Little Questions Answered v8

I hear aloy about this Lily, Snape relationship. Is this coming from HBP when she is defending him?I'm afraid the best way to figure out why some believe there was a relationship is to read this thread:
Lily and Snape - What was their relationship? Will one be revealed v2 (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=96025)

So the blood charm...lots is made of the protection of staying at a blood relative's house until he's 17. Is this one aspect of the charm, or will every aspect of the charm run out when Harry becomes of age?

Basically, what I'm asking is how many more times (if it ever happens again) will Avada Kadavras ricochet off of Harry? Was it just a one-time thing? Could it happen again? Even if it could, will it go away on Harry's 17th birthday?

It would be a pretty lame way for Voldy to go out (again!), but at the same time I would be laughing for hours.


After GoF Voldemort could touch Harry because he used his blood for the resurrection spell. I think this also applies to the AK spell. I don't think Harry will be deflecting anymore AKs.

So the blood charm...lots is made of the protection of staying at a blood relative's house until he's 17. Is this one aspect of the charm, or will every aspect of the charm run out when Harry becomes of age?

My opinion is the deflected AK was actually only a one time thing, otherwise why would DD have wanted to protect him so badly? There is/was a thread where this was discussed and it is very complicated because we don't actually know what exactly the protection was that DD put on Harry after his parents died.

He survived because his mother died for him, so I think that's it. No more avoiding AK. All the other times he has actually escaped thanks to luck and other people.

I think all aspects of any charm placed on Harry on that fateful night will run out when he turns 17, whether they were in place thanks to his mother's sacrifice or DD.

After GoF Voldemort could touch Harry because he used his blood for the resurrection spell. I think this also applies to the AK spell. I don't think Harry will be deflecting anymore AKs.
Unless someone else dies for him I assume - I don't think that is age related.

I was wondering In HBP when Harry & Dumbledore were going into the Burrow. Molly doesn't even check to see if it really is Dumbledore & Harry, she just opens the door when Dumbledore announces its them . How did she know who it really was?. She didn't look or check for passwords or nothing .Was there somekind of magic on the house that shows anyone who is undercover or using polly-juice potion ?

Maybe she used to check only Arthur because he insisted.

Unless someone else dies for him I assume - I don't think that is age related.

It would have to be a blood relative (or that's my understanding) so unless Petunia is going to do something miraculous I think that particular avenue is closed to Harry. (ETA - thanks to Voldie now having Harry's blood flowing through him, nothing to do with age).

Maybe she used to check only Arthur because he insisted.

If I remember correctly that is the case, she asks "who is there" with DD and he says DD, and says the same thing to Arthur. It is he who insists that she goes through the motions of the passwords/questions.

I thought that the only charm that runs out on his 17th birthday was the charm on the Dursley's house. I think that the charm put on Harry with his mother's sacrifice will never expire.

The charm involving Harry's blood has been neutralised by Voldemort.

As for Molly, I expect she thought that if DD were a Death Eater, Harry would either be dead, or he would have figured it out by then.

I know Ron lives in devon and harry, surrey..but what aabout hermione? we don't know much about her! I've always thought oxford, because that's whjere emma's from and it sounds quite posh and intelligent! or maybe london... i'd be intereseted in your thoughts!

This is the closest that JK comes to revealing where Hermione might live. The very, very earliest drafts of the first chapter of 'Philosopher's Stone' have the Potters living on a remote island, Hermione's family living on the mainland, her father spotting something that resembles an explosion out at sea and sailing out in a storm to find their bodies in the ruins of their house. I can't remember now why I thought this was a good idea, but I clearly recognised that it wasn't fairly early on, because the Potters were re-located to Godric's Hollow for all subsequent drafts.Her parents are muggles---dentists---but beyond that, we know very little about them. JK once said about them in an interview:Stephen Fry: Are we going to meet Hermione’s parents?

JK Rowling: We’ve seen them briefly but they’re dentists so they’re not that interesting.

As for Molly, I expect she thought that if DD were a Death Eater, Harry would either be dead, or he would have figured it out by then.

But how did Molly know that the Harry who was standing there was the real Harry Potter. I mean like DD could have been a Death Eater similarly the Harry beside him could have been a fake one. :huh:

We've seen enough of Harry's ability to deduce that he could easily take out as many as five Death Eaters single handed, and that's without Dumbledore, who sorted out a lot more than that at the ministry. They'd have to take both out to be able to impersonate them.

Does anyone know exactly what foe glass does? In what books besides "Goblet of Fire" has the foe glass appeared? *(im sorry if this has been asked, or if this is not the right place this questions supposed to be posted in. Feel free to show me the right place if im wrong!)

We've seen enough of Harry's ability to deduce that he could easily take out as many as five Death Eaters single handed, and that's without Dumbledore, who sorted out a lot more than that at the ministry. They'd have to take both out to be able to impersonate them.

I was not questioning Harry's ability but I was merely trying to emphasize on the fact that what you suggested couldn't be a precise reason why Molly didn't suspect Harry & DD. You say that she judged by the fact that since Harry was standing there next to DD therefore they were real. But my question on that is how could Molly be sure that the Harry was also real. I mean if the Death Eater's could impersonate DD, so could they impersonate Harry.

Here this should answer your question

This device looks like a mirror, but it does not reflect the scene in front of it. Instead, it shows the enemies - the foes - of its owner. The foes are shadowy, indistinct, out-of-focus figures if distant; the images become more distinct as the foes get closer

I think you would like to post such questions here---> Little Questions Answered v8 (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=95422)

But to impersonate both Dumbledore and Harry they would have to subdue them, and both Dumbledore and Harry can take out 5 Death Eaters easily.

What's the deal with the Creevy brothers? They are brothers, and have a Muggle father. I assume that they live with just him as they never mention their mother. We never find out exactly who their mother is, but judging by what Colin says, he never suspected that she was magical:
"It's amazing here, isn't it? I never knew all the odd stuff I could do was magic until I got the letter from Hogwarts. My dad's a milkman, he couldn't believe it either."
I'm almost certain that their mother was a witch, however. Considering that they aren't twins and Muggle-born wizards are relatively rare, it is highly unlikely that there would be two wizards born to one set of Muggle parents two years apart. But this raises questions about the second part of the above quote. If their father knew that their mother was a witch, I don't see how he could be surprised. Did their father honestly not know that their mother was a witch? Or did he know and pretend not to? I guess I just find it hard to believe that they would be together for at least two years and he would never know about this. We know Seamus is half blood, but his dad found out relatively quickly that he had married a witch. Wouldn't the Creevys be the same way? What does everybody else think is going on in the Creevy family?

I've been wondering if, in order to see a thestral, you have to see a human death, does it count if it's an animal death you witness?

What's the deal with the Creevy brothers?
It's funny - I always assumed their mother was a Muggle. I guess I thought that genes somehow determine if a human is going to be magical or not and that the Creevy family just carried those genes and both sons got them. But, is it genes? What determines if a human is magical or not? We already know non-magical humans can come from magical ones (Squibs).

I've been wondering if, in order to see a thestral, you have to see a human death, does it count if it's an animal death you witness?
That's an intersting question. I think it only applies to human deaths because Harry has seem flobber worms die and probably has killed a bug or spider in his life. If animals were considered, I think many more people in the class would have seen the thestrals. Well, it's just a guess, but I'm guessing that only human deaths apply.

I'm almost certain that their mother was a witch, however. Considering that they aren't twins and Muggle-born wizards are relatively rare, it is highly unlikely that there would be two wizards born to one set of Muggle parents two years apart. But this raises questions about the second part of the above quote. If their father knew that their mother was a witch, I don't see how he could be surprised. Did their father honestly not know that their mother was a witch? Or did he know and pretend not to? I guess I just find it hard to believe that they would be together for at least two years and he would never know about this. We know Seamus is half blood, but his dad found out relatively quickly that he had married a witch. Wouldn't the Creevys be the same way? What does everybody else think is going on in the Creevy family?
The Creeveys are Muggleborn: Colin was Petrified by the basilisk and both Lucius Malfoy and Tom Riddle (and numerous others) stated that all of the basilisk's victims were Muggleborn. That's on top of Colin being surprised to find out he was a wizard.

If magic is genetic, it would be more than possible for two children to be born to parents who do not share the trait they do.

It's funny - I always assumed their mother was a Muggle. I guess I thought that genes somehow determine if a human is going to be magical or not and that the Creevy family just carried those genes and both sons got them. But, is it genes? What determines if a human is magical or not? We already know non-magical humans can come from magical ones (Squibs).
Maybe one of their grandparents was magical? Or their mum was a Squib and so ashamed of it that she lived entirely as a Muggle and never said anything to her husband.

I was not questioning Harry's ability but I was merely trying to emphasize on the fact that what you suggested couldn't be a precise reason why Molly didn't suspect Harry & DD. You say that she judged by the fact that since Harry was standing there next to DD therefore they were real. But my question on that is how could Molly be sure that the Harry was also real. I mean if the Death Eater's could impersonate DD, so could they impersonate Harry.

Maybe because Molly understood, as Dumbledore explains it, that if a Death Eater were to attempt to impersonate either him or Harry, they'd probably go through the trouble to find out their likes and dislikes, and therefore she would not be able to tell the fake from the real.

Kind of like when Barty Crouch, Jr. impersonated Mad Eye Moody. Even Dumbledore was fooled by the impersonation.

