Ron is Dumbledore and Flamel--due to time travel...

[Boris_the_Bewilder]

I have read explanations of time travel and I finally saw how it can explain what happened in POA without appeal to the ideas that time repeats itself or that time-travelers can change history, and can explain how Harry can see time-traveling Harry "before" the latter has actually traveled without duplicating Harrys. Harry and Hermione zig-zag back through time, and only one set of Harry's and Hermione's go into the evening and only one come out. (I would repeat the explanation here but it took me making a graph with four different colored pens and a yellow high-lighter to understand it myself.)

Still, my objection is that according to JKR you can change history and that makes it a crumby plot device for reasons stated in earlier posts.

[Furienna]

Really, Harry and Hermione didn't change history, they just fullfiled destinies.

[Boris_the_Bewilder]

True, time-traveling Harry and Hermione didn't change history this time -- they just participated in events as they were supposed to happen (if that is the right way to put it). The problem is that JKR hasn't limited herself to just that -- she has Hermione (when explaining time-turning to Harry) say that wizards have traveled through time and killed their former selves, and that is changing history. And if you can change history, well, you can do anything to the plot and that's why it isn't a very good plot device.

[Furienna]

But even if you kill one of yourself, one of yourselves would be left, right? OK, that was comfusing, but anyway, few people are allowed by the ministry to have the least time turner because such things shan't happen, and I don't think they do too often. And even if you "change history", maybe that was meant to happen? But now I'm rambling over here.

[Boris_the_Bewilder]

The killing stuff leads to a paradox. Let's say 2004 Boris the Bewildered goes back in time and kills 1970 Boris the Bewildered. Then there is no 1971 BTB, no 1972 BTB, and so on -- and so no 2004 BTB to go back in time to kill 1970 BTB ... so 1970 BTB lives and so now there is a 2004 BTB who can go back in time to kill 1970 BTB and so there is no 1970 BTB and so no 2004 BTB and so there is a 1970 BTB ...

But even if I killed 1970 BTB and 2004 BTB didn't just fade away but still existed, still history would change. Everything I would have done from when I killed 1970 BTB to 2004 would never have occurred. In particular, there wouldn't be any 1991 BTB and 1993 BTB to have my children -- so they wouldn't exist.

[Furienna]

But even if Harry had killed his other self in POA, he would only kill a few hours younger Harry so there would be two 1994 Harrys and no one would be able to tell any difference. But fortuneately, that didn't happen. And we don't know how far in time those Hermione said has killed their other selves went, maybe they only went a few back of forwards too.

[Boris_the_Bewilder]

To go back years and years you would need an industrial strength time-turner, not a little wimpy one like Hermione had. You would have to turn hers for days and days and days. Maybe that thing in the Department of Mysteries?

About time-traveling Harry killing the earlier Harry: the paradox would still stand. If he killed his earlier self -- even though he was only a few hours younger -- time-travelling Harry would not exist.

[jigglypuff]

I think this theory is very intersting, but there seems to be some flaws.

I know someone has already mentioned the Weasley's clock, but what about the Marauders Map? If Dumbledore was really Ron wouldn't he show up as Ron on the Marauders Map?


Secondly there is something that JK Rowling said.


In an interview a group of kids asked JK if Harry would ever be a hogwarts teacher. She replied, "No, but one of his classmates would." Then she asked them if they could try and guess who it would be. They all said Ron. JK replied: "No, it's not Ron. I can't see Ron as teacher. No way."

Now, I'm pretty sure that Dumbledore was the Transfiguration teacher before he became Headmaster (correct me if I'm wrong). If this is true then Ron probably couldn't be Dumbledore. JK herself said she couldn't see Ron being a teacher.

I believe that Dumbledore has genuine wisdom. By this I mean that his knowledge does NOT come from the fact that he travelled back into the past as Ron, therefore knowing many of the events that would happen to Harry. I believe that Dumbledore's knowledge and wisdom just come from the fact that he is the most powerful wizard in the world.

[vmonte]

From OotP, U.S. version, page 828 --
Dumbledore says to Harry:
"I was sure that if he realized that our relationship was - or had ever been - closer than that of headmaster and pupil, he would seize his chance to use you as a means to spy on me."

At first you think that Dumbledore avoided looking in Harry's eyes in OOTP because he did not want Voldemort to know that he and Harry had more than just a student teacher relationship? But if you read that quote again the words "or had ever been" are actually highlighted/separated from the rest of the sentence. Is this inferring a previous relationship (different from DD & Harry's current relationship) that Voldemort knows nothing about?

If DD is Ron it makes sense. If Voldemort were to find out that DD=Ron then Ron would also become a target of the DEs.
vmonte

[whizbang121]

Oh the old Redhead Forever theory. I love it.

That's a good point, vmonte. I think the phrase could also have other possible interpretations, but that one is as good as any.
What always makes me think twice about this theory, though, is the O.W.L. examiner who was at Dumbledore's exams and said he could do things with his wand she had never seen. Ron would have a long way to go to impress anyone like that.

The other thing I wondered about was whether Dumbledore had been Lily's mentor as Flamel was his. And whether she was working with the Dragons' blood in any of its twelve capacities.

[Lupin_Lady]

Originally Posted by whizbang121

The other thing I wondered about was whether Dumbledore had been Lily's mentor as Flamel was his. And whether she was working with the Dragons' blood in any of its twelve capacities.

