Little Questions Answered v14

In Deathly Hallows, we discover that Dumbledore's cries of agony, "Not them. Kill me. Kill me instead" were caused by him reliving his memory of the day Ariana was killed. To me, it sounds as though he is in the memory itself, and not merely observing it. Well my question is, when I read this, the dialogue didn't seem to fit. The way Dumbledore is begging in HBP, it sounds as though Grindelwald was about to intentially kill Ariana and/or Aberforth. But in Deathly Hallows we learn that the results of the fight were completely accidental, and that the one who actually cast the curse that killed Ariana is unknown. (Sorry, if this doesn't make sense, it's a little hard to explain)

When a fight leads to the death of someone even by accident it can affect those in the fight in different ways . To my mind Dumbledore feels guilty for His sisters death even though it was never proven who really cast the killing curse. His begging is his way of wishing the fight never happened, because he knew what kind of Wizard Grindewald was and what he was capable of doing. Dumbledore feared facing Grindewald because he was scared that Grindewald would confirm that he Dumbledore really killed Ariana. Dumbledore begging to be the one killed is his Guilty conscience reliving Dumbledore's worst memory.

I hope that helped ?

twins:p

twinsrule26:
When a fight leads to the death of someone even by accident it can affect those in the fight in different ways . To my mind Dumbledore feels guilty for His sisters death even though it was never proven who really cast the killing curse. His begging is his way of wishing the fight never happened, because he knew what kind of Wizard Grindewald was and what he was capable of doing. Dumbledore feared facing Grindewald because he was scared that Grindewald would confirm that he Dumbledore really killed Ariana. Dumbledore begging to be the one killed is his Guilty conscience reliving Dumbledore's worst memory.

I hope that helped ?

twins

I think I see what you're saying. So Dumbledore was not saying what he actually said during the fight, but rather his reactions to its aftermath and his regrets and sorrows that followed it. Okay, thanks! :)

Voldemort - returned to full power. That's the first thing he thinks of before he remembers the dementor on the train. That's what Lupin thought Harry's boggart would be as well - that's why he didn't let Harry tackle the boggart in class.

I believe you're thinking of the movie. In the book, Harry tells Lupin he didn't think of Voldemort (POA, page 155, U.S. edition).

I believe you're thinking of the movie. In the book, Harry tells Lupin he didn't think of Voldemort (POA, page 155, U.S. edition).

No, I just finished re-reading POA so I'm thinking of the book. :)

His first thought was Lord Voldemort — a Voldemort returned to full strength. But before he had even started to plan a possible counterattack on a boggart-Voldemort, a horrible image came floating to the surface of his mind ….

A rotting, glistening hand, slithering back beneath a black cloak … a long, rattling breath from an unseen mouth … then a cold so penetrating it felt like drowning ….

He does tell Lupin later that he didn't think of Voldemort in the US edition, but he actually did think of Voldemort first - and then he remembered the dementors.

ETA -

I just checked the UK edition of POA - I love having both versions! :D - and we can add this to the list of things that were corrected in later printings.

'I did think of Voldemort first,' said Harry honestly. 'But then I — I remembered those dementors.'

I wonder if Scholastic will ever put these corrections in the US editions?

Apologies if this seems like a stupid question, but I'm re-reading POA and am a teensy bit confused about something...

Harry, Ron, Hermione and Dumbledore are the only people who know at the end of POA that Sirius is innocent, right? Therefore we can assume that the rest of the wizarding community still believe Sirius to be a crazy mass murderer who wants Harry dead.

If this is the case, then why do people seem to have completely forgotten about him in the next novel? Why have the extra security measures at Hogwarts been lifted? Why is Sirius's name scarcely mentioned? Surely if people still believe him to be a threat to Harry, then security would remain tight.

Have I missed something here?

My only answer to this was, of course, Dumbledore's influence.

He didn't want the Dementors around in the first place and they had tried to "kiss" Harry - even Fudge admitted that. The thing that probably lessened the security the most was that they had caught Sirius and he had escaped again and they (the Ministry) would be positive that he wouldn't be back (in the Hogwarts area) anytime soon.

That's my opinion anyway. Dumbledore still has a lot of power at this point and the behavior of the Dementors (stationed at Hogwarts) over the preceding school year would have been enough to bolster his argument.

sirius also made sure there were 'sightings' far away from hogwarts to help draw attention away from the school

That's a good question. My guess, to add to what the others have said, is that they assumed that he got or gave up whatever he wanted with Harry. Fudge knew that Harry had some sort of run-in with Sirius which Snape "saved" him from. So I think he assumed that Sirius considered it not worth the trouble since Harry's well protected. Bringing it back up to the public would just remind them that the Ministry lost track of a criminal after arresting him, thus embarrassing them even further. So if it seemed like the danger was past, I think they'd just continue the search quietly.

Why couldn't the Weasleys just magic themselves a bigger house? I doubt that houses are one of the five exceptiobs to Gamp's Law of Elemental Transfiguration. Money is, I bet, but if they had added extra floors to thw house like it says they did in CoS, the first time Harry sees it, than why couldn't they have made it more spacious?

DeathlyH:
Why couldn't the Weasleys just magic themselves a bigger house? I doubt that houses are one of the five exceptiobs to Gamp's Law of Elemental Transfiguration. Money is, I bet, but if they had added extra floors to thw house like it says they did in CoS, the first time Harry sees it, than why couldn't they have made it more spacious?

I'm sure that if you could change a house's form to make it more spacious, every witch or wizard would do it. Perhaps there's a size limit to the objects that you can transfigure. For example, it would be easier to transfigure a small rock than a huge boulder. So perhaps the Weasleys didn't have enough magical talent to change their house. Or maybe they preferred it the way it was, and felt there was no need to change it, since it wasn't necessary.

Why couldn't the Weasleys just magic themselves a bigger house? I doubt that houses are one of the five exceptiobs to Gamp's Law of Elemental Transfiguration. Money is, I bet, but if they had added extra floors to thw house like it says they did in CoS, the first time Harry sees it, than why couldn't they have made it more spacious?
Certain charms and spells can wear off over time so maybe, if the Burrow was magically enlarged, the magic would wear off after a while. I know that the Weasleys could in a sense keep fixing it, but as witchsmart pointed out, perhaps they really didn't have enough of a problem with the space issues to see the need to change it.

Ok, that's possible. I just wish we had been told in a book why, exactly, a bunch of wizards who could give themselves whatever were living in a house way too small. Thank you Lisa Turpin and witchsmart. :)

Cedric, laying on the Ground.

Harry, bound to a gravestone with cords conjured by WormTail.

Peter P., WormTail.

the infant-size Voldemort.

later on, the tall, 'skeletally thin' LV that comes rising out of the cauldron & says "robe me".

Crabb & Goyle.

Malfoy.

Space for Bellatrix & her husband, for Snape, Karkaroff, and young Crouch.

i think i'm missing a few names.

i'm taking a class in Flash illustration, animation, and programming, and i would like to draw what i can of the resurrection scene, for one of the midterm or final assignments. so i'm trying to figure out which of the Death-Eaters is present.

Thank you for any help in getting this list straight.

Raviolissimo, I think you're only missing a few Death Eaters who are mentioned by name-- Avery and Nott--, but there may be a few more who were not mentioned but standing in the circle. I would probably need my book to give you a more detailed list.

Certain charms and spells can wear off over time so maybe, if the Burrow was magically enlarged, the magic would wear off after a while. I know that the Weasleys could in a sense keep fixing it, but as witchsmart pointed out, perhaps they really didn't have enough of a problem with the space issues to see the need to change it. There had to be some sort of magic holding that house together though, didn't there? In the description, didn't it say it looked like it started out as a pig sty and rose precariously from there? (not looking at my books, obviously). I just thought it was one of those things the Weasleys just couldn't be bothered with. They added as they needed, but were too busy with their lives to take the trouble to make it elaborate. More of a "Oh, Arthur, the boys are getting too big to all share a room-- could you throw another one on for Charlie?"

Perhaps the old house already had been magically stretched to the breaking point, and so could not stand up to further enlargement. When Harry first sees it, he reflects that it looks as if it were held up by magic, which it probably was.

I think so too. Magic also seems to have a limit. While the house itself was standing up because of magic; it was not a magnificent Manor like house; magic could not create that. The rooms and the things inside the House too reflected their affordability. While a few rooms were added, they were not done proportionally and they did have a limit I think.

ETA -

I just checked the UK edition of POA - I love having both versions! :D - and we can add this to the list of things that were corrected in later printings.

'I did think of Voldemort first,' said Harry honestly. 'But then I — I remembered those dementors.'

I wonder if Scholastic will ever put these corrections in the US editions?

I wonder as well. I originally read PoA as the paperback version, and later ordered it in hardcover so I would have them all in proper book form. It's not corrected in the version I have......

I'm sorry if this has been addressed before but i haven't seen anything here, online or recall it being mentioned in the books on the following 2 things. I apologize if these topics are repetitive.

First, why didn’t Voldemort aparate from place to place while checking on his horcruxes? or at least to the general area? It seems odd he would fly if these items were so important to him when he could pop there instantly.

Regarding Snape, I wondered why Snape rarely used occlumancy. There were many times he could know what Harry was up to but he never seemed to use. He would question and argue with Harry to find the truth when he could just pluck it from his mind.

I realize this was all most likely done to further the story but was there ever a reason given in the context of the story or in interviews with JK?

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

I'm sorry if this has been addressed before but i haven't seen anything here, online or recall it being mentioned in the books on the following 2 things. I apologize if these topics are repetitive.

First, why didn’t Voldemort aparate from place to place while checking on his horcruxes? or at least to the general area? It seems odd he would fly if these items were so important to him when he could pop there instantly.

Well, as I understand it, at the time of finding this out Voldemort was not in the country. Apparating from country to country is banned, and therefore perhaps the Ministry can actually put restraints on wizards so they're not physically able to. I'm not sure if I'm right, it's been a while since I've read DH. If not, then probably for plot devices - Jo didn't want Voldemort to get from place to place too soon.

Regarding Snape, I wondered why Snape rarely used occlumancy. There were many times he could know what Harry was up to but he never seemed to use. He would question and argue with Harry to find the truth when he could just pluck it from his mind.

I realize this was all most likely done to further the story but was there ever a reason given in the context of the story or in interviews with JK?

I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to. I think Snape often used Leglimency to know when Harry was lying to him. He couldn't fully use it to look at memories, but like Voldemort I'm sure he knew when he was being lied to. For example, he knew Harry was lying about the Potions book. Could you perhaps give examples of when Snape would have known something? There is the time in GoF when Harry has just solved the golden egg clue, and then is trapped in the stairs with his invisibility cloak on, with Snape, Filch and Moody around him. I guess Snape could have used Leglimency then, but he had to know that Harry was actually there, I think. I'm not sure.

Regarding Snape, I wondered why Snape rarely used occlumancy. There were many times he could know what Harry was up to but he never seemed to use. He would question and argue with Harry to find the truth when he could just pluck it from his mind. I'm not sure about the first question, but regarding Snape--I was under the impression that it was against school policy to use Occlumency on students. It was illegal to use veritaserum, and I assumed it was for the same reasons. It's a huge invasion of privacy and I doubt Dumbledore would have looked kindly on Snape if he said, "I know he did it headmaster, I saw it in his mind." His Legilimency lessons were a very special case. Also, I think it goes both ways, for example in CoS when Snape sticks up for Harry saying he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time, he clearly knew that Harry was telling the truth. I think he did use it sometimes, but I don't think it's really "admissible evidence" :lol:

As Kala stated, Dumbledore would NOT have been happy knowing that Snape was roaming the halls just taking a peek into students minds. he knew Snape could be trusted with such power.

We know that he did not use it in GOF; he would have clearly been able to know that it was not Mad Eye all along, but it was Crouch in Mad Eye's body all along..and there are a ton of other examples..

However, why did Voldemort use Occlumency on Snape? We know that Voldemort did not trust anyone (trust in my mind is a direct outlet of love) so it boggles my mind why that wasn't used on Snape. Was Snape just that good??

On the subject of Occulmency, is it possible that Dumbledore used it? Especially in those times when he stares at Harry, and Harry feels as though Dumbledore is looking inside him, and right afterwards Dumbledore says that he knows that Harry is telling the truth. Could Dumbledore be using Occulmency to figure that out?

9and3quarters:
However, why did Voldemort use Occlumency on Snape? We know that Voldemort did not trust anyone (trust in my mind is a direct outlet of love) so it boggles my mind why that wasn't used on Snape. Was Snape just that good??

I think he was just that good at shielding his important memories and thoughts from Voldemort. In DH, in the first chapter, Voldemort stares into Snape's eyes and he looks straight back, and Voldemort is satisfied, believing Snape to be telling the truth. Snape was a master of Occulmency, and for this reason he, I think, was able to hide the fact that he was a spy from Voldemort. Also, most of the time Voldemort tried to look into his mind was to confirm some piece of information that Snape had told him, and most of the time it was the truth anyways, so he didn't have to conceal anything, if that makes sense.

Just to clarify things:
Occlumency blocks someone from invading your thoughts
Legilimancy is what you use to look into someone's mind

Raviolissimo, I think you're only missing a few Death Eaters who are mentioned by name-- Avery and Nott--, but there may be a few more who were not mentioned but standing in the circle. I would probably need my book to give you a more detailed list.

thanks a lot, that does help. i need to make a list of Potter characters with notes about how to draw them.

left to right, going clockwise -
spaces for Bellatrix & her husband & Barty Crouch
Lucius Malfoy - blond hair, pointed chin
the executioner for the Ministy - forget his name right now - tall, muscular
Crabb - big, hulking
Goyle - big, hulking
Avery - mid-size, no distinguishing characteristic
Nott - mid-size, no distinguishing characteristic
space for Snape
space for Karkaroff

then, Wormtail, laying on the ground, or revelling in his new silver hand.

Harry, bound to the gravestone. green eyes, glasses, scar, black hair, hair probably not combed.

Cedric, his body on the ground.

Voldemort - light skin, nose that's been reduced to nothing - to me this always sounded like Michael Jackson. tall, skeletally thin. red eyes, slit pupils. a creature with about 1/8 of a human soul.