I was wondering In HBP when Harry & Dumbledore were going into the Burrow. Molly doesn't even check to see if it really is Dumbledore & Harry, she just opens the door when Dumbledore announces its them . How did she know who it really was?. She didn't look or check for passwords or nothing .Was there somekind of magic on the house that shows anyone who is undercover or using polly-juice potion ?

Expanding on My original Question and trying to make it clearer. It was said that the Burrow was given the highest security while Harry was there . It just struck me as slack security to have Molly letting Harry & Dumbledore in without any real check on who they really were . So is there any canon as to how She knew it was really them ?

I thought that was odd also Twins. I don't think it says anywhere whether or not she knew it was really them. I think she just wasn't bothering to check. She was just going to let Arthur in too but he stopped her.

The Creevey brothers are muggle born as RavenEye says as otherwise they would not have been targeted by the basilisk. Also they would have known about things like moving pictures (unless like Harry they were removed from the magical world).

As for whether anyone in their family was magical we don't know. JK never really elaborates on this, it just seems that all of us have the potential for the magical gene to be present as it is the dominant gene particularly in families where there are magical people. It does seem strange that none of the people we encounter who are muggle born seem all that surprised that they are magical. I know in theory someone attends their house to explain but that still wouldn't take away the surprise.

What's the deal with the Creevy brothers? They are brothers, and have a Muggle father. I assume that they live with just him as they never mention their mother. We never find out exactly who their mother is, but judging by what Colin says, he never suspected that she was magical:
"It's amazing here, isn't it? I never knew all the odd stuff I could do was magic until I got the letter from Hogwarts. My dad's a milkman, he couldn't believe it either."
I'm almost certain that their mother was a witch, however. Considering that they aren't twins and Muggle-born wizards are relatively rare, it is highly unlikely that there would be two wizards born to one set of Muggle parents two years apart. But this raises questions about the second part of the above quote. If their father knew that their mother was a witch, I don't see how he could be surprised. Did their father honestly not know that their mother was a witch? Or did he know and pretend not to? I guess I just find it hard to believe that they would be together for at least two years and he would never know about this. We know Seamus is half blood, but his dad found out relatively quickly that he had married a witch. Wouldn't the Creevys be the same way? What does everybody else think is going on in the Creevy family?

Just as long as it's not another dead mum who never told her husband (like Luna - except that she's pureblood), I'm not fussed.

Nice thread! I was thinking, where did Hagrid ACTUALLY get the Blast ended skrewts from?

Does he mention in his interview with Rita that he bred them himself? (Sorry, I'm planning on getting new copies for Christmas, my copies of most of the books have had it).

Nice thread! I was thinking, where did Hagrid ACTUALLY get the Blast ended skrewts from?
They are a cross between manticores and firecrabs, and yes, he mentions it in the interview with Rita. http://www.hp-lexicon.org/bestiary/bestiary_b.html#blast-ended_skrewt

Rita says that they are illegal, but I guess that it was supervised by the ministry and Dumbledore, because they were for the Triwizard Maze.

Just as long as it's not another dead mum who never told her husband

Didn't Seamus' mother not tell her husband until they were well and truly married?

I think with the Creevey brothers it is simply a case that somehow both Dennis and Colin had the magical gene. Seems to imply that there is some heritage somewhere down the blood line but there is always the chance that they are just both "flukes".

I know Seamushas those lines in the PS movie, can someone confirm that they're in the books?

I know Seamushas those lines in the PS movie, can someone confirm that they're in the books?
The lexicon states them as canon. As far as I know the lexicon consideres only the books but not the movies to be trustworthy http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/a-z/f.html

I know Seamushas those lines in the PS movie, can someone confirm that they're in the books?

"I'm half and half," said Seamus. "Me dad's a Muggle. Mam didn't tell him she was a witch 'til after they were married. Bit of a nasty shock for him."
(Imagine me reading that in an appalling Irish accent - I can "do" Hagrid, but I can't do Irish at all!)

Hi everyone! I have this question... Maybe it's a bit dumb, but it's been nagging me for some time... If wizards can conjure things from thin air, why do the Weasleys have to wear second hand robes and all that stuff? Can't they just conjure a new robe?

There are two answers that I can give for this question...

One I think that when it comes to personal items, such as clothes and books you cannot conjure them out of thin air. It seems that the only things that one is able to conjure are simple things. Such as chairs and such....

Two I don't think that the stuff that is conjured stayes around forever. I mean if we conjured up a chair everytime we needed one we would have a million and five chairs lying around the house...haha I know that they can be de-conjured(?) but I do n ot think that the actual object stays there forever. Becuase if that was the case then there would be no need for money, and there would be no shops.

But I think that food is an execption because you don't see an food stores, I get the feeling that most wizards grow thier own food, or conjure it becuase we have no seen referenece to a market anywhere

Don't have the exact quote but it'll be on QuickQuotesQuill.com somewhere, but didn't Jo say certain things were conjureable and others not?

Hi everyone! I have this question... Maybe it's a bit dumb, but it's been nagging me for some time... If wizards can conjure things from thin air, why do the Weasleys have to wear second hand robes and all that stuff? Can't they just conjure a new robe?

Here this might clear your doubt a bit.

Q: It seems that the wizards and witches at Hogwarts are able to conjure up many things, such as food for the feasts, chairs and sleeping bags. . .if this is so, why does the wizarding world need money ? What are the limitations on the material objects you can conjure up ? It seems unnecessary that the Weasleys would be in such need of money. . . (Jan Campbell)

A: Very good question (well done, Jan!!). There is legislation about what you can conjure and what you can't. Something that you conjure out of thin air will not last. This is a rule I set down for myself early on. I love these logical questions!


Now Jo seemed to hint that money can't be conjured but I think the same can apply to Robes as well.

Here this might clear your doubt a bit.

"World Exclusive Interview with J K Rowling," South West News Service, 8 July 2000Q: It seems that the wizards and witches at Hogwarts are able to conjure up many things, such as food for the feasts, chairs and sleeping bags. . .if this is so, why does the wizarding world need money ? What are the limitations on the material objects you can conjure up ? It seems unnecessary that the Weasleys would be in such need of money. . . (Jan Campbell)

A: Very good question (well done, Jan!!). There is legislation about what you can conjure and what you can't. Something that you conjure out of thin air will not last. This is a rule I set down for myself early on. I love these logical questions!



Now Jo seemed to hint that money can't be conjured but I think the same can apply to Robes as well.
Excellent! Alastor, can you add this to the FAQ thread, please? :D

I was watching the new in the U.S. this mourning and they had Rupert Grint on for an interview about his new movie, anyway, the interviewer said that it is reported that Emma Watson does not want to do Harry movies anymore and that the Half Blood Prince is the last movie. Does she not know anything or are they going to make up some ending to the HBP movie, I would be very disappointed if that was the case on both reports.

Excellent! Alastor, can you add this to the FAQ thread, please? :D

Need a link Alastor---> Accio Quote. (http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/0700-swns-alfie.htm) ;)

I was watching the new in the U.S. this mourning and they had Rupert Grint on for an interview about his new movie, anyway, the interviewer said that it is reported that Emma Watson does not want to do Harry movies anymore and that the Half Blood Prince is the last movie. Does she not know anything or are they going to make up some ending to the HBP movie, I would be very disappointed if that was the case on both reports.

As far as I know Emma Watson has been heard saying that she doesn't know whether she wants to film HBP...but apparently she goes through this before signing on for every film. She has finished her schooling and is thinking that perhaps she wants to do something else.

I have no idea whether anything has been decided...you might want to take a wander through "muggle studies" as I'm sure there is a thread on this in there.

HBP will not be the last movie to be filmed, I think they meant "her last movie".

Need a link Alastor---> Accio Quote. (http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/0700-swns-alfie.htm) ;)Thanks! Me thinks I'll put it into the FAHPQ in the morning. :)

Here this might clear your doubt a bit.

Q: It seems that the wizards and witches at Hogwarts are able to conjure up many things, such as food for the feasts, chairs and sleeping bags. . .if this is so, why does the wizarding world need money ? What are the limitations on the material objects you can conjure up ? It seems unnecessary that the Weasleys would be in such need of money. . . (Jan Campbell)

A: Very good question (well done, Jan!!). There is legislation about what you can conjure and what you can't. Something that you conjure out of thin air will not last. This is a rule I set down for myself early on. I love these logical questions!


Now Jo seemed to hint that money can't be conjured but I think the same can apply to Robes as well.


OFCOURSE THEY REVERT TO THIER NATURAL STATE AS IN ALL FAIRYTALES,

AT STROKE OF MIDNIGHT.:lol:

I was watching the new in the U.S. this mourning and they had Rupert Grint on for an interview about his new movie, anyway, the interviewer said that it is reported that Emma Watson does not want to do Harry movies anymore and that the Half Blood Prince is the last movie. Does she not know anything or are they going to make up some ending to the HBP movie, I would be very disappointed if that was the case on both reports.
With the amount of money these films make, no way are they not going to make all 7! I hope Emma stays on though - it will be hard to find a new Hermione.

"I don't know yet[On playing Hermione through Book 7].Every film is so huge, and it's a long time. I love to perform, but there are many other things I love doing."

-Emma Watson

This doesn't indicate that she won't see the franchise through, just that theres a possibility she won't.

Quote:
"I don't know yet[On playing Hermione through Book 7].Every film is so huge, and it's a long time. I love to perform, but there are many other things I love doing."

-Emma Watson


This doesn't indicate that she won't see the franchise through, just that theres a possibility she won't.

