What's New

Our Newest Resource…and it’s about time!

Explore
Characters Locations Magic Canon Events Things Creatures Essays
The Harry Potter Canon

By

Snapshot of TimelineWe here at the Lexicon are delighted to announce the new and amazingly improved Timeline of the Wizarding World. For quite a few months now we’ve been working on this incredible resource, which combines the detailed and carefully researched information from the original timeline with a powerful search tool called the Timeturner. This tool will allow you to create a timeline of exactly what you want, whether of a particular character, of a category such as Quidditch or Magical Creatures, or even of a concept such as heroism. You can find a few of our favorite searches, information about using the Timeline, where our dates come from, and more on the Timelines and Calendars page.

This Timeline is a terrific new part of the Lexicon and something of a preview of other new and exciting projects we’re working on. So here it is, our newest innovation…we can’t wait to see what you think of it!

Commentary

Pensieve (Comments)

  • Nymphadorable

    For some reason the information that Tonks was born in 1973 (probably) doesn’t show up on the page.

  • Thanks, Nymphadorable – just an oversight on our part. I’ve added it now.

  • Lisa

    Steve, John and Belinda have created their favorite timeline searches! That and more is on the intro page to the timelines: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/timeline.html What are your favorite searches?

    Way to go, Clint, John, Steve and Belinda! This is a really powerful tool that you’ve created!

  • Mundungus

    The Normans conquered England in 1066 not Britain

  • Cindy

    No way to know for certain (at least, not for me) but isn’t it logical that Minerva McGonagall became Transfiguration teacher (december Y-24) to take over from Dumbledore when he became Headmaster (which is also Y-24, month unknown)?!
    Good work, I’m impressed! I love this tool!

  • Skrewt

    Outstanding work!!
    On the date of the Prophecy, actually there are few more hints for it to be in Autumn 1979 as opposed to Winter 1980.
    1 – Autumn ’79 (Halloween??) is well compatible with the statements of Trelawney in Sep. ’95 and of DD in June ’96
    2 – RAB seemed to know about the prophecy (cf. “… when you meet your match …” in the note in the locket)
    3 – Regulus Black died in ’79 (BFT)
    4 – if Regulus Black=RAB, the only way to match all that is to put the Prophecy in Autumn ’79.
    Of course that is not pure canon and the weak link is the Regulus=RAB, but perhaps you may include it as a subordinate.

  • Jabbok

    Excellent work!

    Quick query–will you be giving the same make over to the day-by-day calendars as well? I rely on those quite heavily.

    Again, a most hearty thanks!

  • Skrewt – even with all that evidence, we only have one concrete bit of evidence on the matter – Dumbledore says in June ’96 that it happened “16 years ago,” meaning 1980. Unless we get some more information, I can’t find anything that contradicts this.

    Jabbok – I don’t know for sure what will be happening with the calendars long term, but for now I think we’re pretty happy with them. What would you suggest we could do to improve them?

    Thanks to everyone for their comments!

  • Amy

    The work everyone does at this site never ceases to amaze me. Now I have to set aside a few hours to really get into this thing!

  • Steve

    The day-to-day calendars are a bit of a problem when it comes to the timeline. The day-to-day calendars assume that the year fits the calendar of the ‘real’ year that they take place in, and many dates are assumed from that. So the events on the day to day calendars would need to be modified for the timeline, which is strictly canon. We will do this, but it will take some time to do the conversion. I think we’ll always maintain those calendars as a separate resource even if we add the events to the timeline.

    Steve

  • Ada

    Sorry for my english , I’m french…
    I understood what John said about prophecy.
    But I agree with Skrewt. Halloween 1979 would be too an interesting date for the prophecy because it’s the conception’s day of Harry Potter… And Dumbledore said that Snape “did not know _he had no possible way of knowing_ wich boy Voldemort would hunt from then onwards”.
    And I think that october and november are frequently “cold and wet” months in Harry Potter’s books, not december, january or february.

    ***Excellent work! Thanks you!***

  • lisasimpson

    I believe I found an error:
    Harry, Hermione and the Weasleys visit a much-changed Diagon Alley

    There they have a run-in with Draco and Narcissa Malfoy in Madam Malkin’s, visit Weasleys’ Wizard Wheezes, and follow Draco to Borgin and Burkes, where they overhear him threatening Mr. Borgin.
    This happened the Saturday following Harry’s birthday. According to the calendar used by the rest of the book, this day would be September 3.
    Should say “August 3”.