Nagini - can't forget Nagini. to me she always seemed big and fat, but not too long. Voldemort wears her like she's a feather boa. i figure he might but a lightening charm on her, but i doubt that he shrinks her. if he's 6 1/2 feet tall, then it seems like she would be 12 to 15 feet long. but, she's big enough to eat some of the human victims of Voldemort's deathlust, so she's fat. most 12 foot long snakes don't have the girth to eat a human adult. also, the biggest poisonous snake is about 15 feet, the king cobra, and they're skinny. so Nagini is a unique breed, by Muggle standards.

it's hard for me to imagine the scene without having some Dementors in the background. though i think Goblet of Fire was Dementor Free. except for the scene where one accompanies Fudge into the castle.

the executioner for the Ministy - forget his name right now - tall, muscular
That is Walden Macnair :D

Regarding Legilimency: I think that it would be impossible to really delve into someone's mind without their knowledge. When Snape looked at Harry's memories during Occlumency lessons, Harry experienced them at the same time, and knew exactly what Snape was seeing. However, it is possible to tell whether someone is lying or telling the truth without being invasive enough to for them to know you were using Legilimency on them, but if they were lying, you would have no way of knowing what was really true without looking deeper. I think Dumbledore, Voldemort, and Snape were all constantly aware of the veracity of the people around them. (Think of Dumbledore in those "Is there anything you wish to tell me" moments.)

Yes, I do believe Snape was Just. That. Good. IMO, he was the only person ever to lie to Voldemort without Voldemort realizing it. It takes a knack for detaching from one's contradicting emotions, and I don't know whether anyone else would have been capable of doing it to the degree necessary to delude Voldemort.

I wonder as well. I originally read PoA as the paperback version, and later ordered it in hardcover so I would have them all in proper book form. It's not corrected in the version I have......

I just got the UK editions for Christmas - complete hardback set - and all of them have the corrections in them. I bought a boxset of the first five in paperback in the US editions back in 2005 and none of them have been corrected.

I know Bloomsbury made a bunch of corrections and reprinted in 2004, but I don't know if Scholastic ever did that. It does not appear that they had by 2005 anyway. Maybe they were waiting for the series to be complete. :shrug:

Does anyone know whether there is a complete list of textual corrections somewhere?

The Lexicon has a pretty extensive list of corrections, but I don't think it's complete. The correction to POA that we were discussing is not on it. I only know it was corrected in the UK edition because I compared my UK edition and my US edition.

I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to. I think Snape often used Leglimency to know when Harry was lying to him. He couldn't fully use it to look at memories, but like Voldemort I'm sure he knew when he was being lied to. For example, he knew Harry was lying about the Potions book. Could you perhaps give examples of when Snape would have known something? There is the time in GoF when Harry has just solved the golden egg clue, and then is trapped in the stairs with his invisibility cloak on, with Snape, Filch and Moody around him. I guess Snape could have used Leglimency then, but he had to know that Harry was actually there, I think. I'm not sure.

one example would be when snape accuses haryr of taking his polyjuice potion. He would know it was crouch jr. thats one that stands out for me but in general it seems as if he doesnt use. i know i would all the time if i had it.

one example would be when snape accuses haryr of taking his polyjuice potion. He would know it was crouch jr. thats one that stands out for me but in general it seems as if he doesnt use. i know i would all the time if i had it.

This isn't really a discrepancy. When Snape accuses Harry of taking his polyjuice ingredients (which Crouch Jr. really stole), Harry confusedly thinks that Snape is bringing up the time from second year when Harry (technically Hermione) really did take polyjuice ingredients from him. Since Harry thought they were talking about that old incident in which he was guilty, Harry did lie about it when he told Snape he didn't take it. Snape did not know Harry was thinking of the past, but detected that he was being untruthful, and so concluded that Harry really was the culprit this time.

First, why didn’t Voldemort aparate from place to place while checking on his horcruxes? or at least to the general area? It seems odd he would fly if these items were so important to him when he could pop there instantly.

I think he just liked the feel of the wind on his scalp...but seriously, that is a good question. It reminds me, too, of SS, when they say Dumbledore is "on his way" to London as if he were not apparating. Loonymagic may have a point about a Ministry ban on the country-to-country thing, but the MoM was in V's palm by then, completely. I'm surprised no one else has commented on this.

LookALethifold:
I think he just liked the feel of the wind on his scalp...but seriously, that is a good question. It reminds me, too, of SS, when they say Dumbledore is "on his way" to London as if he were not apparating. Loonymagic may have a point about a Ministry ban on the country-to-country thing, but the MoM was in V's palm by then, completely. I'm surprised no one else has commented on this.



Well, most of the places were we known Voldemort was flying to were either a horcrux location or the prison were Grindelwald was kept. I'm pretty sure that Voldemort flew to Grindelwald's prison instead of Apparating there because there were probably magical wards in the tower that prevented one from Apparating or Disapparating, and so Voldemort had to fly up to the tower. As for the horcrux locations, we know that Voldemort put up protects so that people couldn't Apparate directly there, and so maybe that's why he flew there instead, though he could probably just Apparate on the outside of the non-Apparation zone. Perhaps he did just want to feel the wind in his non-existent hair as LookALethifold suggested. :lol:

I think in OotP Hagrid explains that Dumbledore uses thestrals when he doesn't want to apparate.

Apparating isn't the most comfortable way to travel.

Besides, sometimes the journey is more important than the destination. ;-)

The Lexicon has a pretty extensive list of corrections, but I don't think it's complete. The correction to POA that we were discussing is not on it. I only know it was corrected in the UK edition because I compared my UK edition and my US edition.

Sorry, that just caught my attention. What correction in PoA are you referring to? :)

And now for my own little question:
Are Harry and Ginny's children pure-bloods? Both their parents are magical folk, so I would have assumed so. However, Harry is a half-blood.

It's just a little question that somehow intrigues me. :)

Sorry, that just caught my attention. What correction in PoA are you referring to? :)

And now for my own little question:
Are Harry and Ginny's children pure-bloods? Both their parents are magical folk, so I would have assumed so. However, Harry is a half-blood.

It's just a little question that somehow intrigues me. :) Is Harry technically a half-blood? Both his parents were magical, so I'm not sure. He's not a pureblood, and I wouldn't think his children are either, but I don't know that we ever got a term for it. Lily would be persecuted for being Muggle-born, and Seamus would be considered a half-blood...

I guess I'm not sure.

Sorry, that just caught my attention. What correction in PoA are you referring to? :)

And now for my own little question:
Are Harry and Ginny's children pure-bloods? Both their parents are magical folk, so I would have assumed so. However, Harry is a half-blood.

It's just a little question that somehow intrigues me. :)
No, they would not be considered purebloods by those who care about such things. Theoretically ANY nonmagical heritage would make you non-pureblood. Of course, as Hagrid noted in CofS, there probably are not any true purebloods around anymore in HP world. He may not have reckoned on the Gaunt family, since they had been out of touch with even the magical world for generations apparently, but in any case, they died out except for Voldemort by the time Hagrid said what he did.

Are Harry and Ginny's children pure-bloods? Both their parents are magical folk, so I would have assumed so. However, Harry is a half-blood. I think Jo based a lot of her pureblood supremacy stuff on Nazism, and the Nazi's policy was that if you had 4 German grandparents you were considered of "German blood", having 1 or 2 grandparents of Jewish blood was considered "mixed blood" and 3 or 4 was considered Jewish descent.

So going by that, since Lily was not pureblood, Harry and Ginny's kids would be mixed, but if their children married purebloods then their kids (Harry and Ginny's grandkids) would be considered purebloods I believe. I think they thought 3 generations removed the so called taint.

Sorry, that just caught my attention. What correction in PoA are you referring to? :)

And now for my own little question:
Are Harry and Ginny's children pure-bloods? Both their parents are magical folk, so I would have assumed so. However, Harry is a half-blood.

It's just a little question that somehow intrigues me. :)

Yeah, what question in PoA? :hmm:

If Harry is Half-Blood (which is not sure, since his mother, though Muggleborn, was a witch - unlike other Half-Blood's fathers, Tom Riddle Sr and Snape Sr who didn't have any Magic in them at all), then his kids are quarter-blood. ;)

The matter is being discussed in the "Pureblood" thread somewhere in this forum. :)

If Harry is Half-Blood (which is not sure, since his mother, though Muggleborn, was a witch - unlike other Half-Blood's fathers, Tom Riddle Sr and Snape Sr who didn't have any Magic in them at all), then his kids are quarter-blood. ;)

The matter is being discussed in the "Pureblood" thread somewhere in this forum. :)

Wouldn't that make Harry's kids three quarters blood because Ginny is pure blood?

Is Harry technically a half-blood? Both his parents were magical, so I'm not sure. He's not a pureblood, and I wouldn't think his children are either, but I don't know that we ever got a term for it. Lily would be persecuted for being Muggle-born, and Seamus would be considered a half-blood...

I guess I'm not sure.

Lily was Muggle-born, so Harry is a half-blood. Dumbledore even says this when they're discussing why Voldemort didn't choose Neville in OOP. While all sane, non-dark folk in the series insist that anyone with magical abilities must have had wizards in their ancestries, and that pure-blood families couldn't truly exist, the dogma would consider both Harry and Voldemort to be half-bloods even though Tom Riddle Sr. had no powers and Lily Evans did. Ron and Hermione's kids would also all be considered half-bloods. Harry and Ginny's kids could, ridiculously enough, be considered "3/4-bloods" but as quarters and thirds never seem to enter the wizarding vernacular (except for train stops), they would most likely be considered half-bloods by the pure-blood enthusiasts.

I think he just liked the feel of the wind on his scalp...but seriously, that is a good question. It reminds me, too, of SS, when they say Dumbledore is "on his way" to London as if he were not apparating. Loonymagic may have a point about a Ministry ban on the country-to-country thing, but the MoM was in V's palm by then, completely. I'm surprised no one else has commented on this.

There's a passage somewhere in DH that states that Voldemort is flying towards a location until he gets close enough to apparate. Distance is a factor, probably not a Ministry regulation.

Hermione was watching Ron fret over the state of the Cattermoles, and there was such tenderness in her expression that Harry felt almost as if he had surprised her in the act of kissing him.

Did anyone else have trouble seeing what this sentence meant? I still don't know.

Hermione was watching Ron fret over the state of the Cattermoles, and there was such tenderness in her expression that Harry felt almost as if he had surprised her in the act of kissing him.
Did anyone else have trouble seeing what this sentence meant? I still don't know.
I think we discussed this sentence before. Basically it means that the look Hermione was giving Ron was very intimate, which surprised Harry and made him feel uncomfortable in the same way he would have felt if he had happened upon Ron and Hermione kissing. Hermione was feeling very affectionate toward Ron because of the interest he was taking in other people and was probably thinking about that, which caused the intimate look.

I think we discussed this sentence before. Basically it means that the look Hermione was giving Ron was very intimate, which surprised Harry and made him feel uncomfortable in the same way he would have felt if he had happened upon Ron and Hermione kissing. Hermione was feeling very affectionate toward Ron because of the interest he was taking in other people and was probably thinking about that, which caused the intimate look.

Hmm, I see that now. It certainly makes sense, especially because of the way Harry never brought attention to their relationship directly. Thanks for that answer! :)

Wouldn't that make Harry's kids three quarters blood because Ginny is pure blood?
Three quarters pure wizard or one quarter Muggle, it all depends which way you look at it. ;)

Actually since both his parents are Wizard/Witch, Harry is more Pureblood than Muggle-blood. Lily must have inherited her magic from some ancestor, maybe a Squibb who married a Muggle. Didn't have magic themselves but could pass on the genes.

That's why the concept of "purity of race" is such hogwash. Nobody can claim to be "pure" this or "pure" that. There's been too much mixing of races over the centuries. :shrug:

Lily was Muggle-born, so Harry is a half-blood.
Aaah, Muggleborn, but a witch! Which means she had some wizarding blood somewhere up the family tree.

The "real" half-bloods are people like Severus Snape and Tom Riddle, whose fathers were "pure" Muggles. Sorry to repeat myself.:blush:

That's why the concept of "purity of race" is such hogwash. Nobody can claim to be "pure" this or "pure" that. There's been too much mixing of races over the centuries. :shrug:

Exactly. The whole concept is beyond stupid. :no:

And just look at where centuries of inbreeding amongst the pure-bloods got them: the Gaunts!!!! :whistle:

The "real" half-bloods are people like Severus Snape and Tom Riddle, whose fathers were "pure" Muggles.

Ah, I see what you mean. :cool: I still think Harry qualifies as a half-blood though. :) But, really, as you say, it's all meaningless anyway, which is why Riddle's pure-blood mania was so stupid. If you're a magical person, you're a magical person, and that's the end of it! :agree:

P.S. I love your sig pic. :love: :sad:

Here are Jo's own words on the topic.


Why are some people in the wizarding world (e.g., Harry) called 'half-blood' even though both their parents were magical?

The expressions 'pure-blood', 'half-blood' and 'Muggle-born' have been coined by people to whom these distinctions matter, and express their originators' prejudices. As far as somebody like Lucius Malfoy is concerned, for instance, a Muggle-born is as 'bad' as a Muggle. Therefore Harry would be considered only 'half' wizard, because of his mother's grandparents.

Harry was very upset with the Ministry that they had arrested Stan Shunpike, the conductor of the Knight Bus, and sent him to Azkaban. Did I miss it, or was there any mention of whether he was ever released from Azkaban? I assume he was, but I was wondering if there was ever any mention.

Harry was very upset with the Ministry that they had arrested Stan Shunpike, the conductor of the Knight Bus, and sent him to Azkaban. Did I miss it, or was there any mention of whether he was ever released from Azkaban? I assume he was, but I was wondering if there was ever any mention.
He was arrested in HBP and broke out with the DE. He fought with them against the Order in DH, but he was under the Imperius Curse.

Hermione was watching Ron fret over the state of the Cattermoles, and there was such tenderness in her expression that Harry felt almost as if he had surprised her in the act of kissing him.

Did anyone else have trouble seeing what this sentence meant? I still don't know.

Well, I guess that....or that....ha ha, I can't tell you, I thought I knew, but the sentence IS kind of confusing.

Tenshi:
He was arrested in HBP and broke out with the DE. He fought with them against the Order in DH, but he was under the Imperius Curse.


Speaking of which, did Shan survive the night of the attack on Harry?

He must've survived, if he died the ministry would've announced that the escaped Death Eater Stan Shunpike had been killed by aurors. It would've made them look good especially since they arrested him before if they caught in in DE robes they'd have proof wouldn't they? Or at least proof enough to connect him.

He must've survived, if he died the ministry would've announced that the escaped Death Eater Stan Shunpike had been killed by aurors. It would've made them look good especially since they arrested him before if they caught in in DE robes they'd have proof wouldn't they? Or at least proof enough to connect him.