This sound a little bit like" Show Me The Money "coming from her agent Me Thinks .:lol:

I feel she'll do them all.

Questions about a real life person's personal decisions isn't exactly what this thread is supposed to be about. Let's leave Emma Watson for now.

In Muggle Studies, there are sections about the movies where people are talking about Emma Watson if you want to go there for more.

Back to little questions answered, does Voldemort have control over the dementors or can they even be controlled at all?

PotterPig, that is a good question. Does Voldemort really have control over them?

This is just one viewpoint, but the Death Eaters basically take whatever offer is best for them. When Voldemort had fallen in Godric's Hollow, the Dementors agreed to work in Azkaban. However, as soon as Voldemort had returned to full power, they had returned to him, and deserted Azkaban.

In some ways, Voldemort does have control over the Death Eaters. They would do his bidding. However, in some ways, they have far more freedom compared to the Death Eaters or werewolves that serve Voldemort

Back to little questions answered, does Voldemort have control over the dementors or can they even be controlled at all?

I don't believe that he has actual control over them. They work with him. I think they want the freedom's that having a powerful dark wizard ruling would give them.

Back to little questions answered, does Voldemort have control over the dementors or can they even be controlled at all?


I think that Voldemort has some kind of authority over them. I mean they were in ministry contol for how long? I would think that he would have some kind of control over them. I think dementors are the kind of creatures that are going to listen to whoever they want. I don't think it matters who the person is. I mean if you think about it...it's kind of like an election. Who is going to give you what you want. Wizard's were basically keeping Demetor's.....for lack of a better word...alive..in the times that LV was bodiless. Then when he came back to power, they went to him because he was giving them freedoms and privlages that the wizards never gave to them.

How do you kill off Dementors? I know a Patronus drives them off but it doesn't kill them. How can you get rid of Dementors? Do they die of natural causes?

How do you kill off Dementors? I know a Patronus drives them off but it doesn't kill them. How can you get rid of Dementors? Do they die of natural causes?

I looked for an answer to help you out. But I can't find any Canon evidence to help answer your Question . It seems that JKR hasn't told us how to kill off or destroy a Dementor yet .

I really hope that she tells us how...


I think that will be a big part of the next book...I mean ...like Lupin said...they are fear.

I really hope that she tells us how...


I think that will be a big part of the next book...I mean ...like Lupin said...they are fear.

"Love conquers all", maybe you have to "love them a liitle", OH! NO! what about the unthinkable................................:lol:

KISS THEM FIST:lol: :lol:

KISS THEM FIST:lol: :lol:After you, sir. :p

I couldn't find the answer for my lil' question:
what did the Other Minister meet the Prime Minister for exactly? He wanted to warn him about some strange things which may happen, but what for? I mean, what is this warning supposed to change?

Scrimgeour had to introduce himself, hadn't he?

Fudge wasn't only warning for something that would maybe happen, he also informed about things that already happened. The real reason for Herbert Chorley's illness and the fact that Kingsley Shacklebolt was there to protect him were both things the Prime Minister should know.

I don't believe that he has actual control over them. They work with him. I think they want the freedom's that having a powerful dark wizard ruling would give them.
Wasn't it said somewhere that he would allow them unlimited access to people?
The Ministry imposed regulations on them and whilst Voldemort was incommunicado, the Ministry was their best bet.
Which means that they aren't just free to go off and roam as they please otherwise they wouldn't have needed the Ministy's offer.

How does a summoning charm work exactly? I mean, Harry uses it to summon his Firebolt, I'd presume, but what if there were more than one Firebolts in the school? Does the speel tune into your thoughts so it locates and retrives your specific Firebolt?

I think the word 'Firebolt' is much the same as the incantation 'accio': more of an aide-memoire than a direct command. For the Charm to work, Harry just needed to concentrate on his broom and the act of making it come to him the words were extra really.

How does a summoning charm work exactly? I mean, Harry uses it to summon his Firebolt, I'd presume, but what if there were more than one Firebolts in the school? Does the speel tune into your thoughts so it locates and retrives your specific Firebolt?

I think RavenEye has it. Harry was concentrating specifically on HIS Firebolt so that was why it came to him, but also, I do think in this instance he was the only one with a Firebolt as it was such an amazing thing to arrive in the school, and even Lucius Malfoy only bought Nimbus 2001's.

Malfoy got 2001's because they were the best thing out in CoS - The Firebolt would slaughter it in a head to head race regardless of who was riding it. But yes, I can see your point - The Firebolt was so expensive that even Malfoy couldn't blag one probably.

I think the word 'Firebolt' is much the same as the incantation 'accio': more of an aide-memoire than a direct command. For the Charm to work, Harry just needed to concentrate on his broom and the act of making it come to him the words were extra really.

I think you are right Raven because when the Weasly Twins summoned their Brooms in Ootp they just said Accio Brooms and at that moment there were hundreds of brooms present at Hogwarts but only thier brooms appeared clearly suggesting that it is not the spell but the power of concentration that does the trick.

Also when we have Harry training hard for the summoning charm in Gof there is Hermione there urging him to concentrate hard on the stuff to be summoned. So that also proves that it is the Conc. thing raher than specific pronunciation of objects.

When Snape overheard the prophecy and was caught, why was he let go? After all, he was a Death Eater and it was at the height of Voldemort's terror. He can't have let Dumbledore think he had gone over to Dumbledore's side yet, or he would not have been listening in and he would not have had to have been caught at it.

I think you are right Raven because when the Weasly Twins summoned their Brooms in Ootp they just said Accio Brooms and at that moment there were hundreds of brooms present at Hogwarts but only thier brooms appeared clearly suggesting that it is not the spell but the power of concentration that does the trick.

Do you think that one might need to be more specific when its farther away?

Also - regarding the Summoning Charm, how did it work when Mrs. Weasley removed the Weasley's Wizard Wheezes sweets from the twins in GoF without specifying anything?

When Snape overheard the prophecy and was caught, why was he let go? After all, he was a Death Eater and it was at the height of Voldemort's terror. He can't have let Dumbledore think he had gone over to Dumbledore's side yet, or he would not have been listening in and he would not have had to have been caught at it.

Was he immediately let go? I had the feeling that Dumbledore contained him for a while - but of course I could be wrong, I haven't read HBP in a while now...

When Snape overheard the prophecy and was caught, why was he let go? After all, he was a Death Eater and it was at the height of Voldemort's terror. He can't have let Dumbledore think he had gone over to Dumbledore's side yet, or he would not have been listening in and he would not have had to have been caught at it.

I think this is all part and parcel of how and why DD trusts Snape. We don't know why he was still able to tell Voldemort about the prophecy yet come to the good side too, and boy do I wish we did!

Maybe DD thought that Snape hadn't heard enough to do anything drastic...or maybe (there is a thought) DD knew that "Harry Potter" would be "created" and let the future takes it's course, but I don't like this theory because it implies that DD was happy for James and Lily to die which I don't believe is the case.

Do you think that one might need to be more specific when its farther away?

Also - regarding the Summoning Charm, how did it work when Mrs. Weasley removed the Weasley's Wizard Wheezes sweets from the twins in GoF without specifying anything?


It dosen't matter how far away the object is all that matters is one should be concentrating really hard. I think that is what someone suggested Harry in GoF (I don't have the book on me so I can't get you the quote)

As for Mrs Weasly she used accio but she must have been concentrating on the toffee's therefore it worked.

I think this is all part and parcel of how and why DD trusts Snape. We don't know why he was still able to tell Voldemort about the prophecy yet come to the good side too, and boy do I wish we did!

Maybe DD thought that Snape hadn't heard enough to do anything drastic...or maybe (there is a thought) DD knew that "Harry Potter" would be "created" and let the future takes it's course, but I don't like this theory because it implies that DD was happy for James and Lily to die which I don't believe is the case.

That's right I agree with your point that even a great wizard like DD would not have been able to judge the entire scale of events and therefore thought it was better to get snape out of the place before he heard the entire prophecy and caused more damage than that was already done.

It dosen't matter how far away the object is all that matters is one should be concentrating really hard. I think that is what someone suggested Harry in GoF (I don't have the book on me so I can't get you the quote)

As for Mrs Weasly she used accio but she must have been concentrating on the toffee's therefore it worked.

What about when Harry said "Accio horcrux"? He didn't know what it was so he couldn't have been concentrating on it the same way.


That's right I agree with your point that even a great wizard like DD would not have been able to judge the entire scale of events and therefore thought it was better to get snape out of the place before he heard the entire prophecy and caused more damage than that was already done.

I'm looking forward to finding out what happened when the prophecy was made. As it stands it doesn't make much sense.

I'm looking forward to finding out what happened when the prophecy was made. As it stands it doesn't make much sense.


What about it doesn't make sense?

What about it doesn't make sense?

Well, Albus said part of the prophecy was overheard but the way Sybill tells it, Snape heard practically all of it. And why would Dumbledore have let Snape trot off and tell Voldemort about it if Voldemort was likely to take action against the babies? And why did Snape only tell Voldemort the first part if he heard it all? Much needs explaining IMO.

I always got the impression that Snape either only heard part of the prophecy or decided not to tell Voldemort the whole story. It all depends on whose side you think Snape is on. Maybe Dumbledore thought it wouldn't do any harm to let Snape go because he was supposed to be on the same side.

What about when Harry said "Accio horcrux"? He didn't know what it was so he couldn't have been concentrating on it the same way.

