for myself early on." 42

According to this rule, if you want your magic to last, you need to work from some sort of a material basis, which can only be grown, produced or bought. You can probably transfigure a pot of soup ingredients into a delicious broth, but I suspect you will end up with a smaller volume of broth than the weight of all the ingredients put together.

And if you literally are working from nothing (we've been shown some examples, like conjuring an armchair by Dumbledore during Harry's hearing at the Ministry43) then what you are putting into the process is, I guess, a bit of yourself – your energy, vitality and possibly even a part of your physical or magical ‘substance'. Not anyone can afford that and even if they can, wizards might be rather unwilling to weaken the strength for a meal or a robe day after day. Not to mention the fact that the conjured items might disappear in the least suitable moment, as is usually the case.

So, wizards must work to earn their living. What do they do? The Ministry for Magic seems to be the biggest employer of wizards and witches (some socialistic connotations are coming instantly to mind); there are many departments and different posts to be filled but you must be one of the best at school, a head boy or a head girl preferably, to find an employment there. It is the career path chosen by Percy Weasley, an ambitious son of Arthur Weasley. The Ministry perhaps doesn't offer much in terms of remuneration, not for the minor clerks anyway, but esteem is assured; you must be good at something if you work for the Ministry, even if it's only gossip (Bertha Jorkins).44 The Ministry is also the favourite choice of Harry, as he's wanted to become an Auror from the moment he heard about them45 (but I am not terribly sure if he knows what it entails). Aurors constitute a kind of wizarding police, directly subordinate to the Minister for Magic; they are the wizarding elite and one needs really top grades at school to qualify.46 The prestige of the job is enormous and the salary, I suppose, among the highest at the Ministry. It's also likely that Aurors might be paid bonus money for fighting Dark Wizards; the job is dangerous, just look at Moody.

Of course, there are plenty of other possibilities for employment (and my list is by no means complete): a shop assistant job, (chosen by Tom Marvolo Riddle because of some additional perks47), farming eels or other creatures for profit like Agatha Timms48, being a musician or a singer (Celestina Warbeck49 or The Weird Sisters band50), being a shop keeper like Borgin and Burkes51 or the Weasley twins.52 If you are good at sports you can try to get a place on one of many Quidditch teams (Olivier Wood53) but when your sports career is over, it's better to have a post at the Ministry waiting for you (Ludo Bagman's case54). You can also be a healer at St Mungo's a hospital for magical maladies and injuries created by Bonham Mungo,55 but there the prerequisites are as high (if not higher) as in the case of any Ministry post: you must be really good at school and quite dedicated. As one of the main St Mungo's healers went straight to become one of the celebrated headmistresses of Hogwarts (Dillys Derwent),56 I think the position of the profession is very high. The same is true for teachers at Hogwarts. Although we see some examples of blatant incompetence (Sybil Trelawney57 or Gilderoy Lockhart58), the teachers as a whole seem to be good at their own subject and good at almost everything else.

We have, however, only scraps of information when it comes to the salaries. Hit-Witch or Hit-Wizard for the Magical Law Enforcement Squad (new hire's starting salary, together with a Ministry of Magic broomstick (company broomstick?) and one's own regular bed at St. Mungo's)59 earns 700 Galleons per month ($5,131.00). Not bad, but the job is dangerous. We don't know how much the teachers are paid at Hogwarts but we know that after deciding to return from his retirement Slughorn demanded a pay rise almost instantly, so you can suppose the salary of a teacher is, like everywhere else, not the best possible. 60 At Gringotts you can be a dragon feeder, earning 7 Galleons ($51.31) per week, but you must like dragons or at least tolerate them and have sharp reflexes...er...so, unless you are like Hagrid, perhaps a job at Flourish and Blotts Wizarding Bookstore as Assistant Manager would suit you better! You can earn 42 Galleons per month ($307.86), certainly not the salary of your dreams.61 Just imagine how long you would need to save to get 1000 Galleons, Harry's Tournament winnings.