But Harry didn't read the papers regularly. He was only at the Burrow for a few days before the wedding, and it might not have reached the Daily Prophet yet. Plus, the ministry was pretty much being controlled by Voldemort at that time, and Voldemort wouldn't want it getting out that he had yet again failed to kill Harry Potter. He probably kept the whole chase a secret.

But the point is to keep the public thinking that the government is in charge so catching a "Death Eater" will look great across the front cover. Remember that both Arthur and Kingsley were still working at the ministry when Harry got back they would've known, at the very least Kingsley.

Why was Colin Creevey at Hogwarts before the battle when muggleborns weren't supposed to be there? He was muggleborn wasn't he?

Why was Colin Creevey at Hogwarts before the battle when muggleborns weren't supposed to be there? He was muggleborn wasn't he?He was muggleborn - good point. Was there anything said about muggleborns not being allowed to attend Hogwarts? I can't remember. It seems like a plot hole - surely if he was attending Hogwarts he would have been a 'Harry supporter' and would have been hiding out in the RoR - I can't imagine him acting like a model student and going along with all that was going on at Hogwarts. OR he just kept his head down and tried to blend in. That is IF muggleborns were allowed to attend Hogwarts in the first place! I don't think I helped you at all. :)

Why was Colin Creevey at Hogwarts before the battle when muggleborns weren't supposed to be there? He was muggleborn wasn't he?
I got out my copy of DH and checked, and there is no mention of Colin at Hogwarts before everyone is ushered from the Room of Requirement to the Great Hall. He is not mentioned among those who were living in the Room prior to Harry's return so I would assume he was called back with all of the old members of the DA, like Cho and Angelina and everyone else.

This was answered in the Live Web Chat :)


Roseweasley: Why was colin creavey still a student at hogwarts when he was muggleborn surely he would have been locked up and interogated, not allowed back to school therefore, he shouldnt have died
J.K. Rowling: Colin wasn't a student. He sneaked back with the rest of the DA, along with Fred, George and the rest. He ought not to have stayed behind when McGonagall told him to leave, but alas - he did.

As for Muggleborns being allowed at Hogwarts, they were not. I'm pretty sure that there were blood tests at Hogwarts to make sure that no Muggleborns found their way in. This was one of the reasons Dean was on the run - he wasn't sure if he was a Muggleborn or not :)

So Lily never really loved Snape more than an old chum?? I thought it was going to head in that direction but they seemed to stay friends only:no: unless JK left any subtle hints I missed?

So Lily never really loved Snape more than an old chum?? I thought it was going to head in that direction but they seemed to stay friends only:no: unless JK left any subtle hints I missed?

I remember JKR saying that their relationship could have perhaps developed into something more if Snape hadn't chosen a path in the Dark Arts, but I can't find a quote for you. I don't think anything else actually happened, other than friendship :)

I remember JKR saying that their relationship could have perhaps developed into something more if Snape hadn't chosen a path in the Dark Arts, but I can't find a quote for you. I don't think anything else actually happened, other than friendship :)

Here's that quote :)
(From the Leaky Cauldron Web Chat)

"Jaclyn: Did lily ever have feelings back for snape

J.K. Rowling: Yes. She might even have grown to love him romantically (she certainly loved him as a friend) if he had not loved Dark Magic so much, and been drawn to such loathesome people and acts."

Ah, thank you _LoonyLovegood_! :D I knew I had read it somewhere.

Poor Snape. He was so close to getting all that he had ever wanted - Lily. But he messed it all up. :(

Hey, do you remember if Fleur ever said anything in French in the books? All I can remember is that her parents pronounced everything charmant, but it wasn't one of Fleur's lines.

Hey, do you remember if Fleur ever said anything in French in the books? All I can remember is that her parents pronounced everything charmant, but it wasn't one of Fleur's lines.
I don't know about Fleur specifically, but there are some Beauxbatons girls speaking French in the forest while everybody is running from the Death Eaters after the World Cup in Goblet of Fire. They don't say very much, though.

Who took over for McGonagall as Head of Gryffindor?

Who took over for McGonagall as Head of Gryffindor?

As far as I know, we don't find out.
The "Neville-Head of Gryffindor?" thread in The Wand does have some discussion about it, though.

Hey, do you remember if Fleur ever said anything in French in the books? All I can remember is that her parents pronounced everything charmant, but it wasn't one of Fleur's lines.
She never actually speaks in French, but there are some lines in the narration where she talks to others in French, like after Gabrielle is pulled out of the lake and right before the third task, if I remember correctly.

Hey, do you remember if Fleur ever said anything in French in the books? All I can remember is that her parents pronounced everything charmant, but it wasn't one of Fleur's lines.

But Madame Maxime had already put her arm around Fleur's shoulders and was leading her swiftly out of the room. Harry could hear them both talking very fast in French as they went off into the Great Hall. Karkaroff beckoned to Krum, and they, too, exited, though in silence.

Cedric and his parents were just inside the door. Viktor Krum was over in a corner, conversing with his dark-haired mother and father in rapid Bulgarian. He had inherited his fathers hooked nose. On the other side of the room, Fleur was jabbering away in French to her mother. Fleur's little sister, Gabrielle, was holding her mother's hand. She waved at Harry, who waved back, grinning. Then he saw Mrs.. Weasley and Bill standing in front of the fireplace, beaming at him.

Madame Delacour was most accomplished at household spells and had the oven properly cleaned in a trice; Gabrielle followed her elder sister around, trying to assist in any way she could and jabbering away in rapid French.

If you're looking for specific French phrases - that would take longer to find. :)

I have a quick question -- and I feel very dumb for asking this, for it's probably obvious.

In the Chapter "The Princes Tale" in DH, Dumbledore at one point says to Snape that he is very brave, and then he mused that perhaps they sort too soon.
Snape looks stricken at this, but I don't see why. Dumbledore was suggesting that perhaps he should have been in Gryffindor, right?

On Pottercast (by the Leaky Cauldron) they mentioned that this dialogue of Dumbldore's was very cold. I don't understand what is so cold about it, except perhaps that Snape was insulted that Dumbledore didn't think him Slytherin-y enough?

Please help me, I feel so silly asking this. :p

No question is silly! I guess it is like you assumed. It does not seem to be a compliment for Snape, who likes Slytherin very much and also favored Slytherings during his time as teacher.

Additionally I got the impression most of these conversations between Dumbledore and Snape happened rather cold. But then it was no small issue Dumbledore wanted Snape to spend his life with. There's a good discussion about their relation in Snape and Dumbledore: Joint Character Analysis (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=113993&highlight=dumbledore+snape).

In the King's Cross scene, was there really any doubt that Harry would return. I mean, not among us readers, but even as tired and frustrated as Harry was could he have even contemplated not returning to the people he loved?

How the hell did the slytherin basalisk travel around the school in the pipes when its a gigantic snake? Of courrse there is the obviouse anwer, that there are REALLY REALLY BIG PIPES, but that would just be ridiculose.
And also, if hogwarts was founded over a thousand years ago, and Salazar Slytherin built the chamber of secrets around that time, how would he have thought the basalisk would get around the school, because pipes wern't invented in those days?

I don't know about Fleur specifically, but there are some Beauxbatons girls speaking French in the forest while everybody is running from the Death Eaters after the World Cup in Goblet of Fire. They don't say very much, though.

Yes it was something like where is Madame Maxine...but in French obviously, something that was quite obvious to non-french speakers. I don't think there would have been much point putting anything more complicated as most English speakers wouldn't have understood

I'm re-reading the entire series, so here's my questions about book 1:
1.) How does Dumbledore get the stone in Harry's pocket? I understand that the Mirror of Erised allows Harry to FIND the stone, but what bit of magic does Dumbledore do to get the stone in his pocket?
2.) How does Voldemort know its in Harry's pocket? Maybe legilimacy (sp?)
3.) How does Quirrel break into Gringotts to get the stone?
Thanks:
:relax:

I'm re-reading the entire series, so here's my questions about book 1:
1.) How does Dumbledore get the stone in Harry's pocket? I understand that the Mirror of Erised allows Harry to FIND the stone, but what bit of magic does Dumbledore do to get the stone in his pocket?
2.) How does Voldemort know its in Harry's pocket? Maybe legilimacy (sp?)
3.) How does Quirrel break into Gringotts to get the stone?
Thanks:
:relax:

Excellent questions, prongs. I'll try my best to answer them.

1) I think Dumbledore explains it in the book dosen't he? Dumbledore had put a certain complex charm on the mirror so that only a person who wanted the stone but not to use it would be able to get it. I assume it would be similiar to the complicated and ancient magic of a true Gyffindor being able to summon the sword from the sorting hat in times of need.

Another question I have is where was the stone before it was summoned by Harry? Inside the mirror?

2) You got it. This is our first sign in the books of Voldemort being able to read people's mind, especially people like Harry who wear their hearts on their sleeves.

3) I would assume it would be easier to break into a Gringotts vault when the vault in question was emptied of it's treasure. Remember, Hagrid had removed the stone from the vault on the morning before Qurriell broke in. Besides having the great mastermind that Voldemort is on your side would help greatly. Only a wizard as cunning and intelligent as Voldemort would be able to do something as extraordinary as breaking into a Gringotts vault, as Ron says on the train in PS, "People get nervous when something like this happens, thinking maybe You Know Who is behind it."

I have a question of my own:

In COS, Riddle mentions how Hagrid used to 'go off into the forbidden forest and wrestle with trolls' and 'raise werewolf cubs' under his bed when he was in school.

Is this true, or is Riddle being sarcastic? We've seen how big a tweleve foot tall mountain troll can be. How could Hagrid have possibly survived an encounter with a troll being only 'half' giant? Are forest trolls smaller?

And how can you 'raise' werewolf cubs? I thought someone can only become a werewolf uness they are bitten? Are people BORN werewolves and if so do they still mutate into humans when it is not full moon? More than this how can you raise them under your bed?

I re-read COS last week and found this very interesting.

Maybe this was already asked, but when the piece of Voldemort's soul was killed that lived in Harry, did Harry lose his ability to speak to snakes? Or was he still a parselmouth without Voldemort's soul bit?

Maybe this was already asked, but when the piece of Voldemort's soul was killed that lived in Harry, did Harry lose his ability to speak to snakes? Or was he still a parselmouth without Voldemort's soul bit?

Harry did lose his ability to speak parseltongue, JKR said. Voldemort's soul was the one that gave him that ability, without it, there was no other thing that could make him speak parseltongue. I think he rather liked the fact that he couldn't speak such dark language.

How the hell did the slytherin basalisk travel around the school in the pipes when its a gigantic snake? Of courrse there is the obviouse anwer, that there are REALLY REALLY BIG PIPES, but that would just be ridiculose.
And also, if hogwarts was founded over a thousand years ago, and Salazar Slytherin built the chamber of secrets around that time, how would he have thought the basalisk would get around the school, because pipes wern't invented in those days?
There are Sewer pipes in many old British Cities that were made by the Romans over 2000 years ago . So the ability to make big sewer pipes would have been known to the four Founders, Who were the greatest Witches & Wizards of their age 1000 years ago . I don't see any problem with there being pipes big enough for a Basalisk to crawl through .


In COS, Riddle mentions how Hagrid used to 'go off into the forbidden forest and wrestle with trolls' and 'raise werewolf cubs' under his bed when he was in school.

Is this true, or is Riddle being sarcastic?

He was being his regular Evil self ,never saying anything nice about anyone unless it benifitted him by doing so. Yes he was being Sarcastic .

Another question I have is where was the stone before it was summoned by Harry? Inside the mirror?
That's a good question....I'm not sure we'll ever know exactly where it was unless JKR tells us. I don't think it would have been in the mirror, the mirror merely reflects the current deepest desire of the person peering in. More likely the stone would have been somewhere in the room, the way I see it.

I have a question of my own:

In COS, Riddle mentions how Hagrid used to 'go off into the forbidden forest and wrestle with trolls' and 'raise werewolf cubs' under his bed when he was in school.

Is this true, or is Riddle being sarcastic? We've seen how big a tweleve foot tall mountain troll can be. How could Hagrid have possibly survived an encounter with a troll being only 'half' giant? Are forest trolls smaller?

And how can you 'raise' werewolf cubs? I thought someone can only become a werewolf uness they are bitten? Are people BORN werewolves and if so do they still mutate into humans when it is not full moon? More than this how can you raise them under your bed?

I re-read COS last week and found this very interesting.

I think Riddle was lying, in the most insulting manner possible. Hagrid was half-giant, Riddle would have despised him just for that. And based on the fact everyone could see that Hagrid loved all creatures, even monstrous ones, it would be a lie that people would tend to at least partly believe.

Another question I have is where was the stone before it was summoned by Harry? Inside the mirror?

Ok - this is basically what I was trying to get at in my original (poorly worded) question. I'm not sure at all what the answer is. :grumble:


I have a question of my own:

In COS, Riddle mentions how Hagrid used to 'go off into the forbidden forest and wrestle with trolls' and 'raise werewolf cubs' under his bed when he was in school.

Is this true, or is Riddle being sarcastic? We've seen how big a tweleve foot tall mountain troll can be. How could Hagrid have possibly survived an encounter with a troll being only 'half' giant? Are forest trolls smaller?

And how can you 'raise' werewolf cubs? I thought someone can only become a werewolf uness they are bitten? Are people BORN werewolves and if so do they still mutate into humans when it is not full moon? More than this how can you raise them under your bed?

I would interpret this as mean sarcasm on Riddle's part. Still, I'm not sure how you can raise werewolf cubs (I've personally never tried :lol:) Isn't a person only a werewolf during the full moon? If so, then Hagrid would be raising a baby too, wouldn't he? Prof Mooney (a werewolf) and Tonks had a baby in DH and, if I remember correctly, I think the baby was fine - he was a metamorph... like Tonks.

That's a good question....I'm not sure we'll ever know exactly where it was unless JKR tells us. I don't think it would have been in the mirror, the mirror merely reflects the current deepest desire of the person peering in. More likely the stone would have been somewhere in the room, the way I see it.

This might seem wierd, but in light of McGonagall's revelation that Vanished objects go into nonbeing, or everything, I actually believe Dumbledore may have made the spell so that the Stone was Vanished, but the incredible type of magic he used to get it to the one who wanted it, but not use it, could call it back. That way there is no chance that Quirrell would stumble upon it while searching the room. :) Very weird and far-fetched, I know, but I always imagined the Sotne as not really being anywhere at all, and Dumbledore, with his incredible powers, could make it appear.

Yes, I'm also sure that Riddle was just exaggerating. Hagrid wouldn't try to raise werewolves, and plus, how would you do that? They are human sometimes too. He couldn't just keep a person under his bed and wait for the full moon every month.