Even though he couldn't visualize the Horcrux he atleast had the view that he was looking for something that had a part of Voldemort's soul in it therefore I think it should have worked had the inferi not interrupted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by horcrux4
What about when Harry said "Accio horcrux"? He didn't know what it was so he couldn't have been concentrating on it the same way.


Even though he couldn't visualize the Horcrux he atleast had the view that he was looking for something that had a part of Voldemort's soul in it therefore I think it should have worked had the inferi not interrupted.

I wonder if the failure to get it from shore wasn't a tip-off that there wasn't a real Horcrux there to find ? Harry's spell might have worked if there was a real Horcrux there .

I wonder if the failure to get it from shore wasn't a tip-off that there wasn't a real Horcrux there to find ? Harry's spell might have worked if there was a real Horcrux there .

Now you have said it that I realize that you might be correct twins that might be a reason why Harry couldn't fetch the Locket. :agree:

Now you have said it that I realize that you might be correct twins that might be a reason why Harry couldn't fetch the Locket. :agree:

Yeah. Dumbledore didn't think it was a bad idea to try the Summoning Charm.

How ironic would it be if RAB got the locket that way. :elaugh:

How ironic would it be if RAB got the locket that way.

Ironic I think Harry would pull all his hair out. Anyways I was wondering why didn't Dumbledore tell Harry that he was expecting it to be a locket, because I have a fleeting memory of Dumbledore telling Harry that he knows which one it is. Anyways I will check and get the Quote later on.

How ironic would it be if RAB got the locket that way.
That would be the saddest of ironies indeed.

Ok 2 New Questions .

We know that Ron & Ginny were involved in the battle in the tower .
What I'm wondering is if you only get to see Thestrals after seeing death . Will Ron & Ginny now be able to see them ?. They saw the Death Eater buy it so will that give them the ability the same as Harry ?

What about all the rest of those who saw Dumbledore's body will they be able to now see them as well ?

We know that Ron & Ginny were involved in the battle in the tower .
What I'm wondering is if you only get to see Thestrals after seeing death . Will Ron & Ginny now be able to see them ?. They saw the Death Eater buy it so will that give them the ability the same as Harry ?
Sounds logical. Not that they've had the opportunity to find out yet. It would also depend if the Death Eater's death had 'sunk in' before the carriages to take them to the Hogwarts Express turned up.

What about all the rest of those who saw Dumbledore's body will they be able to now see them as well ?
I don't think seeing a dead body counts, I think you have to actually be present when the person dies. Otherwise Harry should have been able to see thestrals at the end of GoF due to Crouch Snr's death and the rest of the school by OotP due to seeing Cedric's body.

That would be the saddest of ironies indeed.

Yeah, probably a bit too much so. It would be a cool idea for another kind of book, though.

Otherwise Harry should have been able to see thestrals at the end of GoF due to Crouch Snr's death and the rest of the school by OotP due to seeing Cedric's body.
I don't think Harry ever saw the dead body of Crouch Sr. Junior hid him with his Invisibility Cloak and later transfigured him into a bone.
I think you're right about Cedric's body. A lot of kids saw him, and none of them can see Thestrals because of it.

Even though he couldn't visualize the Horcrux he atleast had the view that he was looking for something that had a part of Voldemort's soul in it therefore I think it should have worked had the inferi not interrupted.
Good point! Dumbledore didn't seem to think it would actually work, probably because of the magical protections - Voldemort wouldn't go through all the palaver of setting up so many protections if anyone could just Accio Horcrux and it would come flying. But I think Accio Horcrux would have worked just as well as Accio locket, if the locket had been the real Horcrux and if it had not been Accio-proofed!

What about when Harry said "Accio horcrux"? He didn't know what it was so he couldn't have been concentrating on it the same way.

Even though it wasn't the horcrux, Harry was concentrating on the object. I think the important pieces are "accio" and concentration. He could have said "accio banana" and it would have come so long as he was concentrating enough.

Well, Albus said part of the prophecy was overheard but the way Sybill tells it, Snape heard practically all of it. And why would Dumbledore have let Snape trot off and tell Voldemort about it if Voldemort was likely to take action against the babies? And why did Snape only tell Voldemort the first part if he heard it all? Much needs explaining IMO.

Snape was found by Aberforth/bar keeper. As Snape probably had his ear glued to the door, as soon as he was found by the bar keeper he would have had a conversation about why he was there, so he would not have heard the rest of the prophecy. The prophecy takes at most a minute to say, not very long, so if the bar keeper started talking to him, asking him why he was there, by the time that conversation was over, he would have missed the rest of the prophecy.

DD was able to open the door at the end of the prophecy and Snape was still there discussing things with the barkeeper.

Snape did not hear it all. DD could probably have found out how much he heard once Snape "turned to the good side", but I feel confident that he knew that Snape had only heard a bit - maybe he performed legilimency against Snape...Snape might not have been so good at it at this point to block it.

We know that Ron & Ginny were involved in the battle in the tower .
What I'm wondering is if you only get to see Thestrals after seeing death . Will Ron & Ginny now be able to see them ?. They saw the Death Eater buy it so will that give them the ability the same as Harry ?

I don't think it's just seeing the death, I think it has to mean something to you. The death of a death eater is not going to make you feel sad, and you probably aren't going to dwell on it too much, so they probably can't see Thestrals. Harry couldn't see the thestrals on their return journey the year Cedric died, he spent the summer having bad dreams and thinking it was his fault etc., etc., and that was why he could see them on the journey to school.

What about all the rest of those who saw Dumbledore's body will they be able to now see them as well ?

I think it is the act of someone dying that is important, not just a dead body, no matter how you feel about it.

What Snape heard or heard not is to be discussed here: Did Snape hear the entire Prophecy? (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=91801)

*To Mods, I searched the forums and could not find any topics like this but if there is, you know what to do!*

We know that in the wizarding world, the name Voldemort is feared as much as the wizard himself. In fact, Harry in PS still called him You-Know-Who, or He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named. However, after the battle over the Philosopher's stone, he decides to finally start using his real name, because Dumbledore said that "Fear of the name increases the fear of the thing itself".

Later on in the series, Hermione begins to start using the word, first as a way to comfort Harry in OotP and then because she truely feels that it is the right thing to do.

Now this brings me to my question, Why is it that ROn, who is Harry's best friend, still cringes at the name Voldemort and do you think that fear of this name will be significant in the next book? For example, will this intense fear of Voldemort cause Ron to become weak or less helpful than he would be otherwise?

Well, neither Harry nor Hermione grew up in a wizarding household, so they did not have the fear of Voldemort ingrained into them quite the way Ron did. The Weasleys lost many friends and relatives during the reign of Voldemort. So I think it is much easier for Hermione and Harry to let go of their fears. Perhaps in book 7, Ron will be able to as well.

Well, I know this is kind of off-topic, but I've always wondered how Hermione and Ron would react when they finally got the chance to go face-to-face against Voldemort.

I've been wondering how an invisibility cloak is made, and how you would get hold of them. Ron told is in PS/SS that they're really rare and really valuable, so how would you get one? Would you have to buy it at a place like Borgin and Burkes, or would you have to make it?

In fact, Harry in PS still called him You-Know-Who, or He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named.

Just to show how BurrowGhoul is correct, Harry did use Voldemort's name in PS/SS when he met Hagrid for the first time. He only used You-Know-Who etc. when Hagrid told him not to. If Hagrid hadn't stopped him on that first day, Harry would have used Voldemort's name all along, just because he didn't know anything about Voldemort, and his cruel ways. :)


Well, I know this is kind of off-topic, but I've always wondered how Hermione and Ron would react when they finally got the chance to go face-to-face against Voldemort.

I'm afraid, we'll find that out in Book 7 but we can easily assume they will be a bit scared, especially Ron since he cringes at the mere mention of his name. But, I think, eventually Harry will have to face Voldemort, while Ron and Hermione tackle the Death Eaters, Dementors etc. Then again, that's my opinion/guess. :)

We know that Ron & Ginny were involved in the battle in the tower .
What I'm wondering is if you only get to see Thestrals after seeing death . Will Ron & Ginny now be able to see them ?. They saw the Death Eater buy it so will that give them the ability the same as Harry ?

What about all the rest of those who saw Dumbledore's body will they be able to now see them as well ?

I don't think that just seeing a death what makes you be able to see the thestrals. I think the death has to sink in as a loss. As in case of Harry who didn't see the Thestrals on the return Journey in GoF but in Ootp we have him seeing the thestrals clear. And we also have Dudley mentioning that Harry had nightmares about Cedric this gives us an indication that Harry recognized Cedric's loss and that loss sunk into him making him being able to see the thestrals. Which is obviously not the case with the one's who saw the death of the Death Eater.

Also I don't think that just seeing the Dead Body of a person enable's one to see the Thestrals otherwise all those who attend the funeral of someone or the other would have been able to see the Thestrals but we clearly know that not many people know about them therefore I think it is not possible.

Also I would like to add a question that can Draco see the thestrals because he saw Snape Murder Dumbledore. :eyebrows:

I've been wondering how an invisibility cloak is made, and how you would get hold of them. Ron told is in PS/SS that they're really rare and really valuable, so how would you get one? Would you have to buy it at a place like Borgin and Burkes, or would you have to make it?

Here (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/magic/devices/devices_a-g.html#cloak_invisibility) this might answer you.