Since salaries and wages are not particularly high, no wonder that there are plenty of those who don't want to work. They scrap their living in any dishonest way you can imagine. Here, I have Mundungus Fletcher in mind; a thief and a crook, looking always for some "business opportunities". 62 But there are also wizards who cannot work because it's impossible for them to find a permanent employment. Remus Lupin, a werewolf, is a splendid example of the injustice and inequality of chances in the wizarding world. Nobody cares what he does to make the ends meet, but he can't work due to his illness. It's not so difficult to understand then why the other werewolves have been so eager to join Voldemort's revolt against the system which has made social outcasts of them without any reason other than fear and repulsion.

Werewolves are poor but, after all, they can blame the system. Are there really poor wizards? I don't think so. What does it mean to be poor? There's apparently no single, standard definition of this term, at least one that people from all over the world would agree with. As we discuss the British wizards here, I decided to quote the European Union's working definition of poverty:

Persons, families and groups of persons whose resources (material, cultural and social) are so limited as to exclude them from the minimum acceptable way of life in the Member State [of the European Union- my note] to which they belong.63

Why are the Weasleys deemed to be poor when Arthur has a respectable job at the Ministry? Perhaps his salary isn't the highest, but the fact that the Weasleys haven't much savings in their vault does not automatically imply that they are exceptionally underprivileged, or excluded from minimum acceptable way of wizarding life. In my opinion, you are not poor if you own a house and a plot of land, you can afford to send seven children to Hogwarts, five of them at the same time, and you don't have to resort to the financial hardship fund that is available for children. You just have some cash flow problems from time to time. Rather a lot of people from the Muggle working class consider it perfectly normal to live right up to the last penny of their income without tipping over into debt, but without saving anything either. I definitely get working class vibes from Molly (I don't think it has any derogatory meaning, though) and she is the person who holds the purse strings of the Weasleys household. Finally, don't forget who calls Arthur and his family poor most of the time: their archenemy, Lucius Malfoy and his son. Lucius is hardly an unbiased authority on the subject, is he?

Wizards seem to be poor only if they don't care. The Gaunt family is a showcase example. They lived in squalor unequaled by anything shown in the series so far, a ramshackle hut full of dirt cobwebs and dust.64 They didn't bother to clean it or fix it, magically or otherwise. A "Scourgify" spell, for example, doesn't require any expenses after all, it's only a matter of will and a matter of choice. I think the Gaunts were too proud to work in any capacity and too stupid to change their life for the better ’ a clear sign of a degeneration, both mental and physical. It's hard to guess which factor played the dominant role here: the Dark Arts or the inbreeding and all the problems related with it. There was "a vein of instability and violence (...) due to their habit of marrying their own cousins", explained Dumbledore to Harry.65 What's more, Morphin and Merope weren't sent to school, probably because their father had decided against it. The Gaunts were known for their "liking of grandeur", 66 so sending children to any school might be seen as being below their station in life. It certainly wasn't a money issue, strictly speaking, as they would have been helped by the special fund for impoverished families. A descendant of Slytherin, a pure-blood descendant, mind you, was to clean a house or to patch a leaky roof or to obey a teacher? Forget it, never; it's better to die or to stay at filthy home all your life (you can choose which option is worse). The Weasleys' house is a palace compared to their dwelling.

And, last but surely not least, the “haves”. There are wizards who simply don't need to work; they enjoy a life devoid of any financial troubles. Lucius Malfoy (currently in prison) springs to mind as the best example. If he ever worked, he did it for pleasure, satisfaction and influence, as he came into an inheritance and his fortune was estimated at $900 million by Forbes magazine.67 As a "lobbyist – gentleman" he made some donations for "excellent causes" in order to buy the favours of the then Minister for Magic, Cornelius Fudge, and, undoubtedly, he influenced Fudge to support legislation convenient for himself as well as for his clients and friends. Malfoy owns a big manor and is full of himself in the most annoying way. We were shown also Mrs. Hepzibah Smith, an old wealthy woman, a descendant of one of the Hogwarts founders, Helga Hufflepuff.68 She liked buying and keeping expensive trinkets with significant historical value in her collection. She was also imprudent enough to show her treasures to a handsome salesman, known later as Lord Voldemort.69

The author's attitude towards money and its influence

Personal experience and views of an author are often reflected by the views and experience of the main characters of their books. There are many parallels to be spotted between Harry and his creator, J.K. Rowling, but I'll focus here on these connected with pecuniary issues.

