We know that Hagrid is around the same age as Voldemort. I figure Hagrid is pretty old- must be in his 60's. In book 2- The COS was opened "50 years ago" and Hagrid was accused of setting the creature on the students. So we know that he knew Voldemort, cause that is basically who got him expelled.

He must have known James and Lily and that whole gang after he was groundskeeper- Because there is no way that James and Lily would have been in there 40's or 50's when Harry was born. It just wouldn't make sense.

Also, I'm re-reading GOF and this is something that baffled me:

Mr. and Mrs. Weasley are obviously older than James and Lily would be, because they have much older children and all that- but they must still be younger than Hagrid cause I also don't see them being that old. BUT, before the last task of the tri-wizard tournament, Harry takes Mrs. W and Bill on a tour of Hogwarts, and it mentions that she remenices (sp?) about the groundskeeper before Hagrid.... So that kinda confused me. Wouldn't she and Mr. W have been at school sometime AFTER Hagrid was made groundskeeper?

I may be thinking WAY too much into that, but if someone has an explanation, I'd love to hear it.

P.S. Sorry for hijacking the HBP discussion thread. ;)

Yes, I would think they would have been there after Hagrid and V because I would think they are only around 50 (while as you said Hagrid and V are around 60). Now of course, the actor playing Hagrid in the movies looks nowhere near that age.

She is younger than James/Lily though, she also said in GoF that the Whomping Willow was planted after she left (and we know when/why that was planted).

That's just too weird. My math puts Hagrid at around 64 and he was kicked out in his 3rd year - V is older by a few years. Was Hagrid fully the groundskeeper then, or did he start as an assistant (not remembering)? That could be it......

Or are the Weasley's just older than we all think?

James and Lily are MWPP generation was were all born circa 1960 and entered Hogwarts in 1971. James and Lily married right out of Hogwarts and died young, no older than 22 when they died. Remus is 37-38 in HBP.

The Weasleys were probably born during or right after Grindelwald in the mid-late 1940s. I put them between 1945-1950ius. Since Bill was born in 1970, Molly and Arthur need to have been out of Hogwarts by 1968. Dumbledore didn't become Headmaster of Hogwarts until 1970 at the earliest and I think he made Hagrid groundskeeper when he ascended to the Headmaster's chair.

Whew.. I'm an HP genealogy nerd.

ETA: Hp Lexicon Wizard Pages would also back this up.

that makes her older than james and lily.

That's probably on purpose. These people are wizards, they probably don't look at all the age that we would expect them to so they hire young actors to reflect that (brilliant, that woman :D). How old is Dumbledore? When we saw him in the Pensieve when the CoS was opened (now 54 years ago) he was still old, but his hair still had color. Given Hagrid's not the least bit gray (not that we know) that'd place him well over 60 at the time, add 54 to that and Dumbledore is one old wizard.

So I was thinking about the horcruxes last night (as I was going to bed, go figure) and I had this thought.

What if one of them is hidden in the old Riddle house? Now, here is my logic behind it. Tom may have killed his muggle family and became Lord Voldemort but we do know in OotP he is at the Riddle house with Peter (I think) because he is trying to regain his strength (since he had just been reborn in essence in GoF). So since he is at the Riddle house it is obviously something he has not given up or allowed anyone to live in or own. With that being said I think the house would be perfect to hide a mundane trinket that serves as a horcrux. Mainly because most would assume that Voldemort would want nothing to do with the house since he renounced his muggle father and family.

Other than that the only other places I could think of are with his other death eaters. Since Lucius had the diary (unknowing that it was in fact a horcrux) maybe he gave horcruxes to other "trusted" death eaters.

Voldemort has to be around 65-66. When the CoS was opened Tom was probably around a 5th-6th year.

Dumbledore is around 150 years old.

Yes, that would be a typo on my part...........

(Disclaimer: I'm not a Potter fanatic, just someone who reads the books...)