An Invisibility Cloak is a cloak of silvery grey material that, when worn, makes the covered parts of the wearer invisible. The weave is so fine that an Invisibility Cloak is "strange to the touch, like water woven into material". Invisibility Cloaks are woven from the hair of the Demiguise.

Harry's Invisibility Cloak is either quite large, big enough to cover several kids and a dragon in a wooden packing crate, or more likely it magically expands to cover what it needs to cover, within limits.

Thanks for the link on how the cloaks are made, but I'm still curious about where one would buy one from, if anyone has any ideas...

Well, neither Harry nor Hermione grew up in a wizarding household, so they did not have the fear of Voldemort ingrained into them quite the way Ron did. The Weasleys lost many friends and relatives during the reign of Voldemort. So I think it is much easier for Hermione and Harry to let go of their fears. Perhaps in book 7, Ron will be able to as well.
I agree. I think the taboo about saying Voldemort's name is very deeply ingrained in the wizarding population. It doesn't mean Ron is more scared than the other two - just that he has grown up with the taboo and they haven't.

Lexicon
An Invisibility Cloak is a cloak of silvery grey material that, when worn, makes the covered parts of the wearer invisible. The weave is so fine that an Invisibility Cloak is "strange to the touch, like water woven into material". Invisibility Cloaks are woven from the hair of the Demiguise.

Harry's Invisibility Cloak is either quite large, big enough to cover several kids and a dragon in a wooden packing crate, or more likely it magically expands to cover what it needs to cover, within limits. I have to disagree with the Lexicon about the cloak expanding. There are several references to it becoming too small as the kids (especially Ron) grow, so I think the size is fixed. It would have to be large enough to fully cover one adult so it isn't too much of a stretch to have it cover two 11 year olds and a crate, or three young teens huddled closely together.

Thanks for the link on how the cloaks are made, but I'm still curious about where one would buy one from, if anyone has any ideas...

If you follow the link then you would find that they have stated clearly that obtaining an Invisibility Cloak is not easy because it is really very rare.

I have to disagree with the Lexicon about the cloak expanding. There are several references to it becoming too small as the kids (especially Ron) grow, so I think the size is fixed. It would have to be large enough to fully cover one adult so it isn't too much of a stretch to have it cover two 11 year olds and a crate, or three young teens huddled closely together.True. Nowhere in the books is there any hint whatsoever that the cloak could expand when needed.

I have to disagree with the Lexicon about the cloak expanding. There are several references to it becoming too small as the kids (especially Ron) grow, so I think the size is fixed. It would have to be large enough to fully cover one adult so it isn't too much of a stretch to have it cover two 11 year olds and a crate, or three young teens huddled closely together.

But if it was a set size, then why didn't the cloak get caught in doors? Or stepped on? or something like that when Harry was by himself at the small and scrawny age of 11?

Maybe it's stretchy? :p

But if it was a set size, then why didn't the cloak get caught in doors? Or stepped on? or something like that when Harry was by himself at the small and scrawny age of 11?

Maybe it's stretchy? :p

Could be stretchy. :cool:
I think when Harry was younger, maybe he was more careful with it around doors and such, because he wasn't used to being invisible. A lot of the times, he used the cloak with Ron and Hermione though. Now, at 16, he describes how it's no longer big enough to cover all three of them.

What I've never understood about the invisibility cloak is how it is able to be "stuffed into Harry's pocket", as is has been so many times?

What I've never understood about the invisibility cloak is how it is able to be "stuffed into Harry's pocket", as is has been so many times?

Yes, me too. How on earth does it fit in his pocket, but then he also has to sometimes sit on it, or stuff it up his jumper...and then it can still just about fit over three teenage children???

Because he folds it up?

It must be very thin material, not so surprising as it gives invisibility.

What I've never understood about the invisibility cloak is how it is able to be "stuffed into Harry's pocket", as is has been so many times?

Maybe wizarding robes have large pockets? Or magical pockets that can hold anything you want to put into them?

What I've never understood about the invisibility cloak is how it is able to be "stuffed into Harry's pocket", as is has been so many times?

I've always thought of it being like a piece of ultra fine silk, you can fold a large swath of it very small ,if you try hard enough . Harry's cloak is described as very light ,fluid & silvery-grey so prehaps it too can be folded into a very small package ?

BurrowGhoul's answer is a good Idea too, Wizard space in your pockets .

It must be very thin material, not so surprising as it gives invisibility.
That's what I think too. It's kind of gossamer thin so it can be folded up very small.

Or magical pockets that can hold anything you want to put into them?

"Quick Harry, jump into my pocket!" :rotfl:

...sorry...it's been a long day :D

That's what I think too. It's kind of gossamer thin so it can be folded up very small.

Exactly what I think. Something that thin would just be able to be folded up into a tiny bundle.

Yeah, I don't really think that it means everything. It's just small.

Maybe wizarding robes have large pockets? Or magical pockets that can hold anything you want to put into them?


This kinda makes me think of Hagrid. Look at how many things he fits in his pockets. Granted, he is a giant with giant-sized clothes, but nothing should be able to carry that much stuff.

Maybe part of the magic of the invisibility cloak is the abilitty to fold into something very small. It is light and almost fluid, so it seems like it would be able to fold into itself and become small dense mass.

This kinda makes me think of Hagrid. Look at how many things he fits in his pockets. Granted, he is a giant with giant-sized clothes, but nothing should be able to carry that much stuff.

Thats a great explanation! Hagrid`s pockets contains also an owl, not mentioned as tiny as Pigwidgeon and a not broken birstday cake. Therefore I think there must be more room in Hagrids pockets than usual.

Maybe wizarding robes have large pockets? Or magical pockets that can hold anything you want to put into them?

I think I like this answer best. Although that still doesn't answer why he has to sit on it at times, or put it up his jumper - but then maybe he isn't wearing his robes at these points in time so as his "jeans" or whatever aren't magical, the cloak won't fit in those pockets.

This is something i just wondered when reading another thread, and im sure i have just overlooked a perfectly acceptable answer but anyway.

When Trelawny made the prophesy to DD re Voldemorts downfall, why was Snape listening at the door? Is that just a massive coincidence that VM's follower was listening at the door when the prophesy occured, cos if not then how did Snape know it was going to occur? Or was he just really bored with no life, now that Lilly and James were together...lol

When Trelawny made the prophesy to DD re Voldemorts downfall, why was Snape listening at the door? Is that just a massive coincidence that VM's follower was listening at the door when the prophesy occured, cos if not then how did Snape know it was going to occur? Or was he just really bored with no life, now that Lilly and James were together...lol
He was probably sent to spy on Dumbledore. Of course he couldn't get into Hogwarts, but if it was known back then that Dumbledore frequented the Hogs Head, then Snape might have hung around waiting to see if he showed up and eavesdrop on any conversations he might have. Pubs are good places for eavesdropping. I don't think anyone knew that the prophecy was going to happen. But perhaps Sybill wasn't too far off when she suggested that Snape was eavesdropping on her interview because he wanted a job at Hogwarts himself?

In POA, Harry overhears Arthur Weasley telling Molly that the reason they know Sirius Black is after Harry is that Cornelius Fudge had gone to Azkaban and been told that he'd been muttering in his sleep, "He's at Hogwarts... he's at Hogwarts..." Now, we all know that Sirius is referring to Peter Pettigrew when he's muttering these things in his sleep. But Sirius tells Harry at the end of POA that the reason he knew that Peter was at Hogwarts is because when Cornelius Fudge visited Azkaban, he borrowed his newspaper (to do the crossword) and saw the article about the Weasleys in Egypt. And Cornelius Fudge himself said in the Three Broomsticks that it was his last visit, he didn't go there twice. So the question is... why was Sirius muttering about Hogwarts in his sleep before he found out Peter was at Hogwarts? This seems like it can only be a slip up on the timeline.

Voldemort is relaxing at HQ stroking Nagini absentmindedly.Suddenly,an idea hits him.He grins maliciously .


Voldemort : "ACCIO POTTER!"


Harry comes flying through the Window and lands on the floor looking confused.


Voldemort : "Well, I'll be damned ..."


Thanks to Serena_Hallow for letting me use this ..

I LOVE this! :clap:

Assuming the protection on Harry would prevent such a thing (;) ) from happening, can you accio another person, or an animal?

If I recall a Ravenclaw calls his mate over at the Ball, and he comes over so quickly Harry thinks he must have summoned him using a summoning charm, so I'd presume so.

In POA, Harry overhears Arthur Weasley telling Molly that the reason they know Sirius Black is after Harry is that Cornelius Fudge had gone to Azkaban and been told that he'd been muttering in his sleep, "He's at Hogwarts... he's at Hogwarts..." Now, we all know that Sirius is referring to Peter Pettigrew when he's muttering these things in his sleep. But Sirius tells Harry at the end of POA that the reason he knew that Peter was at Hogwarts is because when Cornelius Fudge visited Azkaban, he borrowed his newspaper (to do the crossword) and saw the article about the Weasleys in Egypt. And Cornelius Fudge himself said in the Three Broomsticks that it was his last visit, he didn't go there twice. So the question is... why was Sirius muttering about Hogwarts in his sleep before he found out Peter was at Hogwarts? This seems like it can only be a slip up on the timeline.

I dont think Fudge says that he personally overheard Sirius saying it, I think it was reported by either other inmates or the guards. I would have to go look at the book to be sure, but I believe it is something along those lines.

Which one is Crabbe and which one is Goyle?