In the King's Cross scene, was there really any doubt that Harry would return. I mean, not among us readers, but even as tired and frustrated as Harry was could he have even contemplated not returning to the people he loved?

Not really, I think. Harry just needed a moment to screw himself up to face life again, and all the stress and uncertainty it held. Having convinced himself to face death, he found it wasn't so bad -- returning to life would mean further pain. Harry was finally getting some answers from Dumbledore, and once he left King's Cross, he would be on his own again. He had also expected to be reunited with his parents, Sirius, and Lupin, and returning to life meant he wouldn't be seeing them again after all. Deep down, I think he knew his decision was made without having to think about it. I know I have had moments when I knew I would ultimately make a certain decision, but put off the moment of doing so if the decision was uncomfortable.


I have a question of my own:

In COS, Riddle mentions how Hagrid used to 'go off into the forbidden forest and wrestle with trolls' and 'raise werewolf cubs' under his bed when he was in school.

Is this true, or is Riddle being sarcastic? We've seen how big a tweleve foot tall mountain troll can be. How could Hagrid have possibly survived an encounter with a troll being only 'half' giant? Are forest trolls smaller?

And how can you 'raise' werewolf cubs? I thought someone can only become a werewolf uness they are bitten? Are people BORN werewolves and if so do they still mutate into humans when it is not full moon? More than this how can you raise them under your bed?

I re-read COS last week and found this very interesting.

I'm quite sure he was either being sarcastic or trying to exaggerate Hagrid's "wild" habits. I see a parallel with Petunia's "frog spawn" rant in PS/SS; Jo confirmed that Lily didn't really do all the spells Petunia accuses her of at home, but Petunia just registered the "worst possible" scenario.

Prof Mooney (a werewolf) and Tonks had a baby in DH and, if I remember correctly, I think the baby was fine - he was a metamorph... like Tonks.

Yes, that's right. Teddy Lupin had no lycanthropic tendencies at all. :)

And how can you 'raise' werewolf cubs? I thought someone can only become a werewolf uness they are bitten? Are people BORN werewolves and if so do they still mutate into humans when it is not full moon? More than this how can you raise them under your bed?
Jo answered that part:

blaise_42 asks: In Chamber of Secrets, Hagrid is supposed to have raised werewolf cubs under his bed. Are these the same kind of werewolves as Professor Lupin?
jkrowling_bn: no... Riddle was telling lies about Hagrid, just slandering him

This might seem wierd, but in light of McGonagall's revelation that Vanished objects go into nonbeing, or everything, I actually believe Dumbledore may have made the spell so that the Stone was Vanished, but the incredible type of magic he used to get it to the one who wanted it, but not use it, could call it back. That way there is no chance that Quirrell would stumble upon it while searching the room. :) Very weird and far-fetched, I know, but I always imagined the Sotne as not really being anywhere at all, and Dumbledore, with his incredible powers, could make it appear.

Interesting (and I don't think it's far fetched, it's a cool idea). But I'm not sure how likely that would be in this case. If the stone was vanished, that would mean that Harry (since Dumbledore was not around) would have to undo the vanishing spell before he could acquire the stone under the conditions of the charm. Being a first year, I doubt very much that Harry would have that type of skill yet, and Dumbledore would know that. I tend to think that the stone was physically there, possibly hidden from view, and perfectly safe under Dumbledore's brilliantly reasoned charm.

If vanished items go into nonbeing, it would seem impossible to bring them back. It sounds as if the object's atoms were irreparably scattered if "nonbeing" is "everything."

Good points

Thank you for answering my question, by the way. ^_^

Does Ginny work and get a job? Or does she just stay at home?

Does Ginny work and get a job? Or does she just stay at home?
J.K. Rowling: After a few years as a celebrated player for the Holyhead Harpies, Ginny retired to have her family and to become the Senior Quidditch correspondent at the Daily Prophet!

Interesting (and I don't think it's far fetched, it's a cool idea). But I'm not sure how likely that would be in this case. If the stone was vanished, that would mean that Harry (since Dumbledore was not around) would have to undo the vanishing spell before he could acquire the stone under the conditions of the charm. Being a first year, I doubt very much that Harry would have that type of skill yet, and Dumbledore would know that. I tend to think that the stone was physically there, possibly hidden from view, and perfectly safe under Dumbledore's brilliantly reasoned charm.

It sounds more plausible to me that the Stone was vanished. I don't think Harry would have to know how to unvanish something, that requirement would almost defeat the purpose of how to get the Stone. I assume there is more than one kind of vanishing spell.

If vanished items go into nonbeing, it would seem impossible to bring them back. It sounds as if the object's atoms were irreparably scattered if "nonbeing" is "everything."

Nonbeing isn't everything, it's nothing.

Did Prof. Lupin ever see Scabbers on the train to Hogwarts?

Did Prof. Lupin ever see Scabbers on the train to Hogwarts?
It doesn't say it. But most of the time he was sleeping anyway, so he could have missed him.

It doesn't say it. But most of the time he was sleeping anyway, so he could have missed him.He seemed very awake and cognizant of what had gone on around him when the Dementor came, so I always thought he was merely feigning sleep. I could be mistaken.

I know Ron kept Scabbers in his pocket because of Crookshanks, so even if Lupn was awake, that doesn't mean he ever laid eyes on the rat. I just couldn't remember if Scabbers ever came out of Ron's pocket when Lupin could have seen him.

Did Prof. Lupin ever see Scabbers on the train to Hogwarts?

Well, Lupin didn't realize until the end of PoA that Scabbers was Peter, did he? So if he had seen him on the train, I don't think he would have thought twice about it.

Yeah it was Sirius who recognized him.

What I wonder is what Peter's worst memory was because part of me thinks it's that last visit to the Potters. Lily's letter stated that he looked down so there was that part of him that felt remorse for what he was about to do.

Yeah it was Sirius who recognized him.

What I wonder is what Peter's worst memory was because part of me thinks it's that last visit to the Potters. Lily's letter stated that he looked down so there was that part of him that felt remorse for what he was about to do.

Didn't she say he, "Looks a little down"?
He's handing over his best friend and his family to be killed; I sure as heck hope that, if nothing else, he looks a little down. I would guess he does feel some remorse, since we know that there's no character that's 100% evil besides Voldemort, but not enough to stop him from doing what he did.

Well, Lupin didn't realize until the end of PoA that Scabbers was Peter, did he? So if he had seen him on the train, I don't think he would have thought twice about it.
That's actually what prompted me to ask the question. Sirius recognized Peter by glancing at a newspaper that the Minister was holding outside his cell, recognzied him quickly enough to ask Fudge to hand him the paper. So I was wondering if Lupin saw him on the train, and if he did but didn't recognize Peter, because he "knew" Peter was dead.

That's actually what prompted me to ask the question. Sirius recognized Peter by glancing at a newspaper that the Minister was holding outside his cell, recognzied him quickly enough to ask Fudge to hand him the paper. So I was wondering if Lupin saw him on the train, and if he did but didn't recognize Peter, because he "knew" Peter was dead.

That's probably the case. Lupin seemed to be really convinced that Pettigrew was dead, so he would have just thought Scabbers was another rat. Sirius only recognized him because he knew that Peter was still alive. Unless Lupin looked closely, ehich he had no reason to do, and noticed Scabbers' paw, then I don't think he would have suspected anything. :)

Peter was in Ron's pocket the whole time on the train, and Lupin was asleep and so I think he would not have noticed the rat. Had he seen the rat, I am sure he would have recognized it at once. Peter too, listening to their conversation as soon as they got into the compartment would not have come out at all, knowing Lupin was also there.

It sounds more plausible to me that the Stone was vanished. I don't think Harry would have to know how to unvanish something, that requirement would almost defeat the purpose of how to get the Stone. I assume there is more than one kind of vanishing spell.
I have to agree with Gwenhwyfara. The vanishing spell being discussed here was the one McGonagall referred to at Ravenclaw's dormitory entrance in DH, and there would be no coming back for the stone from that particular vanishing spell. And if the stone was vanished, I'm sure Dumbledore's charm would have broken (as the Fidelius did in Godric's Hollow), so Harry wouldn't have been able to obtain the stone anyway. To my knowledge, we aren't given an example in HP of another type of vanishing spell.

Nonbeing isn't everything, it's nothing.
Well, since everything is really nothing because all is illusion, non-being is also everything.

When Peter and the other Marauders turned into their Animal forms, did it ever say that they did it before Lupin changed into the Werewolf or only after? What I'm asking is would Lupin have seen Peter as a rat enough to be able to spot him like Sirius did ?

twins:p

I think it would be just before; if they were unable to transform for some reason and Lupin by then transformed into a werewolf, well that would have been dangerous for them.

They needed Peter to touch the knot on the Whomping Willow and Werewolves unless provoked will only attack humans.

I'm re-reading the entire series, so here's my questions about book 1:
1.) How does Dumbledore get the stone in Harry's pocket? I understand that the Mirror of Erised allows Harry to FIND the stone, but what bit of magic does Dumbledore do to get the stone in his pocket?

That was the charm - it was not given a specific name. The mirror was the key to finding the stone. Basically, anyone who looked into the Mirror of Erised wanting to find the stone, but not use it, would get the stone. The stone went to Harry's pocket because he looked into the mirror hoping to prevent Quirrell from getting the stone - not to use the stone himself.

2.) How does Voldemort know its in Harry's pocket? Maybe legilimacy (sp?)

That was our first clue towards Legillimency and Voldemort being able to do that. It was also a clue towards the connection between Harry and Voldemort to some extent.

3.) How does Quirrel break into Gringotts to get the stone?

I think he would have done that very similar to how the trio break into the Lestrange vault in DH. It wouldn't have been as difficult for Quirrell because he was not wanted like the trio was in DH. All he would have to do is ask to be taken to his own vault and - as soon as they got into the cart away from everyone else - put the goblin steering the cart under the Imperius curse and make him go to vault 713 and open it instead.

Another question I have is where was the stone before it was summoned by Harry? Inside the mirror?

Dumbledore said the mirror could be used to find the stone - not that it was inside the mirror. Harry assumed that the stone was inside the mirror, but Dumbledore emphasized the word "find" when he explained what he had done. I've always felt that Dumbledore kept the stone with him the whole time. The obstacles that were set up always seemed more like a test for the trio than anything else to me - they were each skewed towards the trio's individual talents in some way or other. And - with the exception of Fluffy - none of those obstacles were put in place until after Christmas. The mirror was in that empty classroom until then. It was after Harry discovered the mirror and Dumbledore saw that what Harry desired most was family that the other obstacles were put in place.

I think Fluffy was put there as a diversion initially - to make Voldemort and whoever was helping him believe the stone was being kept there. I don't think the stone was ever down there. I think Dumbledore had it the whole time - until Harry looked in the mirror and summoned it.

I have a question of my own:

In COS, Riddle mentions how Hagrid used to 'go off into the forbidden forest and wrestle with trolls' and 'raise werewolf cubs' under his bed when he was in school.

Is this true, or is Riddle being sarcastic? We've seen how big a tweleve foot tall mountain troll can be. How could Hagrid have possibly survived an encounter with a troll being only 'half' giant? Are forest trolls smaller?

And how can you 'raise' werewolf cubs? I thought someone can only become a werewolf uness they are bitten? Are people BORN werewolves and if so do they still mutate into humans when it is not full moon? More than this how can you raise them under your bed?

I re-read COS last week and found this very interesting.

Well, Riddle was being sarcastic and attempting to slander Hagrid - as someone else pointed out with the quote from Jo.

However, there are different kinds of trolls. Mountain trolls are huge - as we see in PS/SS. However, the security trolls used to guard the Fat Lady's portrait in POA were not that big - and they seemed at least a bit more intelligent than mountain trolls.

According to Lupin in DH, being a werewolf can be inherited. That was one of the reasons he felt so guilty about Tonks being pregnant. He was sure the baby would be a werewolf and the thought tormented him.

“My kind don’t usually breed! It will be like me, I am convinced of it — how can I forgive myself when I knowingly risked passing on my own condition to an innocent child? And if, by some miracle, it is not like me, then it will be better off, a hundred times so, without a father of whom it must always be ashamed!”

While Riddle wasn't telling the complete truth about Hagrid, I think he was exaggerating Hagrid's behavior for that lie. I can see Hagrid sneaking off into the forest - particularly with his fascination for "interestin' creatures". And he did hatch Aragog and attempt to raise him in the castle.

Peter was in Ron's pocket the whole time on the train, and Lupin was asleep and so I think he would not have noticed the rat. Had he seen the rat, I am sure he would have recognized it at once. Peter too, listening to their conversation as soon as they got into the compartment would not have come out at all, knowing Lupin was also there.

Right. Lupin never saw Scabbers on the train or at Hogwarts. Scabbers stayed in Ron's pocket the whole time on the train because Hermione let Crookshanks out - and he probably heard them mention Lupin's name as well. Ron never took Scabbers out of Gryffindor tower at the castle so Lupin never would have seen him.

As someone else pointed out, Lupin probably wouldn't have paid any attention to Ron's rat anyway because he believed Pettigrew was dead. It wasn't until he saw Pettigrew's name on the map that he realized Pettigrew had to be alive. Sirius recognized Pettigrew's rat form in the picture because he knew Pettigrew was alive - he would have closely examined any rat or picture of a rat he saw because of that. Lupin didn't know so it's unlikely that he would have noticed anything.

I have to agree with Gwenhwyfara. The vanishing spell being discussed here was the one McGonagall referred to at Ravenclaw's dormitory entrance in DH, and there would be no coming back for the stone from that particular vanishing spell. And if the stone was vanished, I'm sure Dumbledore's charm would have broken (as the Fidelius did in Godric's Hollow), so Harry wouldn't have been able to obtain the stone anyway. To my knowledge, we aren't given an example in HP of another type of vanishing spell.

I wouldn't say that another type can't exist just because we don't see it. Do we even see how Vanished objects come back? Bill (I think) used the vanishing spell on the Order's scrolls in OotP, and I think we can agree that he did not disintegrate them, but vanished them.

If Dumbledore's charm was dependent on a Vanishing spell, why should the charm have broken? Why is it impossible that Dumbledore could have done a more complicated version of the Vanishing spell, which is a Transfiguration spell, if you're not willing to concede that more than one vanishing spell exists? Godric's Hollow was not Vanished, I don't think that example relates to this. I'd be willing to accept that the spell was something other than a Vanishing spell, something we haven't seen before, but I don't see anything that contradicts that it could have been a Vanishing spell.