Harry, although very young, is concerned about who will pay for his magical education, as Uncle Vernon and Aunt Petunia are the last people to give half a penny for such a purpose.70 In my view, this practical, clear-headed thinking of the little hero is the result of J.K. Rowling's relative poverty in the past and the financial troubles she'd experienced being a single mother, leading a hand-to’mouth existence. Clearly, she hasn't forgotten the money-related everyday problems of the poor.

Even in the magical world, created by her, nothing is for free; you must pay even for a newspaper and everyone must take money into consideration. Our hero receives the first lesson about this simple, even trite truth as early as the next day after finding out that he is a wizard and had to accept it. I personally am sure that he will pay more than money to achieve his ultimate goal. When it comes to defeat evil, blood is the only valid currency. Do you remember the hidden door in the cave which contained the fake Horcrux?71 Dumbledore might have considered it crude72 but for Lord Voldemort, who started his wizarding life as a poor orphan, it must have made perfect sense. There's a price for everything, including the knowledge about the Horcruxes, only the currency changes.

After speaking with Hagrid, Harry is assured, to his relief, that his parents had an equivalent of a savings account (a vault) and he has inherited a small fortune so he will have enough money to buy his school equipment throughout seven years.73 Entering the wizarding community Harry becomes a wealthy heir (almost a from-rags-to-riches fairy tale story), but it would be the last reason for him to be happy. In fact Harry often feels ashamed at the mere sight of the inherited gold in his vault, mainly because his best friend, Ron, comes from a poorer background. For example by the end of the holidays before his second year at Hogwarts, he visited the Weasleys' vault and...

...felt dreadful, far worse than he had in the Knockturn Alley, when it was opened. There was a very small pile of silver Sickles inside, and just one gold Galleon. Mrs. Weasley felt right into the corners before sweeping the whole lot into her bag. Harry felt even worse when they reached his vault. He tried to block the contents from view as he hastily shoved handful of coins into a leather bag.74

The happiest moments are when Harry shares its wealth, for example buying his friends some sweets.75 Apparently it reflects the approach of the author, who stated in the interview with Jeremy Paxman that she felt guilty getting so rich76 and is known for her support for many charities.

Generally, rich people, especially those who are proud of their status, are not treated favourably in the books; they are often portrayed as selfish and supercilious creatures, sometimes callous, sometimes only stupid. Gambling, betting and get-rich-quick schemes are also shown in a bad light: Fred and George lost all their savings betting with Ludo Bagman at Quidditch World Cup.77 On the other hand, poor wizards (and other creatures) in the series are among the most likeable characters, such as Remus Lupin, the best DADA teacher at Hogwarts so far, and Dobby the independent house elf.

It's a great lesson shown to readers: money is important and necessary indeed, but if you start thinking only about it, finally you will be deceived. A phenomenon called Leprechaun gold confirms it. These are golden coins that look exactly like the real ones but vanish after some time, usually 24 hours. They are treated as nothing more than a kind of ornamental confetti, to be thrown in the air during World Quidditch Cup or to be buried by Hagrid for some practice with Nifflers.78 It's a symbolic reminder that even real gold or a big fortune, although very useful, is nothing on which to rely. It can quickly change hands and, if not husbanded and spent wisely, evaporates in no time.

The real role of money in the Potterverse

Magic folk must work and spend their earnings like every other group of people. They are quite interested in the topic. Exactly like in the real world, they want to get rich and buy nice, expensive gadgets. They think about earning more, they want to be rich. Although not the main topic in the series, money is so interwoven with all the main threads that one should devote some time to it. It is important whether someone is wealthy or not, as money can define their life and their future. If you are greedy, however, there will be bad consequences despite all the magic involved. Those who run after money are usually bitterly disappointed in the end. Exactly as in the Muggle world, money matters for wizards a lot, but the best of them see that it is a good servant and a bad master.

Works Cited

1. The Holy Bible. King James Version. "1 Timothy 6:10" The Blue Letter Bible. 29 July 2006. <http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1Ti/1Ti006.html#10>

2. Schiller, Bradley. The Economy Today. Fourth edition, New York: Random House Business Division, 1989. p. 248.

3. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 1997. p. 49.