In the movies you mean?

http://www.danielradcliffe.com/siteimages/crabbeandgoyle.jpg

Right is Goyle played by Joshua Herdmann
Left is Crabbe played by Jamie Waylett

In POA, Harry overhears Arthur Weasley telling Molly that the reason they know Sirius Black is after Harry is that Cornelius Fudge had gone to Azkaban and been told that he'd been muttering in his sleep, "He's at Hogwarts... he's at Hogwarts..." Now, we all know that Sirius is referring to Peter Pettigrew when he's muttering these things in his sleep. But Sirius tells Harry at the end of POA that the reason he knew that Peter was at Hogwarts is because when Cornelius Fudge visited Azkaban, he borrowed his newspaper (to do the crossword) and saw the article about the Weasleys in Egypt. And Cornelius Fudge himself said in the Three Broomsticks that it was his last visit, he didn't go there twice. So the question is... why was Sirius muttering about Hogwarts in his sleep before he found out Peter was at Hogwarts? This seems like it can only be a slip up on the timeline.

You are right about the quotes and the timeline, but can we always believe what Fudge says is true. Maybe he gave the newspaper to Sirius on the previous visit and then forgot it was the previous visit. He is a politician and it makes for a good story in the retelling, and maybe he actually did forget (or Heaven Forbid!, Jo did make a mistake :grumble: ).

I didn't know where to ask this, so I'll stick here and hope someone answers it...
I was watching the third Harry Potter film and Jk Rowling said that somethings in the third film gave clues to things that would happen in the sixth book. Having read the sixth book I can't see anything there. Can anyone else?

Credit to MOMEVE on the title competition,:cool:

Liked the title. Made me think about the name Godric's Hollow. The idea that the village has something to do with Godric Griffindore has not been denied as of yet. Gi9ven that Griffindore may have lived there and knowing that most elderly people tend to be somewhat of a hermitt. The "Hollow" may be the actual cave of his residence, around which the village developed.

Your thoughts?

I thought she said that it would be clues for the seventh book.

I dont think Fudge says that he personally overheard Sirius saying it, I think it was reported by either other inmates or the guards. I would have to go look at the book to be sure, but I believe it is something along those lines.

I'd always assumed he had received reports after his visit. I don't think we know the timeframe do we?

Given that everyone thinks that Sirius killed James and Lily, and that he probably wants to kill Harry, it would have been assumed that he was talking about Harry and therefore for him to suddenly start saying "he's at Hogwarts" would have been enough for the guards to notify Fudge.

But yes, Jo might have made a "mistake"...or maybe Fudge was there for a couple of days!?

If Voldemort had his horcruxes and believed himself immortal, why did he put so much faith in the prophecy? Wouldn't he have just dismissed it as impossible?

That's Voldemort's nature: he doesn't want anyone around who might threaten his supremecy and quest for power, baby or not. Besides, his demise at Godric's Hollow would only have emphasised the importance of taking the prophecy seriously hence his desire to hear it properly in OotP.

If Voldemort had his horcruxes and believed himself immortal, why did he put so much faith in the prophecy? Wouldn't he have just dismissed it as impossible?

Voldemort's wants to take no risks. He knows that wizards in the past who made horcruxes had been defeated(Grindelwald?) and didn't want to take that chance. After all, in his twisted mind, all he would have to do is kill a baby, and I mean, how hard could that be?

If Voldemort had his horcruxes and believed himself immortal, why did he put so much faith in the prophecy? Wouldn't he have just dismissed it as impossible?

I think that even though he believed himself to be immortal, he also believed, in some ways that the prophecy could be true and could not be easily undone or avoided. He had to make sure everything was done so he could not be touched by fate.

I'm not at all sure that Voldemort knew the Horcruxes would work. He told the DEs "one or more of my experiements" had worked and I know he was skirting around the issue, but even so, he could have said that he knew he couldn't die.

I'm not at all sure that Voldemort knew the Horcruxes would work. He told the DEs "one or more of my experiements" had worked and I know he was skirting around the issue, but even so, he could have said that he knew he couldn't die.

Well if he knows that one of them had worked, and he had done the same thing to all of them, wouldn't they all have worked?

How could he know any of them worked until he was "killed"? They worked by producing Vapourmort, and that only happened once.

How could he know any of them worked until he was "killed"? They worked by producing Vapourmort, and that only happened once.

Yes but he made the whole "one of more experiments" quote after he was vapourmort, so he would have known all of them had worked

Question:
Mr. Weasley says in chapter 6 of book four that Portkeys only work at predetermined times, and later he is seen counting down with his watch when they go to the Quidditch World Cup. Then how did the Triwizard cup function as a portkey, since it worked immediately when it was touched by Harry and Cedric?

Yes but he made the whole "one of more experiments" quote after he was vapourmort, so he would have known all of them had worked
But he was talking about the time he was ripped from his body at Godric's Hollow. Up to that point he couldn't have tested whether the Horcruxes worked without killing himself to see if he died.

Mr. Weasley says in chapter 6 of book four that Portkeys only work at predetermined times, and later he is seen counting down with his watch when they go to the Quidditch World Cup. Then how did the Triwizard cup function as a portkey, since it worked immediately when it was touched by Harry and Cedric?
Actually, if you re-read that passage, you'll see that Harry counts to three---quite similar in manner to Dumbledore in OoP...once with the cauldron that sent everyone to 12 Grimmauld Place, and then with the statue's head which took Harry back to Hogwarts.

There's the question about why the portkey worked to return Harry to Hogwarts following the cemetery scene.

Question:
Mr. Weasley says in chapter 6 of book four that Portkeys only work at predetermined times, and later he is seen counting down with his watch when they go to the Quidditch World Cup. Then how did the Triwizard cup function as a portkey, since it worked immediately when it was touched by Harry and Cedric?
I think that there are a few inconsitencies about portkeys. Earlier in this thread I brought up another one, so I think Jo might have some explaining to do in Book7

But he was talking about the time he was ripped from his body at Godric's Hollow. Up to that point he couldn't have tested whether the Horcruxes worked without killing himself to see if he died.
Oh, you're right. I was under the impression you were saying something else:p

how does moody make the spider fly with the imperious curse if it controls yer thoughts how did he make it fly?? was it a magic flying spider?? if so they never established that ...and lily potter is obviously fighting with james while defending snape in OOTP but then voldemort calls her a MUGGLE in GOF how is she a muggle if she is a witch??

Credit to MOMEVE on the title competition,:cool:

Liked the title. Made me think about the name Godric's Hollow. The idea that the village has something to do with Godric Griffindore has not been denied as of yet. Gi9ven that Griffindore may have lived there and knowing that most elderly people tend to be somewhat of a hermitt. The "Hollow" may be the actual cave of his residence, around which the village developed.

Your thoughts?

Thank you!:) I agree with your idea. Don't think its a coincidence that the name of a founder of Harry's house in Hogwarts is the same as the village his parents lived in! I picked that for the title because I think the series will end in the same place it began.

how does moody make the spider fly with the imperious curse if it controls yer thoughts how did he make it fly?? was it a magic flying spider?? if so they never established that

Actually the spider doesn't fly in the book.

He then pointed his wand at it and muttered "Imperio!"
The spider leapt from Moody's hand on a fine thread of silk, and began to swing backwards and forwards as though on a trapeze. It stretched out its legs rigidly, then did a back-flip, breaking the thread and landing on the desk where it began to cartwheel in circles. Moody jerked his wand and the spider rose onto two of its hind legs and went into what was unmistakeably a tap dance. <snip> "Total control," said Moody quietly as the spider balled itself up and began to roll over and over."
This is all we see the spider do under the Imperius curse.

...and lily potter is obviously fighting with james while defending snape in OOTP but then voldemort calls her a MUGGLE in GOF how is she a muggle if she is a witch??

Voldemort, being fanatical about pure-bloods (which is ironic seeing that he is a half-blood himself) would see a witch who is the daughter of 2 Muggles as no witch at all. Once a Muggle always a Muggle I suppose.

in harry potter order of the phoenix why most of the things in grimmauld palace are serpentlike.door knobse.t.c

I think it was just to make it clear that it was a Dark house. Snakes are often referred to throughout the books in relation to Dark wizards. And too, the Blacks are purebloods, all the pbs are related, so it's probably that they had ties to Slytherin's family.

NO NO NO WB has not done that at all i just forgot about the book i read it in 2003 and i saw the movie 3 times this winter so i am more familar with moody making the bloddy thing fly with the imperious curse i have read all of the books and i think moastly they do a good job here's a new question to stay on topic why is it okay for harry to leave ginny to keep her safe at the end of HBP but ron and hermione can come along on the dangerous adventure to find horcrux's??

NO NO NO WB has not done that at all i just forgot about the book i read it in 2003 and i saw the movie 3 times this winter so i am more familar with moody making the bloddy thing fly with the imperious curse i have read all of the books and i think moastly they do a good job here's a new question to stay on topic why is it okay for harry to leave ginny to keep her safe at the end of HBP but ron and hermione can come along on the dangerous adventure to find horcrux's??
:lol:

Well, Ron and Hermione formally haven't exactly gone out yet in the first place:p But anyway, they would both be going anyway, and Harry knows he can't stop them because they've been on so many adventures before

do you think that ginny will be one of the new deaths ??? cuz it won't be ron or hermione jk obviously waited till the last book to then unite them but them i wonder who she will off?? ginny?? making it a sad miserable moment for harry and ron and the weaslys PLEASE NO!!!!

here's a new question to stay on topic why is it okay for harry to leave ginny to keep her safe at the end of HBP but ron and hermione can come along on the dangerous adventure to find horcrux's??