Well, since everything is really nothing because all is illusion, non-being is also everything.

I interpreted the nonbeing status McGonagall was talking about to be a dimensional difference. It's a concept that closely parallels the part of quantum theory dealing with being/nonbeing.

Nonbeing isn't everything, it's nothing.

McGonagall said it was, in her conversation with the Ravenclaw tower door knocker:


Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, American edition, p. 519
"Where do Vanished objects go?"
"Into nonbeing, which is to say, everything."
"Nicely phrased."

That's actually what prompted me to ask the question. Sirius recognized Peter by glancing at a newspaper that the Minister was holding outside his cell, recognzied him quickly enough to ask Fudge to hand him the paper. So I was wondering if Lupin saw him on the train, and if he did but didn't recognize Peter, because he "knew" Peter was dead.

Another likely factor contributing to Sirius' recognition is the fact that he was stuck in Azkaban and very bored. He would have scrutinized every inch of that newspaper because it was the only thing he had to do, and the only genuine outside information he had had in a very long time.

Another likely factor contributing to Sirius' recognition is the fact that he was stuck in Azkaban and very bored. He would have scrutinized every inch of that newspaper because it was the only thing he had to do, and the only genuine outside information he had had in a very long time. But wasn't the picture of Peter what prompted Sirius to ask Fudge for the paper in the first place?

That's actually what prompted me to ask the question. Sirius recognized Peter by glancing at a newspaper that the Minister was holding outside his cell, recognzied him quickly enough to ask Fudge to hand him the paper. So I was wondering if Lupin saw him on the train, and if he did but didn't recognize Peter, because he "knew" Peter was dead.

Sirius asked for the paper just to see it, Fudge mentioned him talking about missing doing the cross word puzzle. I don't think he caught sight of Peter until after he had the paper. Makes sense because the page has to be turned towards Sirius just right to catch such a tiny animal in a picture

I know if I were in prison, I would snatch at any opportunity to acquire some reading material -- no matter what it was. Sirius was very, very bored, and didn't even have insanity to take his mind off the monotony of his cell like the other prisoners did. He wouldn't have to have any particular reason for asking for that particular paper -- he just saw an opportunity to get something to do, that would give him something else to think about than Peter's betrayal, which he later said was the one thing that kept him sane since it wasn't a happy memory and the dementors couldn't take it from him. Seeing as this thought would have mounted to obsession in the absence of any distractions, it's no wonder Sirius spotted Peter right off, even in a tiny picture. He had been brooding on that rat for twelve years, after all.

Sirius asked for the paper just to see it, Fudge mentioned him talking about missing doing the cross word puzzle. I don't think he caught sight of Peter until after he had the paper. Makes sense because the page has to be turned towards Sirius just right to catch such a tiny animal in a picture

That's what I thought happened as well. Sirius had been locked away with no contact with the outside world - I think he merely wanted to find out what was happening in the real world, away from Azkaban. It was a complete coincidence that the newspaper happened to have the Weasley's in it.

Sirius asked for the paper just to see it, Fudge mentioned him talking about missing doing the cross word puzzle. I don't think he caught sight of Peter until after he had the paper. Makes sense because the page has to be turned towards Sirius just right to catch such a tiny animal in a picture
I always read it that he'd just used the crossword as an excuse to get the paper away from Fudge, and the only real reason he'd wanted it was because he had spotted Peter. But I could be wrong.

Fudge was unsettled when Sirius calmly asked for the crossword. That would be reason enough for him to do it -- bothering the Minister was an opportunity he couldn't pass up.

This is one I have to ask so that I have a clever answer for my husband... I was discussing the resurrection stone and Dumbledore's clever use of the Snitch that Harry won in his first match in which to hide it. My husband asks, "so, if Harry could open it because the thing had a memory for his skin, how was Dumbledore able to open it?"

*insert sounds of crickets chirping...

I don't know if I know this and simply forgot the answer, or if this is one for the Department of Mysteries... :lol:

Fudge was unsettled when Sirius calmly asked for the crossword. That would be reason enough for him to do it -- bothering the Minister was an opportunity he couldn't pass up.

Also, Sirius could not be overly agitated or show his alarm, because the Dementors would undoubtedly be called by Fudge, who was forever seeing his life as being threatened...

He seemed very awake and cognizant of what had gone on around him when the Dementor came, so I always thought he was merely feigning sleep. I could be mistaken.

I know Ron kept Scabbers in his pocket because of Crookshanks, so even if Lupn was awake, that doesn't mean he ever laid eyes on the rat. I just couldn't remember if Scabbers ever came out of Ron's pocket when Lupin could have seen him.I was just listening to PoA audio book - it is pretty clear that Scabbers is in Ron's pocket the whole time - and that Lupin is asleep the whole time. It is only with the train stopping and the Dementor's entrance that he wakes up.

One thing I did just notice was that Scabbers is in Ron's pocket at one point when Harry is talking about how he would want revenge on Sirius because he betrayed Harry's parents - so Scabbers hears that as well as what Harry hears when the Dementors come near.

This is one I have to ask so that I have a clever answer for my husband... I was discussing the resurrection stone and Dumbledore's clever use of the Snitch that Harry won in his first match in which to hide it. My husband asks, "so, if Harry could open it because the thing had a memory for his skin, how was Dumbledore able to open it?"

*insert sounds of crickets chirping...

I don't know if I know this and simply forgot the answer, or if this is one for the Department of Mysteries... :lol:I had considered that myself. It doesn't specifically say how he opened it. I made the assumption that he was able to use his talent and enormous brain to open the snitch (or it was just easily opened because it was an ordinary snitch) and then he put the spell on it to only open when Harry says "I am about to die". I think the mouth thing was only to read the message. Because nothing happened when he put his lips to it, only that the message appeared. It opened later - 'at the close'.

I know if I were in prison, I would snatch at any opportunity to acquire some reading material -- no matter what it was. Sirius was very, very bored, and didn't even have insanity to take his mind off the monotony of his cell like the other prisoners did. He wouldn't have to have any particular reason for asking for that particular paper -- he just saw an opportunity to get something to do, that would give him something else to think about than Peter's betrayal, which he later said was the one thing that kept him sane since it wasn't a happy memory and the dementors couldn't take it from him. Seeing as this thought would have mounted to obsession in the absence of any distractions, it's no wonder Sirius spotted Peter right off, even in a tiny picture. He had been brooding on that rat for twelve years, after all.
I agree with this. I think Sirius was just bored out of his brain and saw Fudge with the paper. He wasn't trying to unnerve Fudge - Fudge was just unnerved because Sirius seemed so sane when most other prisoners go mad within weeks - and then you have Sirius who is sane enough to ask for a paper, sane enough to want to read or even do something like a puzzle - the crossword.

It wasn't until he saw the paper that he noticed Scabbers and then he started muttering 'He's at Hogwarts'. That might have even happened while Fudge was still on his visit to Azkaban.

This is one I have to ask so that I have a clever answer for my husband... I was discussing the resurrection stone and Dumbledore's clever use of the Snitch that Harry won in his first match in which to hide it. My husband asks, "so, if Harry could open it because the thing had a memory for his skin, how was Dumbledore able to open it?"



Well, snitches don't usually open, do they? I think what happened was that Dumbledore took the snitch -- a perfectly ordinary snitch that just happened to have Harry's skin memory in it -- and charmed it so that it would a) open and conceal a small important object, and b) so that it would reveal its message only at the touch of the person it was already charmed to recognize. We don't even know that snitches are hollow. Dumbledore might have hollowed this one out for his own purposes, especially if a snitch containing a stone did not seem to the ministry inspectors to be heavier than an ordinary one. He made sure that Harry was the only person who could get the message that explained how to open it. It could have opened to anyone who told it "I am about to die," but Dumbledore with his attention to detail would have wanted to make absolutely sure that Harry was the only one who got the Stone, and so made the combination of skin memory and passphrase necessary to open it.

Interesting question, Kimagine. I would think that Dumbledore knew some incredible spell that allowed him to make the Ring disappear, then have it reappear inside of the Snitch. That way, he never touched it. Probably not true, but that's what I think would happen. :)

So if Harry is the first person to ever touch that snitch do they use a new one every game? It seems a bit too perfect for them to have just gotten a new one when he showed up.

So if Harry is the first person to ever touch that snitch do they use a new one every game? It seems a bit too perfect for them to have just gotten a new one when he showed up.
They must keep a few snitches in reserve IMO, as it could be that he simply flies away or it gets stolen. But I think that they probably continued playing with that particular snitch and that DD just went and got it from the collection. I see no reason why they should get a new one every game.

They must keep a few snitches in reserve IMO, as it could be that he simply flies away or it gets stolen. But I think that they probably continued playing with that particular snitch and that DD just went and got it from the collection. I see no reason why they should get a new one every game.
But the whole point of the charm that makes it respond to only the first person to touch it is so that they can prove who got the snitch in a game. For that to be effective they would have to use a new one for every game. Hogwarts only has 6 games per year, so that is not too much, and they can use the old ones for practice sessiosn.

I feel stupid asking this, but I'm wondering how Kreacher knew Bellatrix so well in OOTP. I mean, I would assume she had been at Sirius' house in the past, so he would have met her, but he seemed to know her quite well (it said the picture of her seemed to be Kreacher's favorite). Did Bellatrix and Kreacher ever live in the same house or was this just his natural house-elf loyalty to the Black family, and her being a loyal black?

I feel stupid asking this, but I'm wondering how Kreacher knew Bellatrix so well in OOTP. I mean, I would assume she had been at Sirius' house in the past, so he would have met her, but he seemed to know her quite well (it said the picture of her seemed to be Kreacher's favorite). Did Bellatrix and Kreacher ever live in the same house or was this just his natural house-elf loyalty to the Black family, and her being a loyal black?
I think Kreacher's loyalty to Bellatrix had more to do with his original Black owners love and support for anyone who was in league with Voldemort. He probably idolized her because his mistress was probably very fond of her niece that stayed so much in line with the family's beliefs. I'm sure Kreacher met Bellatrix when she was younger and probably came by Grimmauld Place, but I doubt they had any sort of strong bond or friendship. Kreacher's fondness is something like a hero-worship he inherited from Mrs. Black.

I think Kreacher's loyalty to Bellatrix had more to do with his original Black owners love and support for anyone who was in league with Voldemort. He probably idolized her because his mistress was probably very fond of her niece that stayed so much in line with the family's beliefs. I'm sure Kreacher met Bellatrix when she was younger and probably came by Grimmauld Place, but I doubt they had any sort of strong bond or friendship. Kreacher's fondness is something like a hero-worship he inherited from Mrs. Black.

Alright, that makes sense. Thank you!

This is one I have to ask so that I have a clever answer for my husband... I was discussing the resurrection stone and Dumbledore's clever use of the Snitch that Harry won in his first match in which to hide it. My husband asks, "so, if Harry could open it because the thing had a memory for his skin, how was Dumbledore able to open it?"

*insert sounds of crickets chirping...


Perhaps it's like those courtesy safes in the closets of hotel rooms. :p

You imprint it (define the password or credit card you will use to open it), insert your valuables, lock it, and use your imprint to reopen it. [steps 1 and 2 might be reversed]

Harry imprinted it. Dumbledore inserted the valuables and locked it. Harry unlocked it.

So if Harry is the first person to ever touch that snitch do they use a new one every game? It seems a bit too perfect for them to have just gotten a new one when he showed up.

Well, they do use a new ball for each match of Cricket, so why not? It seems to be a well documented fact that snitches have flesh memories so as to identify the seeker who gets it.

Maybe, the Snitch is 'reset' after each game, so it can be used again. It's likely that Dumbledore just 'nicked' that Snitch after Harry's first game.

Seems to be that they get new ones because in OoTP Harry accidentally took the Snitch with him after the game where they fought Malfoy. Everyone in the common room watched it flying around so it makes sense that they'd order six Snitches a year. I mean we have at least two documented cases of someone taking one: James and Harry and James wasn't even a seeker, the one you'd think would have the best chance at it.

Why did Moody/Crouch Jr leave Krum alive by the forest and simply Stun him? He showed he had no trouble killing his father and leading Harry to his death. This seems a little too convinient that a cold-blooded murderer like him would simply Stun someone who was there. Also, hs goal was to get Harry to win, and that much improved his chances with one less Champion. I'm not saying I wanted Krum to die, but it would have seemed the logical thing for him to do.

Why did Moody/Crouch Jr leave Krum alive by the forest and simply Stun him? He showed he had no trouble killing his father and leading Harry to his death. This seems a little too convinient that a cold-blooded murderer like him would simply Stun someone who was there. Also, hs goal was to get Harry to win, and that much improved his chances with one less Champion. I'm not saying I wanted Krum to die, but it would have seemed the logical thing for him to do.
His father was a danger for him and could have revealed him and actually tried to do so. Barty had no other choice there. But killing Krum would be unnecessary here.

:agree: It would have led to much more suspicion and I think the Tournament would probably have been cancelled if Krum had been found dead. The plan wouldn't have worked out. It was unneccesary and could have ruined the entire plan.

Why did Moody/Crouch Jr leave Krum alive by the forest and simply Stun him? He showed he had no trouble killing his father and leading Harry to his death. This seems a little too convinient that a cold-blooded murderer like him would simply Stun someone who was there. Also, hs goal was to get Harry to win, and that much improved his chances with one less Champion. I'm not saying I wanted Krum to die, but it would have seemed the logical thing for him to do. I agree with Loony and Tenshi. Voldemort wanted to remain unnoticed, they managed to convince Fudge that Crouch Sr. had gone mad, had there been deaths or had a (sane) champion 'disappeared' even Fudge wouldn't have been as easy to lull.


I feel stupid asking this, but I'm wondering how Kreacher knew Bellatrix so well in OOTP. I mean, I would assume she had been at Sirius' house in the past, so he would have met her, but he seemed to know her quite well (it said the picture of her seemed to be Kreacher's favorite). Did Bellatrix and Kreacher ever live in the same house or was this just his natural house-elf loyalty to the Black family, and her being a loyal black? Don't forget that she was dear Master Regulus' cousin! They were fellow Death Eaters and she may well have been his tutor, his idol or at least his favourite cousin.

Or Regulus when he joined the death eaters could have spoken very highly of Bellatrix and Kreacher would have liked her because Regulus did. Regulus seemed to have been very affectionate to Kreacher and the elf also loved and was very faithful to Regulus.