I've often wondered the same thing. Everyone says how good at Charms Lily was, but she may have been good at potions too.
Everyone seems to speak of Lily highly (I know she's dead, and that's how people speak of the dead), more so than James.

[vmonte]

Just modifying the ideas on my original post a bit.

If Ron=DD:
Ron is going to be young when he goes back in time so it would make
sense that he will probably stay with a family (or with someone).

Do you think that Ron goes back in time and becomes Flamel's
apprentice? The Flamel family would then be more like a second
family to Ron.

I'm sure that Flamel would be able to teach Ron quite a lot!

It would also make sense as to why Dumbledore would later on keep the
SS/PS at the school. He was trying to protect and save his surrogate
parents!

(Perhaps something he couldn't do for his real parents!)

[Furienna]

Originally Posted by whizbang121

What always makes me think twice about this theory, though, is the O.W.L. examiner who was at Dumbledore's exams and said he could do things with his wand she had never seen. Ron would have a long way to go to impress anyone like that.

Yes, Ron doesn't seem more than average, huh? But there is a way that I think this could be explained too, if the theory is right: Ron is not the Albus Dumbledore who did these extraordinary NEWTs back in the day. Maybe the real Albus and the real Aberforth died or disappeared forever or maybe even got their souls sucked out of them by a dementor's kiss by some reason right after he had done these NEWTs, and then, Ron and one of his brothers, who followed him back into the past (could be Bill, Charlie, Percy, Fred OR George, though it sounds most like Fred or George to do impropriate magic), took their identities from that moment on. But I don't know if I believe in this theory, for I also some big reasons NOT to believe it.

1. The Dumbledore we know now seems more likely to be someone who got extraordinary good NEWTs than Harry's mostly loyal but still goofy best friend.
2. If Dumbledore really is Ron, why did he do that mistake he did in OOTP, not telling Harry anything? If he was Ron, he should have known how Harry would suffer that year and try to stop it from happening.
3. If Dumbledore really is Ron, why would be hire Umbridge, knowing of the terrible things she would do? He should rather have had Snape teaching DADA that year than allowing Umbridge into Hogwarts!
4. If Dumbledore really is Ron, why would he let the Triwizard tournament happen, or at least not take more precautions about it, if he knew what would happen in the third task?
5. If Dumbledore really is Ron, why would be let the Potters make Pettigrew their secret-keeper? Or wouldn't he at least take care of Scabbers long before the Shrieking Shrack scene in POA?

I could have made a longer list too about things Dumbledore should have stopped or at least tried to stop if he really was Ron, but I won't do it, it would too long I think you get the picture. Even if Dumbledore wouldn't want to change history if he went back in time, I don't think Ron would care if it made Harry's life or the situation for wizardkind better.

[vmonte]

I think that DD is trying to change events from the past but he has no control over people.
I think that DD did try to save Harry's parents. Perhaps the first time the Potter's were killed there was no keeper. DD, in the next timeline, makes Sirius the keeper; but Sirius changes the keeper to Peter and messes everytihng up.

I think that DD also tried to save Sirius's life (several times), but Sirius's destiny was to die.
1. He sends Hermione & Harry back to save Sirius & Buckbeak.
(The first time around Sirius was probably turned into a vegetable by a Dementor.)
2. He later commands Sirius to stay at Order headquarters, but Sirius doesn't stay put, and he gets killed.

Why DD would let Umbridge teach? Did he have a choice? Why would he let Snape teach (who is also sadistic)?
There is a book a book called "The Art of War," a military book that is over 1000 years old (I think).
Well anyway, this book has a very famous quote which says: "Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer (not sure of exact quote). If DD is a strategist, then perhaps he has Snape at the school for a different reason altogether. Perhaps it's so that he can keep an eye on Snape. DD may also want Snape at the school so that
the children can learn about him, and people like him. The more the kids are around Snape the more they are going to learn his weaknesses (just like Voldy). Perhaps DD is teaching the kids how to fight the DE's -- how to use the DEs weaknesses against them.
I'm starting to think that Occulmency lessons were not so much to
teach Harry how to close his mind, but how to read Snape's mind. I
wonder if DD meant Harry to see what was in the penseive as well.

[Furienna]

Yes, I thought about that later too. What if Dumbledore went back in time to change things, and they were even worse then?

But about Snape being sadistic... Yes, he is, but what's Umbridge then? Forcing kids to cut into their hands and take away quidditch from Harry, anyone?

[FreckledApples]

wouldnt that mean that time in history would repeat over and over if ron always grew up to get a time machine device from dd and ended up being dd giving himself a time machine device? i hate these things they give me headaches

[FreckledApples]

what if the PS got stolen and voldie got powerful then and so someone we dont know went back in time to stop it and the person grew up to be DD??? that could explain how he didnt know what was going to happen and thought voldie would go away if he hid the PS in hogwarts! but it messes everything up and voldie still gets to rise o power. and therefore his mistake of not telling harry the prophecy was an honest mistake cause he didnt know what was coming!

[nrogara]

Ugh! This is all very interesting reading but it has given me a big ole headache and left me very confused.

I don't think I believe that Ron is Dumbledore for many of the reasons listed. But if it did happen I would trust JKR to make sure we know exactly what went on.

[vmonte]

DD has a scar on his left leg that looks like the London Underground. Ron has sustained an injury in the same leg...hmmm.

[Furienna]

Do you mean the leg he broke in POA?