Harry only thinks he can keep Ginny away. Plllease, she'll be back. Ginny will want to come just like she did in OotP, that's just who she is. As for why Harry was okay with Ron and Hermione coming? Well, he really wasn't. I'm too lazy to go quote the book right now, but when he told Ron and Hermy he wasn't coming back to school and instead he was going to go looking for Horcruxes, he was surprised to hear them say they were coming. He said he expected them to just accept what he was doing. Besides Ron and Hermy have been with Harry through thick and thin. Harry knows what Ron and Hermy are capable of doing. And even though he really likes Ginny and has known her for years, he does really understand what shes able to do. And nither do we for that matter.

yea i guess so .....i forget was luna lovegood even in HBP???

here's a new question to stay on topic why is it okay for harry to leave ginny to keep her safe at the end of HBP but ron and hermione can come along on the dangerous adventure to find horcrux's??
Both Ron & Hermione are adults and thus are free to make up their own minds about their futures . Harry can't stop Ron & Hermione from coming along with him, nor do I think would he if he could . Harry needs them both even though he doesn't want them to get hurt .
Ginny on the other hand is not yet an adult ,and as such she can't deside her own future, no matter how much she wants to .
Harry's love for Ginny is such that he wants her safe no matter what she thinks about it .

I have a question... If the Dursley's dislike magic & Harry so much, why do they all turn up to pick him up at the end of every school year. Why doesn't just Vernon or Petunia go and pick him up? Why all three of them? And why does Dudley come along every time (especially when he can't be bothered getting off the couch to go with his father to pick up Aunt Marge). It seems most odd indeed.

yea i guess so .....i forget was luna lovegood even in HBP???

Yes She was she was Harry's Date to Slughorn's Christmas Party. Luna was also the commitator for the Quidditch game between Gryffindor and Hufflepuff .

In HBP, Tonks changes her Patronus. But how does it happen?Is it only because of the 'emotional upheaval'?

Maybe Tonks was under the Imperius curse.....because she acts very oddly in HBP.......maybe that even changes your Patronus as long as you are under the control of someone....

It turned into a werewolf because she's in love with Lupin, and because she was in shock/sadness because Sirius dies.

At least that's my theory, I don't remember correctly if it turned into a werewolf.

Yeah, it does.

I think it's because your Patronus is something that depends heavily on your emotions--the thing that fuels it is, after all, a happy memory. It makes sense that if your emotional state changed dramatically that that would be reflected in any magic that depended on emotion, including the manifestation of your Patronus.

Yeah, it does.

I think it's because your Patronus is something that depends heavily on your emotions--the thing that fuels it is, after all, a happy memory. It makes sense that if your emotional state changed dramatically that that would be reflected in any magic that depended on emotion, including the manifestation of your Patronus.

Ok, I'm almost afraid to ask this; it might have a really obvious answer. BUT: I've always wondered why Harry's patronus is a stag? The significance of the stag is later discovered to be that James' animagus form is a stag. But Harry did not know this when he first cast a patronus, did he? So how did he manage to see his dad's animagus form? (Maybe I missed something, or got the chronology confused in my memory).

Ok, I'm almost afraid to ask this; it might have a really obvious answer. BUT: I've always wondered why Harry's patronus is a stag? The significance of the stag is later discovered to be that James' animagus form is a stag. But Harry did not know this when he first cast a patronus, did he? So how did he manage to see his dad's animagus form? (Maybe I missed something, or got the chronology confused in my memory).
I think it's subconscious. Like Dumbledore said, Harry has a piece of his father in him.

It must be very thin material, not so surprising as it gives invisibility.
Hmm... the quote from Lexicon clearly suggests that Invisibility cloak is something that appears like water woven so maybe that is what makes the cloak so light and foldable that it fits into Harry's pockets.


Assuming the protection on Harry would prevent such a thing (;) ) from happening, can you accio another person, or an animal?

I remember asking the same question in the previous version of this thread and GH you gave the same answer. :p
If I recall a Ravenclaw calls his mate over at the Ball, and he comes over so quickly Harry thinks he must have summoned him using a summoning charm, so I'd presume so.

Anyways remember that Harry felt that he (the boy who had invited Parvati for a dance) had summoned the boy, but felt dosen't mean he actually summoned the boy so we have no such cannon to support the point.

I have a question... If the Dursley's dislike magic & Harry so much, why do they all turn up to pick him up at the end of every school year. Why doesn't just Vernon or Petunia go and pick him up? Why all three of them? And why does Dudley come along every time (especially when he can't be bothered getting off the couch to go with his father to pick up Aunt Marge). It seems most odd indeed.

It is because of the letter that Dumbledore wrote to Petunia when he left Harry at the Dursley''s doorsteps stating the reason why they would have to keep Harry. It had to do with the Magical Protection that Lily had left on Harry when she died saving him.

It is because of the letter that Dumbledore wrote to Petunia when he left Harry at the Dursley''s doorsteps stating the reason why they would have to keep Harry. It had to do with the Magical Protection that Lily had left on Harry when she died saving him.

I find it hard to believe that the Dursleys would still keep Harry out of the goodness of their hearts, unless Dumbledore pointed out that they would essentially be murdering him if they didn't take him in. I wonder if some of that protection applies to them as well. It wouldn't surprise me if Voldemort had the Death Eaters destroy the whole family purely because they are related to Harry (even if Harry was dead), and perhaps his living there gives them the same blood protection.

I find it hard to believe that the Dursleys would still keep Harry out of the goodness of their hearts, unless Dumbledore pointed out that they would essentially be murdering him if they didn't take him in. I wonder if some of that protection applies to them as well. It wouldn't surprise me if Voldemort had the Death Eaters destroy the whole family purely because they are related to Harry (even if Harry was dead), and perhaps his living there gives them the same blood protection.

I don't even think it was a question of the Dursley's keeping Harry, I belive it was down to Petunia. Deep down somewhere she must have had some sort of soft spot for her sister....even if it was only to prove herself in some perverse way by being alive to bring up Harry.

I wondered before was there some sort of charm on the Dursley's placed by Dumbledore along the line. Idle speculationt on my part of course.

read the first harry potter book where Hagrid finally comes to get Harry in the Shack. Harry asked how Hagrid got there, and he said he flew. (as in on the motorcycle.) If he would have apparated he certainly wouldn't have said he Flew would he? Or do you disagree?
Jen

I didn`t believe Hagrid can apparate. Therefore he needs an exam, but he didn`t go to school at that age. Also I didn`t think that he flew by bike, it wasn`t there in the morning and he told Dumbledore ten years ago he would bring it back to Sirius. The only possibility I see is that Hagrid flew with a Thestral to the shack and send it back because Harry shouldn`t see it next morning.

About Harry's patronus, the first time it took full form was when he was saving himself and Sirius from the dementors. Prior to that, he had been convinced that it was his dad who had cast the patronus. I think that may have been part of the reason it was a stag. He certainly had his dad on his mind.

read the first harry potter book where Hagrid finally comes to get Harry in the Shack. Harry asked how Hagrid got there, and he said he flew. (as in on the motorcycle.) If he would have apparated he certainly wouldn't have said he Flew would he? Or do you disagree?
Jen

If he had apparated he would have said flew, because apparating for him would probably be illeagal. I doubt that he would have used the bike, seeing as it would be two recognizable. If a ministry member saw him in the sky with that, they would probably shoot him down.

I didn`t believe Hagrid can apparate. Therefore he needs an exam, but he didn`t go to school at that age. Also I didn`t think that he flew by bike, it wasn`t there in the morning and he told Dumbledore ten years ago he would bring it back to Sirius. The only possibility I see is that Hagrid flew with a Thestral to the shack and send it back because Harry shouldn`t see it next morning.

My thoughts exactly on the apparition. The only reason I disagree with the Thestral theory is because he couldn't have taken the bike back to Sirius that night, because it was my understanding that Sirius immediately left the Potters destroyed house to find Peter Pettigrew, thats why Sirius told Hagrid to 'Have the bike, he wouldn't be needing it anymore'. And wouldn't Hagrid have mentioned if he returned the bike, instead of making it seem like the last time he saw him was after the Potters had died when he came to get Harry....all speculation of course.

And another thing, How did the Dursleys get off the island? It seems like I know the answer somewhere in a vague back part of my brain, but I'm on slow internet right now and I don't feel like a 3 hour search for the answer.

We used to have a thread about Hagrid's flying. It seems to be gone.

Anyway Jo has never given us an answer.

My thoughts exactly on the apparition. The only reason I disagree with the Thestral theory is because he couldn't have taken the bike back to Sirius that night, because it was my understanding that Sirius immediately left the Potters destroyed house to find Peter Pettigrew, thats why Sirius told Hagrid to 'Have the bike, he wouldn't be needing it anymore'. And wouldn't Hagrid have mentioned if he returned the bike, instead of making it seem like the last time he saw him was after the Potters had died when he came to get Harry....all speculation of course.


At the beginning of PS Hagrid told Dumbledore that he would bring the bike back to Sirius. Chapter 1, page 23 British paperback edition:
I`d best get this bike away

You can bring back a bike or a car if the owner isn`t at home. And I think Harry had heard the sound of the bike even through the thunder and were do you think was it on the next morning?