HC I was ticked off that I'd gotten to page 480 in the book and nothing interesting had happened up until that point? I didn't even care about the ending. I understand that this book was to shore up our expectations for the final book, but man, it's been a long time since I read something this dull. :(

BLASPHEMY!!!!!!!!! YOU GIT...YOU PRAT...HOW DARE YOU I OUGHT TO HEX YOU TO PIECES! *screams levicorpus and laughs wildly*




Hehe, just kidding :D. *liberacorpus*


I'm trying to think, was there something that Riddle's dad was wearing when we saw him? A broach, a cloak, anything that he might have kept? If there is, he may have been wearing it when Voldy killed him, that'd be the perfect horcrux. I'll look at the beginning when he's hiding with Wormtail in the Riddle house, perhaps there's something he's holding, some object mentioned...I don't know how weird this is, but does anyone else feel like if they figure this out they can somehow get the message to Harry to help him in the next book?

I think the locket that was supposed to be in the middle of the lake is the locket that was found in OoTP along with what Harry considered to be a vile of blood.

i think this shows that she wasn't ready to die for her son...she loved him, sure - but she still let him do it - she didn't act as Lily did - and step in front of the Dark Lord - she cared, but not enough to die for her son.

i don't malfoy truly knows what love is.

i take offense

Doesn't exactly carry much significance on a grandeur level though, would it?

I think some brilliant theories have been expounded. Well played on the R.A.B. and locket in the old Black family home...is it possible that only a slytherin can open that locket...or an heir?

I had genuinely thought DD was alive up to the point his portrait was on the wall. And I can't believe HP didn't try to talk to DD through the portrait because as we know they can talk...with him so close HP would definitely have tried to wake him & chat.

I thought DD would have had a horcrux...even though it was out of charachter for him...seeing as love is his ultimate goal...splitting your soul would not likely be an express route to love. I thought that maybe the book was the horcrux for DD.

I feel that Snape is good still too - DD is not just some old fool...he was so adament that Snape was on his side.

it's going to be a hard 2 yrs

I don't think it's possible that Dumbledore had a horcrux. The only way to create one is by killing someone, and Dumbledore would never kill anyone. I think that Rowling killed him off so that Harry would fight Voldemort on his own.

Do you guys think that Hogwarts will still be open for year 7? My friend was saying that since Draco managed to get Death Eaters into there and with Dumbledore being killed there, parents are going to think that it's not the safe place it once was and aren't going to want to send their kids there.

Now that I've had time to think more, even though I want to kill Snape (he he) there was a reason for doing what he did. DD was trying to talk Malfoy out of killing him (and then prodding him to do it). He didn't do that for Snape. He just told him to do it.

As for DD being a horcrux, yes it is hard to imagine DD killing out of cold blood, but we don't know. We really only know bits and peices of his past. He could have. It could have been a death eater. But on the other hand if Voldemort was able to figure out ways to split his soul into 7 horcruxes, maybe he figured out a way to split his soul into a person, without their knowledge. That being the case if DD figured it out the only way to defeat Voldemeort would have been to sacrifice himself "for the greater good".

JK has a reason for everything she writes in the books, there is a reason behind DD being killed by Snape. We just won't know the reason for another two years and boy does that suck!!!

I love Harry Potter and I totally agree with you Sistermadly!! I felt like the whole book was building up to something huge (which it did, don't get me wrong)-- but then it ended in less than 100 pages!!

In the other books all of the major incidents happened mid-book and then the book finished out with the solution to the problem!! Its almost as if there was not a major incident-- like in GofF with the buildup to the tournament-- and then the tournament started and all of the problems started-- and then in the end they fought off the bad people-- and then the year ended!!

I felt like this book is a complete pre-qual to the final book-- like it was the first 30 chapters of Book 7!! I feel as if we were reallllllly left hanging in this book way more than in the past books!!

Just my 2 cents!! Please do not cast any spells upon me!! ;)