4. Ibid. p. 50.

5. "The Galleon." The Development Of Square-Rigged Ship From the Carrack to the Full-Rigger. 19 Dec 1999. Great Gridlock. 29 July 2006. <http://www.greatgridlock.net/Sqrigg/galleon.html>

6. Wikipedia. "Shekel." Wikipedia Encyclopedia.23 July 2006. Wikimedia. 29 July 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/shekel>

7. Wikipedia. "Money in Harry Potter." Wikipedia Encyclopedia. 28 July 2006. Wikimedia. 29 July 2006. <

8. The Harry Potter Lexicon. “Money." The Wizarding World. 27 March 2006. The Floo Network. 20 July 2006. <http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizworld/money.html>

9. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 1997. p. 58.

10. BBC Online. "Red Nose Day Chat." BBC Online. 12 March 2001. Quick Quotes Quill. 12 December 2004. The Floo Network. 20 July 2006. <http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2001/0301-bbc-rednose.htm>

11. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. London: Bloomsbury, 1998. p. 44.

12. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. London: Bloomsbury, 2000. p. 166.

13. Ibid. p. 81.

14. "What is the average salary in the United States?" Ask Yahoo! 18 May 2004. Yahoo. 29 July 2006 <http://ask.yahoo.com/20040518.html>

15. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 1997. pp. 56-57.

16. Wikipedia. "Gnomes of Zürich." Wikipedia Encyclopedia. 29 July 2006. Wikimedia. 20 July 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnomes_of_Zurich>

17. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. London: Bloomsbury, 1998. p. 33.

18. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 1997. p. 50.

19. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003. p. 665.

20. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 1997. p. 56.

21. Wikipedia. "Goblins (Harry Potter)." Wikipedia Encylopedia. 26 June 2006. Wikimedia. 20 July 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goblins_%28Harry_Potter%29>

22. The Harry Potter Lexicon. "Goblins." The Bestiary. 6 April 2006. The Floo Network. 20 July 2006. <http://www.hp-lexicon.org/bestiary/goblins.html>

23. Ibid.

24. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003. p. 81.

25. Wikipedia. "Goblins (Harry Potter)." Wikipedia Encyclopedia. 29 July 2006. Wikimedia. 20 July 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goblins_(Harry_Potter)>

26. The Harry Potter Lexicon. "Bill Weasley." Which Wizard: Who's Who in the Wizarding World. 27 November 2005. The Floo Network. 29 July 2006. <http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/bill.html>

27. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003. p. 276.

28. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. London: Bloomsbury, 2005. p. 106.

29. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003. p. 174.

30. Ibid. p. 81.

31. Wikipedia. "Minor Slug Club Members." Wikipedia Encyclopedia. 10 June 2006.Wikimedia. 20 July 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_Slug_Club_Members>

32. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003. p. 81.

33. The Harry Potter Lexicon. "Goblins." The Bestiary. 6 April 2006. The Floo Network. 20 July 2006. <http://www.hp-lexicon.org/bestiary/goblins.html>

34. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003. p. 353.

35. "A History of Gold Coins." The Gold Information Network. 2006. Gold Coin Specialists.29 July 2006. <

36. "Metals: Ingot." About Business & Finance. 2006. New York Times Company.29 July 2006. <http://metals.about.com/library/bldef-Ingot.htm>

37. "A History of Gold Coins." The Gold Information Network. 2006. Gold Coin Specialists. 29 July 2006. <http://goldinfo.net/goldhistory1.html>

38. “Gold Coins." Tax Free Gold. 19 July 2005. Chard.29 July 2006. <http://www.taxfreegold.co.uk/goldcoinsbriefhistory.html>

39. "Coins/ History." Gold Encyclopedia & Diary. 3 April 2002. Goldavenue Encyclopaedia. 29 July 2006. <http://info.goldavenue.com/Info_site/in_glos/in_glos_coinshistory.htm>

40. "A History of Gold Coins." The Gold Information Network. 2006. Gold Coin Specialists.29 July 2006. <http://goldinfo.net/goldhistory1.html>

41. Davies, Glyn. "Origins of Money and of Banking." History of Money from Ancient Times to the Present Day. 25 May 2005. Roy Davies. 29 July 2006. <J K Rowling.” South West News Service. 8 July 2000. Quick Quotes Quill. 10 January 2006. The Floo Network. 29 July 2006. <http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/0700-swns-alfie.htm>

43. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003. p. 128.

44. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. London: Bloomsbury, 2000. p. 15.

45. Ibid. p. 144.

46. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003. p. 583.

47. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. London: Bloomsbury, 2005. p. 405.

48. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. London: Bloomsbury, 2000. p. 81.

49. The Harry Potter Lexicon. "Warbeck, Celestina." Witches and Wizards from A to Z. 9 May 2006. The Floo Network. 29 July 2006. <http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/a-z/w.html>

50. The Harry Potter Lexicon. "Weird Sisters." Witches and Wizards from A to Z. 9 May 2006. The Floo Network. 29 Jul 2006. <http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/a-z/w.html>

51. The Harry Potter Lexicon. "Borgin ." "Burke, Caractacus." Wizards and Witches from A to Z. 12 April 2006. The Floo Network. 29 July 2006. <http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/a-z/b.html>

52. The Harry Potter Lexicon. "Weasley's Wizarding Wheezes." The Wizarding World. 27 March 2006. The Floo Network. 29 July 2006. <http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizworld/wheezes.html>

53. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003. p. 492.

54. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. London: Bloomsbury, 2000. p. 515.

55. The Harry Potter Lexicon. "Bonham, Mungo." Witches and Wizards from A to Z. 9 May 2006. The Floo Network. 29 July 2006. <http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/a-z/b.html#Mungo>

56. The Harry Potter Lexicon. "Derwent, Dilys." Wizards and Witches from A to Z. 13 May 2006. The Floo Network. 29 July 2006 <http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/a-z/d.html>

57. Bunker, Lisa, ed. "Sibyll* Patricia Trelawney." Which Wizard: Who's Who in the Wizarding World. 22 November 2005. The Floo Network. 29 July 2006. <http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/trelawney.html>

58. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. London: Bloomsbury, 1998.

59. The Harry Potter Lexicon. "The Daily Prophet." Help/ About: Lexicon Sources. 20 April 2006. The Floo Network. 29 July 2006. <http://www.hp-lexicon.org/about/sources/source_dp.html>

60. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. London: Bloomsbury, 2005. p. 74.

61. The Harry Potter Lexicon. “Money." The Wizarding World. 27 March 2006. The Floo Network. 20 July 2006.
<http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizworld/money.html>

62. Wikipedia. "Mudungus Fletcher." Wikipedia Encyclopedia. 3 July 2006. Wikimedia. 29 July 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mundungus_Fletcher>

63. "Poverty- Definition and Management." Child Poverty. 2005. Children in Wales. 29 July 2006. <http://www.childreninwales.org.uk/2157.html>

64. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. London: Bloomsbury, 2005. p. 190.

65. Ibid. p. 200.

66. Ibid. p. 201.

67. Noer, Michael and David M. Ewalt, eds. "#15 Malfoy, Lucius." Forbes Fictional 15. 1 December 2005. Forbes Business and Financial News.29 July 2006. <http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/fictional/15.html>

68. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. London: Bloomsbury, 2005. p. 408.

69. Ibid.

70. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 1997. p. 50.

71. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. London: Bloomsbury, 2005. p. 523.

72. Ibid. p. 522

73. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 1997. p. 50.

74. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. London: Bloomsbury, 1998. p. 47.

75. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 1997. p.76.

76. Paxman, Jeremy, interviewer. “JK's OOTP interview.” 19 June 2003. BBC NewsNight. Quick Quotes Quill. 2 January 2005. The Floo Network. 29 July 2006 <http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2003/0619-bbcnews-paxman.htm>

77. Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. London: Bloomsbury, 2000. p.634.

78. Ibid. p.472.

Bibliography

Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. London: Bloomsbury, 1998.

Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. London: Bloomsbury, 2000.

Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. London: Bloomsbury, 2005.

Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003.

Rowling, JK. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 1997.

The Harry Potter Lexicon. 2000-2006. The Floo Network. 20 July 2006. <http://www.hp-lexicon.org/>

Wikipedia. Wikipedia Encyclopedia. 2005-06. Wikimedia. 20 July 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page>

Comments? Discuss this essay here on the Scribbulus forum.





Finding Hogwarts

The Leaky Cauldron is not associated with J.K. Rowling, Warner Bros., or any of the individuals or companies associated with producing and publishing Harry Potter books and films.