I find it hard to believe that the Dursleys would still keep Harry out of the goodness of their hearts, unless Dumbledore pointed out that they would essentially be murdering him if they didn't take him in. I wonder if some of that protection applies to them as well. It wouldn't surprise me if Voldemort had the Death Eaters destroy the whole family purely because they are related to Harry (even if Harry was dead), and perhaps his living there gives them the same blood protection.

I think they to are proected by the ancient magical protection. And I think I agree with Liselle that somewhere deep down she has a soft spot for Harry.

I have a question... If the Dursley's dislike magic & Harry so much, why do they all turn up to pick him up at the end of every school year. Why doesn't just Vernon or Petunia go and pick him up? Why all three of them? And why does Dudley come along every time (especially when he can't be bothered getting off the couch to go with his father to pick up Aunt Marge). It seems most odd indeed.

My take on it is:

Petunia doesn't seem to drive (she is never written to drive and if she goes anywhere, Vernon does too).

Vernon probably refuses to get Harry on his own, maybe he wants to refuse full stop but because of the protection, Petunia insists.

Dudley can't be left at home.

Therefore, they all go.

Harry asked how Hagrid got there, and he said he flew. (as in on the motorcycle.)

I think the most likely is by Thestral.

I didn`t believe Hagrid can apparate. Therefore he needs an exam, but he didn`t go to school at that age.

You don't need to go to school to apparate, you need to go to the "licensing office". You don't go to school to be allowed to drive, you get tested by a driving examiner, it's the same thing in my mind.

If Hagrid wanted to apparate all he would have to do is be 17 and learn how to - then be tested and pass.

Harry and Ron, in theory, won't be in school in book 7, yet they are still going to go for their apparition licence.

I don't think Hagrid would have been allowed to take the test before he got his name cleared by the end of CoS.

I don't think Hagrid would have been allowed to take the test before he got his name cleared by the end of CoS.I agree, but we saw that he performed lower magic without being allowed before cos, too.

I wondered about Hagrid's apparation a fe months ago, too, and think it is possible that he is able to. He could have learned it by someone else and the part where he left King's Cross and Harry the first time seems to describe an apparation. Seems. There could be several ways to explain, but it's still possible for me that we saw an apparation there.

Is it possible Dumbledore gave him a portkey to help him get back to Hogwarts after he'd safely delivered Harry?

Is it possible Dumbledore gave him a portkey to help him get back to Hogwarts after he'd safely delivered Harry?I would say it is. It's one the possibilities I would rate as very likely.

Problem with the portkey is that he already had to take it with him and so it had to be activated somehow. Dumbledore showed at least already that he do use portkeys without being allowed to do so by the MoM.

About Harry's patronus, the first time it took full form was when he was saving himself and Sirius from the dementors. Prior to that, he had been convinced that it was his dad who had cast the patronus. I think that may have been part of the reason it was a stag. He certainly had his dad on his mind.

Actually, the first time his patronus took full form was at the Quidditch game when Malfoy showed up in the dementor costume. Someone (was it Lupin??) said to Harry later, "the unusual form your patronus took at the Quidditch game" (or along that line) and Harry himself saw something enormous erupt out of his wand, but didn't have time to look at it. And it charged down Malfoy. So I think, with the Patronuses... they kind of have a mind of their own. They know what the best form is for their creator, even if the creator himself is unaware of the significance. Do we know if Patronuses are always animals?

It was Dumbledore who said it.

I seem to remember that every patronus we know about has been an animal.

I don't think Hagrid would have been allowed to take the test before he got his name cleared by the end of CoS.

We don't know that the two are connected. Expulsion doesn't necessarily mean he can't apparate.

If you are expelled from school the rest of the world isn't open to you.

I seem to remember that every patronus we know about has been an animal.*shuts down her theory that Arthur Weasley's patronus could be a toaster*

Actually, the first time his patronus took full form was at the Quidditch game when Malfoy showed up in the dementor costume. Someone (was it Lupin??) said to Harry later, "the unusual form your patronus took at the Quidditch game" (or along that line) and Harry himself saw something enormous erupt out of his wand, but didn't have time to look at it. And it charged down Malfoy. So I think, with the Patronuses... they kind of have a mind of their own. They know what the best form is for their creator, even if the creator himself is unaware of the significance. Do we know if Patronuses are always animals?

So far I think we saw five patroni? Dumbledore used one for Hagrid to come in GoF and we only know two other students than Harry that are able to cojure one (Cho and Hermione). In the last book we only saw Tonk`s. All were animals, therefore I think patroni are always animals.

*shuts down her theory that Arthur Weasley's patronus could be a toaster*
Or an electrical plug? :lol:

Or an electrical plug? :lol:

PP= PLUG PRATONUS:rotfl: :rotfl:

Dudley can't be left at home.


You don't think that they'd trust their 16 year old "angel" at home?

I know I wouldn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freaky
Dudley can't be left at home.



You don't think that they'd trust their 16 year old "angel" at home?

I don't think its a matter of trusting him alone :no: . Its more like He would throw a temper tantrum if they tried to leave him at home .

I don't think its a matter of trusting him alone . Its more like He would throw a temper tantrum if they tried to leave him at home .

I thought he had those tantrums because of the various restrictions imposed and if he is left at home alone he would be free man and wouldn't bother to make a fuss, I mean he does that only to catch everyone's attention (though he isn't very hard to miss out :lol:) so when nobody is at home whose attention would he like to capture. :huh:

does anyone think the twins will return in the lst book other then the wedding??

does anyone think the twins will return in the lst book other then the wedding??

Yes, I do. They are to funny for one scene in the whole book. I hope we will see them in their shop and they will join the order, now that they are off age. They invented shield clothes in HBP, maybe they help Harry with other saving or fighting things. Their knowledge is indispensible.

You don't think that they'd trust their 16 year old "angel" at home?
It's probably more that none of them want to be alone with Harry. I think it's a kind of show of solidarity that they all arrive together to collect Harry. Then they are always 3 against 1 and can squash him if he starts any "funny stuff!" Harry has shown he can stand up for himself so all three of them turning up is a bit like a police escort!

Of course, if the ban on underage magic were revoked, Harry could lay them all out inside two seconds but as it is, the bodyguard theory works for me.

Of course, if the ban on underage magic were revoked, Harry could lay them all out inside two seconds but as it is, the bodyguard theory works for me.
Only one month to go until that no longer applies! Drat that Statute of Secrecy, though!

Well, x+ two months if you want to get technical about it as we don't have a release date yet. But in essentials, you are correct.

Maybe they could amend it to using magic in fromt of those muggles who know you're a witch/wizard.

I don't think it's too likely that the Dursleys go to London for shopping or whatnot every other week. The train arrives quite late, doesn't it. They have the whole day to make London, and Dudders wouldn't like to miss that.

Yes, I do. They are to funny for one scene in the whole book. I hope we will see them in their shop and they will join the order, now that they are off age. They invented shield clothes in HBP, maybe they help Harry with other saving or fighting things. Their knowledge is indispensible.



Can you imagine how funny the twins will be at the wedding? It's probably gonna be the only light-hearted part in the whole book so we should enjoy it while we can.

This is definitely more of a comment than a question, but it made me go "Hey!" so I thought I'd share it.

For his birthday, my son got the book "Redwall," which is about woodland animals who act like knights, etc. There is a group of evil rats, and in the beginning, a rat named Wormtail loses his hand.

Weird, huh?

This is definitely more of a comment than a question, but it made me go "Hey!" so I thought I'd share it.

For his birthday, my son got the book "Redwall," which is about woodland animals who act like knights, etc. There is a group of evil rats, and in the beginning, a rat named Wormtail loses his hand.

Weird, huh?

That makes me think the author is a fan.
I searched for the book, is these a serie?

That makes me think the author is a fan.

I thought so too. It's not uncommon that authors include references to the work of other authors or artists they like. Unfortunately can't think of a good example right now.

That makes me think the author is a fan.
I searched for the book, is these a serie?
The Redwall series started long before the Philosopher's Stone was first published. It's by Brian Jacques.

The Redwall series started long before the Philosopher's Stone was first published. It's by Brian Jacques.

Thanks RavenEye!
Have you read the books, are they good?

The Redwall series started long before the Philosopher's Stone was first published. It's by Brian Jacques.

So maybe it's the other way aroud. Maybe JKR likes those books.

I don't think it's too likely that the Dursleys go to London for shopping or whatnot every other week. The train arrives quite late, doesn't it. They have the whole day to make London, and Dudders wouldn't like to miss that.

Yeah, I think that's right. Y'know, get some boxing gloves, a cake, a Play Station, a muffin, a BB gun, and some candy....just the usual stuff:p

The Redwall series started long before the Philosopher's Stone was first published. It's by Brian Jacques.
The publication date was 1986.

My nieces really enjoyed the series, which is why they bought it for my son.

I haven't gotten very far, just the first few chapters, so I don't even know if the Wormtail character ever appears again.

I like to discuss Felix Felicis, but I only found three threads about the use of Snape and Hermione, but my point is more general. Any idea if this exist yet?

Annett, You might want to put that question in the Ask the Staff thread, but for now it doesn't look like there's anything out there so I'd go ahead and create a thread if you want to discuss it:)

Annett, You might want to put that question in the Ask the Staff thread, but for now it doesn't look like there's anything out there so I'd go ahead and create a thread if you want to discuss it:)

Thanks, I opened a new discussion here (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?p=4141516#post4141516).

Why does Tonks always say "Wotcher, Harry."? Is this a British thing or something?