What does the awesome expression "blood is thicker than water" actually mean?

Question

I really want to start using it in my everyday conversation.

Answer 1

The basic MEANING of this expression -- has been given, more or less, by several answers. But no one has yet suggested an EXPLANATION of the 'blood VS water' notion. I hope to help a little bit with that.

Yes, it means something like "family loyalties are greater than other loyalties". But note that it may be used to comment on situations in which someone's obligations to another --even very SERIOUS obligations-- are 'trumped' by what his family WANTS... even when the latter is NOT an obligation. In other words, it is not always a positive statement, as some seem to think. In fact, if I'm correct about its origins, it may have BEGUN as a cynical statement.

You can find a nearly identical summary of early English uses of this phrase, or relatives to it, and the cataloging of it in various phrase collections from the past several centuries. A typical version (perhaps the original) of this is found in an answer in "The Phrase Finder" forum.
http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/40/messages/121.html

This is virtually repeated (with a few additions and corrections) in the wikipedia article on this expression.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_is_thicker_than_water

One thing to highlight that some may have missed -- the BLOOD ties being spoken of, at least originally, are NOT just those of immediate family but, as the entry says, "of common ANCESTRY". That is, we're often looking at the EXTENDED family, or CLAN. (Think, perhaps, of a mafia "family".. though that's not entirely fair, it may express the sort of loyalty in mind.)

But looking through these entries, included the reference books they cite, I don't see much real explanation of where the phrase came from, ESPECIALLY "why thicker than WATER?"

For example, the earliest cataloging, the 1670 listing by John Lydgate seems to be nothing *more* than a listing, without ANY explanation of the meaning much less the origin of the expression. Check out this listing from page 231 of an early edition of his book.
http://books.google.com/books?vid=0AMcstdiFmeBwq1KeQ&id=gOVcCh0AwxkC&pg=RA1-PR14&lpg=RA1-PR14&dq=J.+Ray+Collection+of+English+proverbs+1670#PRA1-PA231,M1

Also, the 'related' expressions from John Lydgate's *Troy Book* is helpful for expressing the general idea of the power of BLOOD ties, but not the comparison with 'water'. The lines given describe Hector's response to Ajax, whom he is fighting, when he recognizes him as kin (For naturelly blod will ay of knde/ Draw unto blod, wher he may it fynd.' - Book 3, line 2070-71)
http://www.lib.rochester.edu/camelot/teams/troy3frm.htm

For what's going on (since the Middle English is hard to make out!) compare Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida which drew on Lydgate's interpretation of the story... and in which Hector stops the fight when he recognizes Ajax as a relative.
http://www.cummingsstudyguides.net/xTroilus.html

(Actually, though I can't demonstrate it here, I think Lydgate's reference to "blood" is a good example of the "broader" use, referring to the 'clan'. He seems to be referring to the fact that Ajax is of "royal blood".)

The general idea of the expression is also rather clear in in its use in 1815 in Scott's *Guy Mannering* (see the quote in context at http://www.bartleby.com/304/38.html )

But again, what's with the WATER??

-------------------

What I find most interesting, and promising, is the translation offered for the 12th century version of "Reinhard Fuchs" (Reynard the Fox).
'Kin-blood is not spoiled by water.' Unfortunately, I can not lay hands on this specific version in translation or the original German, to check out what was going on in context. (Other, later versions are easier to find, in part becaus Heinrich der Glichezare's version has only survived in fragmented form.) I want to look into this further, but I think we may hazard a reasonable guess.

Note that this use refers to blood (and 'kin-blood' clarifies that it IS speaking about blood/family ties) not being "spoiled" by water. That is, water cannot "impair the value or quality of" or perhaps even "destroy". But one wonders, how MIGHT 'water' threaten to damage the strength of family ties?

I THINK the answer is a "ritual" or religious one. Water is used in various religious rituals, but particularly in ones of ritual 'cleansing' and dedication (e.g., "holy water"), and perhaps above all in the Western world for the ritual of BAPTISM, which is understood to create a new identity, new relationships and obligations for Christians as the people and children of God, and so of the same "spiritual family" as other believers.

If I could find the Glichezare text I might be able to find whether this sort of contrast is in view in the 'kin-blood' statement. But from a quick look at a summary* of his story as well as other versions being written around that time you can see that satirizing** society and its leaders, including the church, was an important element of the stories. So it would not be surprising if the use of this expression had some reference to church practice.
* http://www.german.leeds.ac.uk/mhglit/sumfuchs.htm
** http://www.pentodepress.com/reinhart/reinhart.html, http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Reynard_The_Fox

Here is one writer who interprets the "water" this way and suggests that the expression refers (or ORIGINALLY referred) to the tendency of "natural" ties to be stronger than spiritual ones... and in a negative way (not keeping solemn obligations because a relative opposes it).
http://www.4thpres.org/uploads/4th_Quarterly_Fall_2006.pdf p.16

Now I cannot substantiate this right now, but I believe this expression has SOMETIMES been used to speak of when a person's loyalty to his BIRTH family (BLOOD) trumps his loyalty and obligations to his SPOUSE (who is NOT a blood relative, but is tied to him by 'ritual', which could included sprinkling with [holy/consecrating] water).

Answer 2

It means that the people you are related to are the ones that you are going to stand by, and the ones that are going to stand by you, before someone who is not family. For instance:

If a woman is in a fight with her husband, and he were to go to someone in her family to talk about it. The person who is related to her would be more than likely to take the woman's side because they are related to her, even if they feel close with her husband.

I hope this makes sense. It is hard to explain it, really.

Answer 3

The general interpretation is that "family" is the most important connection.

Answer 4

To try and put in simple terms. your brother would be more important than your friend because he is blood and it's innate of the bonding you have between yourselves. Your friend would always be second when it really counted.

Answer 5

It means that a relative will usually stick by a relative as to where you are not related you take your chances

Answer 6

Family ties are closer than other relationships.

Answer 7

Family Is First!!!!!!!! Stranger Is Very Very LAST!!!!!

Answer 8

screw your friends before family