  • Skrewt

    There is a 1974 date for the last time Petunia saw Lily (PS/SS1, P. says she has not seen her sister for 7 years)
    It is a small thing but you may want to mention it, because it connects with Petunia’s relationship to the Magical World.

  • Reader2

    It looks like you’ve deside to place the Riddle murder in 1943, that’s sad.

    It also looks like you belive that the murders commited before Tom even knew what Hocruxes are qualify as sacrifices to the hocrux, that’s even sadder.

    Ah well, I did all the arguing I could, I’ll just have to wait and hope that the truth will come out some day.

  • roonwit

    Skrewt: The quote is “several” not 7. But I also think that the prophecy could have occured at the end of 1979. 16 years ago from June 1996 could mean anything after July 1979. Trelawney’s account narrows this down to after 9th September when Umbridge inspects her, and something like February 1980 when Umbridge sacks her.

  • Reader2

    IN the time-line Quirrel’s leave of absence is labeled as 1990-1991.

    Yet, on Quirrel’s page you say that his leave of absence was NOT 1990-1991, you have even presented a very convincing essay on the subject.

    So which one is it?

  • Marco

    @Reader 2

    Tom Riddle had actually murdered his father and his paternal grandparents, before he had learned about horcruxes. He obviously just had wanted revenche at that time. This is proven by the fact, that Tom Riddle had already possesed the ring, he had stolen from Morfin, as he asked Prof. Slughorn about Horcruxes.(HBP, Ch.23)

    —————————————

    And then there is another date, which is probably important:

    The copy of “Advanced Potion-Making”, which Snape had owned, had been released in approx.1947. (HBP, Ch.16; nearly 50 years before X-mas 1996). The original owner of this book was most likely Snapes Mother Eileen Prince. If she had purchased that book new, she was 16 in 1947 and so born in 1931 and had attended Hogwarts from 1942-1949, what would make her also a contemporary of Tom Riddle.

  • chickwhoscored

    So much reading…. So much info to take in……. The page is a wonderfull source for info, you guys did a wonderful job!!! 🙂

  • lisasimpson, thanks for pointing that out, I’ve fixed it.

    Skrewt, the only reference I can find in PS1 says that Petunia hadn’t seen Lily for ‘several’ years. Can you tell me where it says seven specifically?

    To everyone who says the prophecy should be 1979: believe me, we’ve thought and talked a lot about it. We just don’t have enough information to place it definitely, and the most definite information we have puts it in 1980. That’s why it’s marked “c. 1980” on the timeline, and not given exactly. And Halloween of 1979 is a whole lot closer to 17 years ago than it is to 16 at the time of Dumbledore’s quote. No matter how interesting that would be to the story, there’s no canon to support it, and that’s what we go by here.

    More comments in a moment.

  • Quirrell’s leave of absensce is, quite frankly, an error in the text. I’ll talk with Lisa about his page, but there’s just no way to explain it with Hagrid’s statements in PS5. Steve and I talked about this one and decided that Dumbledore’s statement about the cursed DADA postition was too precise to put his leave anywhere else.

    Marco, great point on Riddle with the ring. Exactly what I would have said, had you not beat me to it. 😉 Also a great point about Eileen Prince, I’ll have to look into that a little more before adding it, but I agree it should be part of the timeline.

    Folks, please be patient with each other. Not everyone has the time or means to read every single pensieve on our site (I haven’t read them all myself), and that’s perfectly okay – we still welcome everyone’s comments and ideas.

    Thanks as always for all the wonderful discussion – keep it flowing!

  • Pat Pat

    I understand the confusion regarding the horcruxes, since Dumbledore states specifically that “He [Voldemort] seems to have reserved the process of making Horcruxes for particularly significant deaths.” Certainly his father and grandparents would seem to be one of THE MOST significant of his murders. However, it certainly is true that he must have killed them before he learned all of the information about horcruxes from Slughorn, since he was wearing the ring at the time of the conversation. So, this raises the question whether a horcrux HAS to be created at the exact same time as the murder or can it be done at a later time? It would SEEM from the context that the horcrux has to be made as soon as the murder is performed, but I don’t believe this is ever stated specifically (correct me if I’m wrong!)If this is the case, he could have killed his father and grandparents, thus splitting his soul, and then later made the horcrux after receiving more information from Slughorn.