I have one that sorts of trips me up: Lucius is older than Snape, who was approximately the same age as was James and Sirius. How much older was Lucius? I don't recall that he was in Riddle's group in the Slug Club (altough we know that Bellatrix' husband, among others, was). How much older is Lucius than Snape, and how much younger is he than Voldemort?

I have one that sorts of trips me up: Lucius is older than Snape, who was approximately the same age as was James and Sirius. How much older was Lucius? I don't recall that he was in Riddle's group in the Slug Club (altough we know that Bellatrix' husband, among others, was). How much older is Lucius than Snape, and how much younger is he than Voldemort?

He's either four, five, or six years older than Snape. In The Prince's Tale, when Snape goes to sit down at the Slytherin Table after being Sorted. it says Harry saw Lucius Malfoy, with a prefect's badge. So Malfoy was either a fifth, sixth, or seventh year then. I would think that he was probably a fifth year, because they were friends and it would be very wierd for a first year to friends with a seventh year. :)

Well the Harry Potter Lexicon has conlcuded that Lucius was born in 1954, and Snape was born January 9, 1960. That says six years between them, but that is inconsistent with the prefect badge that Brian mentioned...I think this could be another case of Jo's bad maths. :lol:

Lucius's age (41) was mentioned in OotP, The Hogwarts High Inquisitor. That was 1995, so 1954 is a good guess.

Well the Harry Potter Lexicon has conlcuded that Lucius was born in 1954, and Snape was born January 9, 1960. That says six years between them, but that is inconsistent with the prefect badge that Brian mentioned...I think this could be another case of Jo's bad maths. :lol:

That would mean that Lucius was a seventh year when Snape was a first year, wouldn't it? It all depends on when his birthday is. If he was born after September 1st, 1954, he would be a seventh year then, but if he was born before term started he would have already finished Hogwarts the year before Snape came. Unlike Jo, I am good at math. :evil:

Thatwould mean that Lucius was a seventh year when Snape was a first year, wouldn't it? It all depends on when his birthday is. If he was born after September 1st, 1954, he would be a seventh year then, but if he was born before term started he would have already finished Hogwarts the year before Snape came. Unlike Jo, I am good at math. :evil:

Yeah, yeah you're right. I got confused before (Aaaah numbers! :scared: I'm as bad at maths as Jo :lol:). So that makes sense :D Still, it's a bit weird for a first year and a seventh year to make friends. Lucius must have just recognised how talented Snape was at that early age :)

Well the Harry Potter Lexicon has conlcuded that Lucius was born in 1954, and Snape was born January 9, 1960. That says six years between them, but that is inconsistent with the prefect badge that Brian mentioned...I think this could be another case of Jo's bad maths. :lol:

i thought there were prefects in the 7th year, that just because you weren't picked as head boy/girl didn't mean you lost your prefect badge... or did i just make that up?

i thought there were prefects in the 7th year, that just because you weren't picked as head boy/girl didn't mean you lost your prefect badge... or did i just make that up?

I thought so, too. I thought once you became a prefect, you were one through 7th year. I could be wrong, though.

I thought so, too. I thought once you became a prefect, you were one through 7th year. I could be wrong, though.

No, you're right. There are prefects in the seventh year too. I think it was just a mistake in Abby's math. :lol:

I was wondering, if Snape knew when he first sees Worntail ,after Voldemorts return to a body in the grave yard, that wormtail is the one responsible for Lily being dead? I think that up to then ,he might have thought that Sirius Black really was the traitor who set up the Potters . After seeing Wormtail why didn't Snape kill him ? I mean if he loved Lily so much why not kill the one who got her killed ?

twins:p

I was wondering, if Snape knew when he first sees Worntail ,after Voldemorts return to a body in the grave yard, that wormtail is the one responsible for Lily being dead? I think that up to then ,he might have thought that Sirius Black really was the traitor who set up the Potters . After seeing Wormtail why didn't Snape kill him ? I mean if he loved Lily so much why not kill the one who got her killed ?

twins:p

I doubt that Snape knew it was really Wormtail. I mean, no one except Sirius and Peter himself knew. Not even Voldemort did, so there would have been no way of Snape knowing. Also, in PoA, Snape was genuinally worried about Harry's safety because he had promised to protect him. If he knew Sirius was innocent, I'm sure he would have told Dumbledore. Hope that helps. :)

I doubt that Snape knew it was really Wormtail. I mean, no one except Sirius and Peter himself knew. Not even Voldemort did, so there would have been no way of Snape knowing. Also, in PoA, Snape was genuinally worried about Harry's safety because he had promised to protect him. If he knew Sirius was innocent, I'm sure he would have told Dumbledore. Hope that helps. :)

I respect your view, and I could certainly be wrong, but I would assume that by the end of GoF Snape does know the truth. You're correct in that during PoA, Snape thought Sirius was guilty (as did everyone else), but I thought the question was referring to GoF, because it said once Voldemort returns to his body. At this point, Snape sees that Dumbledore is friendly with Sirius, so he must realize that Dumbledore is sure Sirius is innocent. Snape is intelligent, I'm sure he can put two and two together: Sirius is innocent, Peter Pettigrew, who pretended to be dead for 12 years, is actually alive, and he's now working for Voldemort. And I'm sure, if not, Dumbledore could fill him in on the details of who was actually guilty.
"Not even Voldemort did"
Are you saying Voldemort didn't know that it was Peter who was giving him [Voldemort] information and not Sirius...?

As far as why Snape didn't kill him, Wormtail was working for Voldemort, so I don't think Voldemort would have been too pleased with Snape if he had killed him. If I had to venture a guess, though, I'd say he probably would have wanted to kill him.

I respect your view, and I could certainly be wrong, but I would assume that by the end of GoF Snape does know the truth. You're correct in that during PoA, Snape thought Sirius was guilty (as did everyone else), but I thought the question was referring to GoF, because it said once Voldemort returns to his body. At this point, Snape sees that Dumbledore is friendly with Sirius, so he must realize that Dumbledore is sure Sirius is innocent. Snape is intelligent, I'm sure he can put two and two together: Sirius is innocent, Peter Pettigrew, who pretended to be dead for 12 years, is actually alive, and he's now working for Voldemort. And I'm sure, if not, Dumbledore could fill him in on the details of who was actually guilty.
"Not even Voldemort did"
Are you saying Voldemort didn't know that it was Peter who was giving him [Voldemort] information and not Sirius...?

As far as why Snape didn't kill him, Wormtail was working for Voldemort, so I don't think Voldemort would have been too pleased with Snape if he had killed him. If I had to venture a guess, though, I'd say he probably would have wanted to kill him.

I know; Snape surely did know the truth by the end of GoF because Sirius revealed himself to Snape and Dumbledore had them shake hands. But you're right, he didn't attack Wormtail in HBP when he was at his house because he worked for Voldemort (or pretended to). also, while he knew that Sirius was innocent, he didn't necasarily know that it was Peter who had betrayed them. It could have been anyone.

I know; Snape surely did know the truth by the end of GoF because Sirius revealed himself to Snape and Dumbledore had them shake hands. But you're right, he didn't attack Wormtail in HBP when he was at his house because he worked for Voldemort (or pretended to). also, while he knew that Sirius was innocent, he didn't necasarily know that it was Peter who had betrayed them. It could have been anyone.

Yeah, we don't have any canon that says he knew it was Peter. He did know that Peter was one of James' best friends though, and that he ended up working for Voldemort, so he might have figured it out. Or Dumbledore could have told him. Or he just didn't know.

I respect your view, and I could certainly be wrong, but I would assume that by the end of GoF Snape does know the truth. You're correct in that during PoA, Snape thought Sirius was guilty (as did everyone else), but I thought the question was referring to GoF, because it said once Voldemort returns to his body. At this point, Snape sees that Dumbledore is friendly with Sirius, so he must realize that Dumbledore is sure Sirius is innocent. Snape is intelligent, I'm sure he can put two and two together: Sirius is innocent, Peter Pettigrew, who pretended to be dead for 12 years, is actually alive, and he's now working for Voldemort. And I'm sure, if not, Dumbledore could fill him in on the details of who was actually guilty.
"Not even Voldemort did"
Are you saying Voldemort didn't know that it was Peter who was giving him [Voldemort] information and not Sirius...?

As far as why Snape didn't kill him, Wormtail was working for Voldemort, so I don't think Voldemort would have been too pleased with Snape if he had killed him. If I had to venture a guess, though, I'd say he probably would have wanted to kill him.

Agreed. Although Snape didn't overhear it in PoA, he most likely figured it out in GoF. But as you say, killing Pettigrew would not have been a smart move under the circumstances.

I've done a brief search of this site -- as well as the internet itself -- for an answer to this question, and I couldn't find one. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places, but I just can't seem to find an answer.


Okay, there was this whole Ouroboros Theory going on a few years back. JKR said that she made a deliberate typo stating that Voldemort was Slytherin's ancestor. But there was no mention of this in DH.

Did she ever come out and say that it was just to mess with us? (The typo was fixed in later editions... but it WAS still deliberate.) Did she ever confirm that there was no time travel business and that Voldemort was not Slytherin's ancestor? Did she ever state exactly why she made that typo?

This really bothers me, because she should have said so in one of her interviews to disprove this theory, but she did not.

Yes, I know that the series is over, but why leave that little bit hanging?

I've done a brief search of this site -- as well as the internet itself -- for an answer to this question, and I couldn't find one. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places, but I just can't seem to find an answer.


Okay, there was this whole Ouroboros Theory going on a few years back. JKR said that she made a deliberate typo stating that Voldemort was Slytherin's ancestor. But there was no mention of this in DH.

Did she ever come out and say that it was just to mess with us? (The typo was fixed in later editions... but it WAS still deliberate.) Did she ever confirm that there was no time travel business and that Voldemort was not Slytherin's ancestor? Did she ever state exactly why she made that typo?

This really bothers me, because she should have said so in one of her interviews to disprove this theory, but she did not.

Yes, I know that the series is over, but why leave that little bit hanging?

Do you have a quote or other canon to back up the mistake being deliberate? I could not find anything supporting it. Perhaps the theory started because of a mistaken post or fan fiction?

I've done a brief search of this site -- as well as the internet itself -- for an answer to this question, and I couldn't find one. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places, but I just can't seem to find an answer.


Okay, there was this whole Ouroboros Theory going on a few years back. JKR said that she made a deliberate typo stating that Voldemort was Slytherin's ancestor. But there was no mention of this in DH.

Did she ever come out and say that it was just to mess with us? (The typo was fixed in later editions... but it WAS still deliberate.) Did she ever confirm that there was no time travel business and that Voldemort was not Slytherin's ancestor? Did she ever state exactly why she made that typo?

This really bothers me, because she should have said so in one of her interviews to disprove this theory, but she did not.

Yes, I know that the series is over, but why leave that little bit hanging?


I'm not really sure I ever noticed that typo. It would be interesting to know exactly where it is and where you found out about it. Do you happen to remember?

As far as vague interviews and unfinished ends, I think Rowling left many of those on purpose. Most authors do, I imagine. Do you think this typo might be one of those she is deliberately not telling us about? Or do you think it really is just a mistake? IDK. I can only speculate...

I'm not really sure I ever noticed that typo. It would be interesting to know exactly where it is and where you found out about it. Do you happen to remember?

As far as vague interviews and unfinished ends, I think Rowling left many of those on purpose. Most authors do, I imagine. Do you think this typo might be one of those she is deliberately not telling us about? Or do you think it really is just a mistake? IDK. I can only speculate...

I loved the Ouroboros Theory! I almost actually believed that when I first read it!!

About the typo, I think that was just Jo trying to throw us off. She really did make a big mistake, I think, and just tried to cover it up by saying it was "deliberate." That's the only thing I can think of because nothing certainly happened to say that Voldemort was Slytherin's ancestor. :)

I've had some cause to wonder whether the word "ancestor" exclusively means "person who lived some time before a person who is descended from them" as I believe it does. This is not the only place I have ever seen "ancestor" used where I thought "descendant" was the intended word. I wonder whether it is perhaps one of those "British things" that sometimes cause confusion in translation, or whether it is simply a very common misunderstanding to which even the best writers and editors occasionally fall prey.

Here's the quote with the typo:

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Chapter 18, pp. 332-333, American Paperback Edition

"You can speak Parseltongue, Harry," said Dumbledore calmly, "because Lord Voldemort -- who is the last remaining ancestor of Salazar Slytherin -- can speak Parseltongue."

I'm not really sure I ever noticed that typo. It would be interesting to know exactly where it is and where you found out about it. Do you happen to remember?




Rowling said that she had made the typo on purpose, and that we might want to remember it in case it is important.

I'll try to find the interview and post a link if I can.

This whole thing drove me nuts. Why make a deliberate typo and tell us to remember it if it just meant nothing? I know Rowling likes to throw in clever, misleading passages, but that was just unfair.

Rowling said that she had made the typo on purpose, and that we might want to remember it in case it is important.

I'll try to find the interview and post a link if I can.

This whole thing drove me nuts. Why make a deliberate typo and tell us to remember it if it just meant nothing? I know Rowling likes to throw in clever, misleading passages, but that was just unfair.

The only thing I could find was a transcript on Scholastic, October 16, 2000, when JKR went online with classrooms across the U.S.

If you take it in context, along with the fact that voice inflection doesn't come across as well online, it seems clear to me that it's dry sarcastic humor, not a statement of fact. She jokes that while it's being corrected, perhaps the questioner should hold on to the book with the error because it might be valuable one day (as in collector's item).

Q: Harry Potter for grownups again! Is Voldemort the last remaining ancestor of Slytherin, or the last remaining descendent of Slytherin?
JKR: Ah, you spotted the deliberate error. Yes, it should read "descendent." That's been changed in subsequent editions. (Keep hold of the "ancestor" one, maybe it'll be valuable one day!)

I think if it had been a live interview, or podcast, where you could hear the author's voice, the humor would have been obvious.

I agree, HedwigOwl. She probably was just joking now that I think about it. Jo often makes jokes when asked if things will be significant, and I now believe this was just one of those cases. The mistake was corrected in later editions, anyways, so it obviously wasn't important or deliberate. :p

Just for grins:
I'ts a quote. Dumbledore makes the mistake, not JK.
Hi Ho :p

Can't be sure if this has come up, but why would Tom Riddle think that he was the only person who found the Room of Requirement? Harry had seen hundreds of years worth of junk stashed there, so why wouldn't TR have seen the same thing?

Can't be sure if this has come up, but why would Tom Riddle think that he was the only person who found the Room of Requirement? Harry had seen hundreds of years worth of junk stashed there, so why wouldn't TR have seen the same thing?

There's a discussion about that in the Plot Holes, Inconsistencies, and Contradictions thread right now. My belief, however, would be that Tom Riddle is so over-confident that he believes he's the only one clever enough to discover the room.

There's a discussion about that in the Plot Holes, Inconsistencies, and Contradictions thread right now. My belief, however, would be that Tom Riddle is so over-confident that he believes he's the only one clever enough to discover the room.

He would think that; but wouldn't the mounds upon mounds of objects in there have given him a clue? Obviously he wasn't the only one to discover it if all this stuff had found its way into there. This was not his normal over-confident self; this is just downright foolish.

He would think that; but wouldn't the mounds upon mounds of objects in there have given him a clue? Obviously he wasn't the only one to discover it if all this stuff had found its way into there. This was not his normal over-confident self; this is just downright foolish.

Yeah, I've wondered that. For one thing, it was 50 years earlier, so there may have been less stuff (though obviously still some). Perhaps he thought if he said "I need to hide something so that no one will be able to find it." that really no one could. I don't know; it's definitely foolish either way.

He would think that; but wouldn't the mounds upon mounds of objects in there have given him a clue? Obviously he wasn't the only one to discover it if all this stuff had found its way into there. This was not his normal over-confident self; this is just downright foolish.
Perhaps he thought that the extra objects were just for added protection and not left by other people

Can't be sure if this has come up, but why would Tom Riddle think that he was the only person who found the Room of Requirement? Harry had seen hundreds of years worth of junk stashed there, so why wouldn't TR have seen the same thing?
It has come up in some thread or other, here and there. I agree with you, it doesn't make sense. Tom is a smart young man. The stacks of things in the Room of Requirement are evidence that it's been used, is being used. It was very foolish of him to think he was the only one to know about it.

We all know he's arrogant, but he's not stupid. How could he think that in over a thousand years, and with the accumulated evidence of usage, he was the only one to have found the room, and Rowena's diadem would lie safe and undiscovered there? Of course he was the only one to know about the Chamber of Secrets and to be able to control the basilisk, but that's because he was the Heir of Slytherin. The RoR belongs to the whole of Hogwarts. Who did he think put all that stuff in there if nobody else had discovered it? It's a major inconsistency, no doubt about it.

Perhaps he thought that the extra objects were just for added protection and not left by other people
Added protection for what, added by who if not "other people"? No, sorry, Alicks, but this explanation doesn't hold water for me. :)

It has come up in some thread or other, here and there. I agree with you, it doesn't make sense. Tom is a smart young man. The stacks of things in the Room of Requirement are evidence that it's been used, is being used. It was very foolish of him to think he was the only one to know about it.

We all know he's arrogant, but he's not stupid. How could he think that in over a thousand years, and with the accumulated evidence of usage, he was the only one to have found the room, and Rowena's diadem would lie safe and undiscovered there? Of course he was the only one to know about the Chamber of Secrets and to be able to control the basilisk, but that's because he was the Heir of Slytherin. The RoR belongs to the whole of Hogwarts. Who did he think put all that stuff in there if nobody else had discovered it? It's a major inconsistency, no doubt about it.


I think we need to consider the possibility that Riddle didn't see the same room as the one where he hid the tiara.


- We know that Riddle found the room of requirement, but I'd say the odds are that he never hid anything there while a student.

- Whatever the room became for him, he obviously believed no one else at the school would ever use it for that same purpose.

- Riddle hid the tiara when he came back for the "interview" for a teaching job with Dumbledore. His intention at that point in time was to hide the tiara in the room of requirement.

- The room already had a mode for people wanting to hide things, so that's where the tiara ended up. Riddle likely never saw the room that Harry & Draco saw.


So it doesn't seem like an inconsistency/mistake to me.

I agree with FleurduJardin; they had to be added for protection by someone; they couldn't just be there. Voldemort was over-confident, but not unintelligent. Surely he would've wondered how those other things got there?

I think we need to consider the possibility that Riddle didn't see the same room as the one where he hid the tiara.


- We know that Riddle found the room of requirement, but I'd say the odds are that he never hid anything there while a student.

- Whatever the room became for him, he obviously believed no one else at the school would ever use it for that same purpose.

- Riddle hid the tiara when he came back for the "interview" for a teaching job with Dumbledore. His intention at that point in time was to hide the tiara in the room of requirement.

- The room already had a mode for people wanting to hide things, so that's where the tiara ended up. Riddle likely never saw the room that Harry & Draco saw.


So it doesn't seem like an inconsistency/mistake to me.

But the room that Harry and Draco saw was the room where Riddle hid the tiara. They definitely did see the same room, and it's not likely that all of those things suddenly appeared withing the fifty years since Riddle left. :)

Yea, I can't imagine that the room would transfer things from one "view" to another "view" of the room.

The tiara was obviously purposely hidden where it was. The "Room of Hidden Things" seems to appear the same to everyone who viewed it: Draco, Trelawney, Harry, and I think Tom.

He was indeed a smart man, and smart enough to know that anyone hiding something isn't going to be looking closely at every item they come across. He was hiding a needle in a haystack, and one that hardly anyone in the world would ever recognize--I don't think that's a huge risk.

He was indeed a smart man, and smart enough to know that anyone hiding something isn't going to be looking closely at every item they come across. He was hiding a needle in a haystack, and one that hardly anyone in the world would ever recognize--I don't think that's a huge risk.

Yeah I agree, I always assumed that lots, or perhaps ever most, of the junk in the room in its hiding state was put there by the room to help the hider.

But the room that Harry and Draco saw was the room where Riddle hid the tiara. They definitely did see the same room, and it's not likely that all of those things suddenly appeared withing the fifty years since Riddle left. :)
That's exactly what I said on the same topic in the "Plot Hole, Contradictions and inconsistencies" thread just a few minutes ago. :)

See my post #471 here: http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=114635&page=24
:)

Things apear in the room when people wish for them (like the DADA stuff that was there in OOTP). It's possible that Riddle thought that the stuff was there to camoflage the diadem because he wanted to hide it, not because everyone had been hiding stuff in the same room.

Was Filch hired by Dumbledore, and if so, WHY? Was it another case of Dumbledore giving someone (a Squib) a chance when no one else would? If so, how I wonder how long it took Dumbledore to realize his mistake.

Things apear in the room when people wish for them (like the DADA stuff that was there in OOTP). It's possible that Riddle thought that the stuff was there to camoflage the diadem because he wanted to hide it, not because everyone had been hiding stuff in the same room.

That is what I think. Tom thought "I want a room to hide the diadem" and this is what he got. He would have thought it was made purposely like this with all the junk. I think a room with absolutely nothing in it would have been strange. It wouldn't have seemed like a 'hiding place'. Hope that made sense.

The discussion about Voldemort hiding a horcrux in the room of requirement doesn't really belong in this thread, since it isn't a little question, it is a topic :lol:

There is a thread, rather old, but you may find this one a good place to continue to talk about it:

Voldemort and the Room of Requirement (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=108213&highlight=Voldemort)

:D okie, dokie

Was Filch hired by Dumbledore, and if so, WHY? Was it another case of Dumbledore giving someone (a Squib) a chance when no one else would? If so, how I wonder how long it took Dumbledore to realize his mistake.

I think it was DD giving Filch a chance. I don't think he would have thought he made a mistake. I saw him as being almost humored by him. I know he would never have allowed him to really hurt any of the students.

Was Filch hired by Dumbledore, and if so, WHY? Was it another case of Dumbledore giving someone (a Squib) a chance when no one else would? If so, how I wonder how long it took Dumbledore to realize his mistake.

Actually, Filch is a pretty good caretaker, isn't he? Does anyone not know a cranky custodian? I think crankiness = good custodial tendencies. And, if I may plug myself, I invite you to read my entry in the Triwizard Tournament, which centers on Filch and shows a different side to his character (it's the second Triwizard thread, for those who didn't compete in the first task).
Anyway, I don't think Filch's approach to students was any worse than Snape's. Filch may have wanted to hang students by their toes, but he never crosses that line or even attempts to do so.

But the room that Harry and Draco saw was the room where Riddle hid the tiara. They definitely did see the same room, and it's not likely that all of those things suddenly appeared withing the fifty years since Riddle left. :)

That was where the tiara ended up, but Voldemort never saw the room the RoR provided to hide it.

My point is that Voldemort obviously discovered the Room of Requirement while at Hogwarts --- but never as the "hiding room". He didn't actually hide the tiara at Hogwarts until he returned many years later under the premise of "interviewing for a teaching job". Remember the pensive memory, where Harry is certain Voldemort has made a slight but sudden movement for his wand, but sees nothing else. Later in DH, it is obvious to Harry that Voldemort brought the tiara to Hogwarts on the visit to Dumbledore's office, and hid the tiara on that night in the RoR.

BUT, the RoR that Voldemort visited while a student was clearly NOT for the purpose of hiding anything. If he had seen the room that the RoR provides for hiding things, he would never have hidden the tiara there, because it would have been obvious that thousands of students had access to the room. Perhaps he first used it as a place to practice dark arts away from prying eyes. He likely experimented with the room after that, but never summoned it to hide.

Voldy is convinced in DH that no one else would have been able to access the RoR, something he would never have thought if he ever did see the ROR as a hiding room room as Draco, Harry and countless others did. But whathever purpose made the room appear for Riddle, it's clear that he never saw it as the "room of hidden things". If he had, he would never have thought that no one else could access it. Voldy brought the tiara with him the night he "interviewed" with Dumbledore, he sent it to the RoR as he sat in Dumbledore's office. He never saw the RoR manifestation as the hiding room and believed it would go to a manifestation that only he knew.

Does anybody know where the Greenhouses are in relation to the Hogwarts Castle?

Does anybody know where the Greenhouses are in relation to the Hogwarts Castle?

I looked for a map of the Hogwarts grounds and found this: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/images/maps/hogwarts-map-cm.jpg

Hope that helps :D

That was where the tiara ended up, but Voldemort never saw the room the RoR provided to hide it.

My point is that Voldemort obviously discovered the Room of Requirement while at Hogwarts --- but never as the "hiding room". He didn't actually hide the tiara at Hogwarts until he returned many years later under the premise of "interviewing for a teaching job". Remember the pensive memory, where Harry is certain Voldemort has made a slight but sudden movement for his wand, but sees nothing else. Later in DH, it is obvious to Harry that Voldemort brought the tiara to Hogwarts on the visit to Dumbledore's office, and hid the tiara on that night in the RoR.

BUT, the RoR that Voldemort visited while a student was clearly NOT for the purpose of hiding anything. If he had seen the room that the RoR provides for hiding things, he would never have hidden the tiara there, because it would have been obvious that thousands of students had access to the room. Perhaps he first used it as a place to practice dark arts away from prying eyes. He likely experimented with the room after that, but never summoned it to hide.

Voldy is convinced in DH that no one else would have been able to access the RoR, something he would never have thought if he ever did see the ROR as a hiding room room as Draco, Harry and countless others did. But whathever purpose made the room appear for Riddle, it's clear that he never saw it as the "room of hidden things". If he had, he would never have thought that no one else could access it. Voldy brought the tiara with him the night he "interviewed" with Dumbledore, he sent it to the RoR as he sat in Dumbledore's office. He never saw the RoR manifestation as the hiding room and believed it would go to a manifestation that only he knew.

Yes, but if he did hide the tiara on the interview visit, he would've had to have gone into the room. The RoR appears when you need it. He needed it to hide the tiara. Therefore, the room would've been in its 'hiding place' form, with all the piles of junk.
I suppose you could say that he somehow conjured the tiara into the room without ever going inside, but there's not the slightest hint that that sort of thing has ever happened, or that it is even possible.

Added protection for what, added by who if not "other people"? No, sorry, Alicks, but this explanation doesn't hold water for me.
I see where your coming from. It made sense to me when I wrote it lol

I think it makes perfectly sense to hide a tiara there. The room was filled with junk, it would be nearly impossible to find it if you didn't know exactly what you were looking for.

Voldy brought the tiara with him the night he "interviewed" with Dumbledore, he sent it to the RoR as he sat in Dumbledore's office. He never saw the RoR manifestation as the hiding room and believed it would go to a manifestation that only he knew.

That's an interesting suggestion I've never come across before. I had figured Tom asked the room for a place to hide the tiara, got the Room of Hidden things, and failed to recognize that those things had once belonged to other people who wanted to hide them. He may have thought it was part of the room fulfilling his wish - providing camouflage for the thing he was hiding.

Why didnt they choose in the deathly Hallows the seven potters part ,to have also seven Moody´s ,that would have been even more confusing to the death eaters dont you think...

Why didnt they choose in the deathly Hallows the seven potters part ,to have also seven Moody´s ,that would have been even more confusing to the death eaters dont you think...
They were trying to make sure that Voldemort followed one of them, I think, so they chose to use different protectors and put Harry with someone the Death Eaters would not have thought offered proper protection, since Hagrid isn't a fully qualified wizard. Also, the Polyjuice Potion wouldn't have worked on Hagrid because he is half-giant so they would have had to find another escort.

My main guess is that they wanted to make sure the majority of the Death Eaters followed the real Moody and not guess Harry by mistake.

Why didnt they choose in the deathly Hallows the seven potters part ,to have also seven Moody´s ,that would have been even more confusing to the death eaters dont you think...

Hmm, that's an interesting idea. Very interesting indeed. I think that would grow very confusing to all of the people with Harry, as well as the DEs. This way, they knew who each "Harry" was with, so they could keep track of everyone easily. If it had been seven Moody's and seven Harry's, Harry's guard would probably have difficulty figuring out who the real Harry was (I know that he was traveling in a car, which was unique, but it's still confusing).

-edit-
Nevermind, the previous answer is much better than mine.

My main guess is that they wanted to make sure the majority of the Death Eaters followed the real Moody and not guess Harry by mistake.
So somehow they were sentencing MAd eye to death...specially by giving him mundungus as a companion...they should have guessed he would freak out...If it had been seven Moody's and seven Harry's, they would probably have difficulty figuring out who the real Harry was (I know that he was traveling in a car, which was unique, but it's still confusing).

yeah,you have a point there...still ,as confuding as for the Death eaters ,it would have been for the order,maybe Voldemort woulndt have gone straight to moody and have mundungus panicked,i htinkif Voldemort would have gone chasing another pair,maybe Mad eye wouldnt have died...cause theother guys wouldnt have panicked...and mayeb would have given and even better fight...

Yes, but if he did hide the tiara on the interview visit, he would've had to have gone into the room. The RoR appears when you need it. He needed it to hide the tiara. Therefore, the room would've been in its 'hiding place' form, with all the piles of junk.
I suppose you could say that he somehow conjured the tiara into the room without ever going inside, but there's not the slightest hint that that sort of thing has ever happened, or that it is even possible.