  • Pat Pat

    Minor error. Under the year 1844, Dumbledore’s birth, in the explanation part, it is stated that Dumledore is 150 in the summer of 1994 (Y15). I believe that should be Y14.

    Small thing, really. You guys did a tremendous job.

  • Reader2

    Regarding the Quirrel question:

    I do see a loophole in Dumbledore’s statement, Quirrel was not quite himself during the 1991-1992 school year, with Voldemort being in his body with him, so perhaps Dumbledore simply counted the original Quirrel and the possesed Quirrel as two different people.

    I appologize if I had got a bit impulsive on the Hocrux question, I was merely trying to point out that if you had assumed that Riddle murder happened in 1942, the question of how Hocruxes are made would become irrelevant, since it would become plausible that Myrtle was killed after Tom’s conversation with Slughorn, then she could be the one who was sacrifced to the diary-Hocrux.

    You can consider this my final effort. If you still choose to place Riddle murder in 1943, all I can do is place my hopes on the next book.

  • Good catch on Dumbledore’s entry, Pat Pat. I don’t know how you guys find this stuff. Anyway, thanks – it’s fixed now.

    Sorry if we’re disappointing you by not incorporating your theories, Reader2 (and anyone else!) – but we *always* go by canon alone. In the case of conflicting statements, we’ll pick the stronger one – like “16 years ago” or “never kept a DADA teacher for more than one year” – over other inferences. We’d love to be proven wrong about a date – just because that’d mean we had proof! But without that proof, we won’t make a change, no matter how well a theory fits.

  • Ada

    I agree Marco.
    I’ve just an other idea. If Eileen Prince was 16 in 1946 at Hogwarts (and born in 1930), she could be in the same year as Orion Black (born in 1929) …
    If Voldemort is born in 1925, he could be in the same year as McGonagal (head girl too with him?) and Walburga Black (perhaps)…
    Sorry for my english but it’s so interesting…

  • Marco

    You have now decided to set the begin of Dumbledores headmastership in Hogwarts in 1956.

    Prof. McGonagall began teaching in December 1956, what is in the middle of term. This indicates acute occured staff shortage, probably the death or disability of a staff member, in this case then Amando Dippet.

    As Lord Voldemort applied the second timefor the job of the DADA teacher, it was clearly winter, since snow was mentioned. As it was shortly, after Dumbledore became headmaster, it might be in December 1956 or January or February 1957.

  • Grace has Victory

    We are trying to harmonise several points where JKR contradicts herself. Do you think she would tolerate a letter from the Lexicon, asking her to clear it up?

    (1) McGonagall’s statement indicates she became Transfiguration teacher in December 1956. However, a statement by Remus Lupin indicates that Dumbledore didn’t become Headmaster until sometime in the 1960s (probably late 1960s) – after Greyback had bitten him. So what was Dumbledore doing between 1956 and, say, 1968?

    (2) The various events in Tom Riddle’s adolescence can only be harmonised if we assume that the period “fifty years” is an approximation, and not a precise 50. The Riddle family was murdered “fifty” years before Frank Bryce, who died in August 1994. Yet Myrtle was murdered “fifty” years before Harry found the diary, which was in January 1993. If Myrtle literally died in June 1993, then that was more than a year before the Riddles died in July/August 1994. Yet Tom is described as being “in fifth year” (i.e. already sixteen) when he killed Myrtle, and “in his sixteenth year” (i.e. still fifteen – had only just finished fourth year) when he killed his father.

    (3) It’s not clear which murder came first, but it is clear that Tom had already killed his father when he asked Slughorn about the Horcruxes. He was either in fifth or sixth year at that time, since he was not yet Head Boy and “by no means the eldest” of the boys in Slughorn’s study. It is not clear whether he killed Myrtle before or after he knew about the Horcruxes.