I think that's exactly what happened -- Riddle hid the tiara remotely while he was in Dumbledore's office. When Harry's looking into Voldy's thoughts in DH, Voldemort is certain that "he alone had plumbed the deepest secrets of that place". If there was another way to access the room, Voldemort would have found it.

In HBP, when viewing Dumbledore's memory of the "interview" with Riddle, this is what Harry sees:

For a second, Harry was on the verge of shouting a pointless warning: He was sure that Voldemort's hand had twitched toward his pocket and his wand; but then the moment passed, Voldemort had turned away, the door was closing, and he was gone.

Then, in DH, after Harry has learned from looking into Voldy's thoughts, and finds that he hid a horcrux at Hogwarts....this is what he realizes while talking to the Grey Lady about the lost diadem:

But the diadem, once it became his precious horcrux, had not been left in that lowly tree....No, the diadem had been returned secretly to its true home, and Voldemort must have put it there-- "---the night he asked for a job!" said Harry, finishing his thought.

"I beg your pardon?"

"He hid the diadem in the castle, the night he asked Dumbledore to let him teach!" said Harry. Saying it out loud enabled him to make sense of it all. "He must have hidden the diadem up to or down from Dumbledore's office! But it was still worth trying to get the job -- then he might've got the chance to nick Gryffindor's sword as well -- thank you, thanks!"

Harry left her floating there, looking utterly bewildered.

While Harry didn't connect when during the visit Riddle hid the tiara, he immediately knew where. But JKR gave us the information when she had Harry observe the twitch in Voldy's hand while in Dumbledore's office. But rather than an attack on Dumbledore, Riddle was hiding the diadem.

That's an interesting suggestion I've never come across before. I had figured Tom asked the room for a place to hide the tiara, got the Room of Hidden things, and failed to recognize that those things had once belonged to other people who wanted to hide them. He may have thought it was part of the room fulfilling his wish - providing camouflage for the thing he was hiding.
That's an intriguing thought -- if true, I continue to be amazed at how dumb Riddle can be.

That's an intriguing thought -- if true, I continue to be amazed at how dumb Riddle can be.

Yes, I can't believe that for all his legilimency, he couldn't figure out that others might know of the Room of Requirements.

That's an interesting suggestion I've never come across before. I had figured Tom asked the room for a place to hide the tiara, got the Room of Hidden things, and failed to recognize that those things had once belonged to other people who wanted to hide them. He may have thought it was part of the room fulfilling his wish - providing camouflage for the thing he was hiding.

Look, I want the stories to be flawless, too, but come on. Dumbledore says, "Of course, he was probably the most brilliant student Hogwarts has ever seen." Should I put that last sentence in all caps? HE WAS PROBABLY THE MOST BRILLIANT STUDENT HOGWARTS HAS EVER SEEN.

Look, I want the stories to be flawless, too, but come on. Dumbledore says, "Of course, he was probably the most brilliant student Hogwarts has ever seen." Should I put that last sentence in all caps? HE WAS PROBABLY THE MOST BRILLIANT STUDENT HOGWARTS HAS EVER SEEN.

Then you may prefer HedwigOwl's explanation, my friend. I was posting in part because I think it is a good one. :D

While Harry didn't connect when during the visit Riddle hid the tiara, he immediately knew where. But JKR gave us the information when she had Harry observe the twitch in Voldy's hand while in Dumbledore's office. But rather than an attack on Dumbledore, Riddle was hiding the diadem.

And I always thought he was creating the DADA curse. :lol: Though I suppose that might be easier to do remotely, later...

And I always thought he was creating the DADA curse. :lol: Though I suppose that might be easier to do remotely, later...

I also thought Voldemort was creating the DADA curse because Dumbledore tells him that after that visit they were never able to keep a DADA teacher for more than a year.

Voldemort could fly; he could have disillusioned himself, once he left Dumbledore's office, flew to the ROR, which he must have known about before, hid the diadem and walked out. :)

Voldemort could fly; he could have disillusioned himself, once he left Dumbledore's office, flew to the ROR, which he must have known about before, hid the diadem and walked out.
We really don't know if he could fly back then.

We really don't know if he could fly back then.

No, we don't. :) I thought that was possible, because he would be able to reach the ROR faster. Of course he could disillusion himself and walk to the ROR and keep the diadem there as well.

Of course he could disillusion himself and walk to the ROR and keep the diadem there as well.
That's how I think it could have happened.

No, we don't. :) I thought that was possible, because he would be able to reach the ROR faster. Of course he could disillusion himself and walk to the ROR and keep the diadem there as well.

If that was how he did it, why did JKR bother to put in the part in HBP where Harry is sure that Voldy made a move to his wand in the pensieve memory? At the time Harry thought that Voldemort was making a move to attack Dumbledore, but I think that's when Riddle hid the diadem. Being the most brilliant student ever at Hogwart's (as Dumbledore said), Riddle could have found a way to access to the room that was more sophisticated than the method the other students used.

About the supposed curse on the DADA teaching position, while it seems on the surface that it could be, I'm not so sure that wasn't just Hogwart's version of an urban legend. After all, Quirrell didn't last because Voldy was possessing him & making him drink unicorn blood (and left him to die, rather than try to get Quirrell to use magic to heal his body, because he was done using him). Lockhart didn't last because of his own actions, brought on by cowardice, lies and deception. Lupin was a very competent teacher, who had to leave because of Snape's petty action based on old grudges. Moody was really Barty Jr., who had his soul sucked out of him. Umbridge was never really a proper teacher, and was removed at the end of OotP at Dumbledore's demand to Fudge.

If that was how he did it, why did JKR bother to put in the part in HBP where Harry is sure that Voldy made a move to his wand in the pensieve memory?

I thought he was placing the curse on the DADA post when I read it. Because immediately after that we know why the School could not retain its DADA teachers more than a year.

Riddle could have found a way to access to the room that was more sophisticated than the method the other students used.

They were in the Headmaster's Office and we don't know if the office would allow Riddle to banish a horcrux to another part of the school. That was why I thought he may have gone to the ROR after his meeting with DD and placed it there among hundreds of other things.

I thought he was placing the curse on the DADA post when I read it. Because immediately after that we know why the School could not retain its DADA teachers more than a year.
We don't know why, it's not explained if it's true or not. And as I noted in my post, there are reasons not connected to Voldemort, and not mysterious, why the various teachers didn't return.
About the supposed curse on the DADA teaching position, while it seems on the surface that it could be, I'm not so sure that wasn't just Hogwart's version of an urban legend. After all, Quirrell didn't last because Voldy was possessing him & making him drink unicorn blood (and left him to die, rather than try to get Quirrell to use magic to heal his body, because he was done using him). Lockhart didn't last because of his own actions, brought on by cowardice, lies and deception. Lupin was a very competent teacher, who had to leave because of Snape's petty action based on old grudges. Moody was really Barty Jr., who had his soul sucked out of him. Umbridge was never really a proper teacher, and was removed at the end of OotP at Dumbledore's demand to Fudge.
Also, we know from the legend of the Hallows that what is often passed around as true often is not. Dumbledore tells Harry in King's Cross that the hallows were created by the Peverill brothers (but they never met death, and the wand is not unbeatable).

They were in the Headmaster's Office and we don't know if the office would allow Riddle to banish a horcrux to another part of the school. That was why I thought he may have gone to the ROR after his meeting with DD and placed it there among hundreds of other things.
It's possible it happened the way you suggest, but that conflicts with Voldemort's thoughts (he is certain) in DH that there is no way anyone else would be able to access the RoR. If he had seen the room with obvious articles from students over the decades, would he have been dumb enough to continue to believe no one else did/could access the room?

'Oh, he definitely wanted the Defence Against the Dark Arts job,' said Dumbledore. 'The aftermath of our little meeting proved that. You see, we have never been able to keep a Defence Against the Dark Arts teacher for longer than a year since I refused the post to Lord Voldemort.'
I do not think that Dumbledore was unable to see the difference between an urban legend and magic. As he explained to Harry that this proves that Voldemort did want the job, I'm sure he knew what he talked about.

About the supposed curse on the DADA teaching position, while it seems on the surface that it could be, I'm not so sure that wasn't just Hogwart's version of an urban legend. After all, Quirrell didn't last because Voldy was possessing him & making him drink unicorn blood (and left him to die, rather than try to get Quirrell to use magic to heal his body, because he was done using him). Lockhart didn't last because of his own actions, brought on by cowardice, lies and deception. Lupin was a very competent teacher, who had to leave because of Snape's petty action based on old grudges. Moody was really Barty Jr., who had his soul sucked out of him. Umbridge was never really a proper teacher, and was removed at the end of OotP at Dumbledore's demand to Fudge.

Tom graduated in 1947 or so. He worked at Borgin and Burkes for a bit - how long do you think, in such a position? I cannot imagine it was more than 5 years or so. Then he disappeared for 10, and came for the job interview, placing it at about 1960 or so. By the time the curse strikes for the last time (Snape), it has prevented DADA teachers from coming back for 30+ years. (1960 is Snape's birth year). This would be a coincidence on a colossal scale.

And Lupin had to leave because he transformed on campus where he was a danger to students, something I think required a great deal of bad luck. Regardless of what we think of Snape, which should surely be discussed elsewhere, Snape would not have been in a position to do what you allege he did, without Lupin's mistake. Otherwise, why did Snape wait so long? That mistake of Lupin's occured because he saw Peter on the map and forgot all about his potion.

While all the departures we saw were self-induced to some extent, Lupin included, many also had elements of bad luck. Quirrell ran into Voldemort in Albania. Events played out so that Lockhart got Ron's wand and not another. Lupin had his moment of forgetfulness on the night of the full moon. DUmbledore contracted a fatal curse (a major contributing factor to Snape's departure). I'm pretty convinced, like Dumbledore, that there was a curse.

Of course he could disillusion himself and walk to the ROR and keep the diadem there as well.
I see no reason why he would need to Disillusion himself. After all, the Room of Requirement is on the way to the Grand Staircase from Dumbledore's office, and he would not have been doing anything wrong simply walking back to the stairs. In fact, with how arrogant Voldemort was, he would probably be strongly opposed to concealing himself, especially in his "home".

I think that's exactly what happened -- Riddle hid the tiara remotely while he was in Dumbledore's office. When Harry's looking into Voldy's thoughts in DH, Voldemort is certain that "he alone had plumbed the deepest secrets of that place". If there was another way to access the room, Voldemort would have found it.

In HBP, when viewing Dumbledore's memory of the "interview" with Riddle, this is what Harry sees:

For a second, Harry was on the verge of shouting a pointless warning: He was sure that Voldemort's hand had twitched toward his pocket and his wand; but then the moment passed, Voldemort had turned away, the door was closing, and he was gone.

Then, in DH, after Harry has learned from looking into Voldy's thoughts, and finds that he hid a horcrux at Hogwarts....this is what he realizes while talking to the Grey Lady about the lost diadem:

But the diadem, once it became his precious horcrux, had not been left in that lowly tree....No, the diadem had been returned secretly to its true home, and Voldemort must have put it there-- "---the night he asked for a job!" said Harry, finishing his thought.

"I beg your pardon?"

"He hid the diadem in the castle, the night he asked Dumbledore to let him teach!" said Harry. Saying it out loud enabled him to make sense of it all. "He must have hidden the diadem up to or down from Dumbledore's office! But it was still worth trying to get the job -- then he might've got the chance to nick Gryffindor's sword as well -- thank you, thanks!"

Harry left her floating there, looking utterly bewildered.

While Harry didn't connect when during the visit Riddle hid the tiara, he immediately knew where. But JKR gave us the information when she had Harry observe the twitch in Voldy's hand while in Dumbledore's office. But rather than an attack on Dumbledore, Riddle was hiding the diadem.


That's an intriguing thought -- if true, I continue to be amazed at how dumb Riddle can be.

I'm sorry if I seem obstinate, and I'll let the issue go after this, but why would Voldemort try and hide the diadem while he was inside Dumbledore's office? Isn't that a lot harder and riskier than just doing it on the way up or down from the interview? I don't think JKR was giving a hint that Voldemort was conjuring the diadem into the RoR - that's just not in the text, and if it was, I'm sure she would have Harry realize it later (which he doesn't). I think that when there's no solid evidence in the text for something, we have to go with what is most likely. Is it more likely that Voldemort cast some complicated spell while looking Dumbledore in the face, making the diadem vanish from the office and materialize in the RoR, or is it more likely that he opened the door to the RoR and put the tiara inside? Really, though, it could've all been settled if JKR had Harry ask Voldemort later; I see the interchange as something like this:
(Harry and Voldemort face each other at the final duel, Harry has just told him it's his last chance, to show some remorse)
"But before you try to show some remorse or try to kill me, I need to ask you: how in the heck did you get that diadem into the Room of Requirement?"

"Oh, that? Well, I just walked over, the door appeared, and I threw it in really quick. I had just opened the door a crack and tossed it in, so I never saw all the other junk that was also hidden there."

"Then why did you reach toward your pocket in Dumbledore's office, during the interview for the DADA job?"

"Eczema. Had a terrible itch. Yes, those days were the beginning of the end for my once healthy skin and boyish good looks."

I'm sorry if I seem obstinate, and I'll let the issue go after this, but why would Voldemort try and hide the diadem while he was inside Dumbledore's office? Isn't that a lot harder and riskier than just doing it on the way up or down from the interview? I don't think JKR was giving a hint that Voldemort was conjuring the diadem into the RoR - that's just not in the text, and if it was, I'm sure she would have Harry realize it later (which he doesn't). I think that when there's no solid evidence in the text for something, we have to go with what is most likely. Is it more likely that Voldemort cast some complicated spell while looking Dumbledore in the face, making the diadem vanish from the office and materialize in the RoR, or is it more likely that he opened the door to the RoR and put the tiara inside?

No worries, we're all of us guessing here as to how exactly Voldemort hid the diadem in the RoR.

I have to say, though, that it seems to me that it would be likely that Voldemort hid the diadem right in front of Dumbledore's face, because to Voldy, that would be a one-up on Dumbledore. Very in-your-face, something I see in Voldemort's persona.

As far as the curse on the DADA job -- thanks, Alastor, for the quote, and Zgirnius for the post, I'm convinced now that there was a curse -- Voldemort could have cast that on his way out of the castle -- it would mean less to him than hiding a horcrux under Dumbledore's nose, which is why I believe he hid the diadem from the headmaster's office.