    (4) The business of Quirrell’s absence actually suggests that he at one time taught somewhere other than at Hogwarts – either in a school in a foreign country, or else giving non-school lessons, e.g. evening classes to adults. Hagrid says he was “nervous with his students” after returning from his year off, meaning he was teaching again after his return but before September 1991. However, he couldn’t have taught at Hogwarts for two successive years (probably not even for two separated years). If we are to avoid contradicting canon, the natural explanation is that Quirrell was teaching elsewhere in 1990-1 (his “year off” was probably 1989-90) … but is this really what JKR meant?

    (5) I agree that Eileen Prince was probably born in the 1930-1 school year, making her 28 when her son was born. This is not an absolute, since she may have bought her copy a few years after it was published, and it was possibly published in 1948 or 1949. But it’s definitely a year on the right track.

    (6) Dumbledore’s birth year is actually 1845, since JKR was speaking of summer 1995 (end of GoF) when she gave his age as 150. However, I suspect that the age “150” is an approximation, since she gives the same age, 150, in a later interview that refers to summer 1997 (end of HBP).

  • Grace has Victory

    Oh, and a seventh point, because seven is a magic number …

    (7) Voldemort’s first war broke out in 1970. It was actually in the first few weeks of this year, since we know that the war catalysed Arthur and Molly’s elopement, and they cannot have married later than February 1970. (Valentine’s Day wedding, anyone?)

    (8) Voldy’s interview with Dumbledore, where he demands the DADA job, was immediately before he declared open war, and was the direct cause of the declaration. This suggests it was in the winter if 1969-70. He implies (withou directly stating it) that Dumbledore has fairly recently become Headmaster, which fits with Remus Lupin’s statement on the subject.

    (9) However, this contradicts Dumbledore’s own statement that the interview was “ten years” after the murder of Hephzibah Smith. It was actually more than twenty years later. Again, I think this is a contradiction within canon, and perhaps we should ask JKR if she wishes to correct this in one direction or the other.

  • Alma Wands

    In an interview JKR acutally admited that she wasn’t @good at numbers@, but until she gives us a certain date for a major event in the story, the only thing we can do is guess the years based on the statement of the characters.

  • Pat Pat

    Wow, Grace Has Victory! That’s a lot to take in. However, I must agree with the idea that many of the statements are approximations. We, often, in every day language, say “50 years” when we mean 49 or 51. And you are absolutely correct that “the summer of his sixteenth year” means the summer when he was 15! As a math teacher that has always bothered me. I think, however, for the time being we have to make the most educated guesses we can and hope that it gets cleared up in the next book. As someone else mentioned, JKR has made detectives out of us all so we want it all to work out perfectly. I’m not sure every detail will, but I’d personally rather let JKR finish the seventh book before asking her to clear up any inconsistencies.

  • Jinx

    With regards to the prophecy, in OP chap 37 Dumbledore says “Sibyll’s prophecy could have applied to two wizard boys, both born in July that
    year,” This implies that the prophecy was made the same year Harry was born. I’d say March or April 1980.

  • Jinx

    With regards to McGonagall, maybe she wanted to teach transfiguration but since Dumbledore was teaching it she took whatever teaching job that was available. Then when Dumbledore was promoted to headmaster she asked to be reassign to teach transfiguration. Look at Snape. He wanted to teach DADA but taught potions for 15 years before he got his chance.

  • Grace has Victory

    Jinx, I agree that this is not really a problem or a contradiction – we just have a piece of information missing. Your suggestion is a good one. One that I rather like is that perhaps Dumbledore was the teacher who requested an internal transfer, and that between 1956 and 1968 he taught DADA. (That adds a zing of irony to his interview with Tom Riddle in 1970.)

    Both theories are speculation, and in no way the “hard canon” that the Lexicon requires.

    Pat Pat, I wouldn’t for a second want JKR to reveal anything remotely like a spoiler before Book VII. But there are some questions that she really doesn’t mind answering – she was pleased enough to tell us Ron’s eye-colour and Patronus. If we ask nicely, she’ll be able to refuse nicely if she prefers.

    I always thought the Marcus Flint business was botched. There was no need to alter later editions of the story, because the idea that he had to repeat a year – even if an authorial afterthought – is just what most readers would want to believe about him.

  • daveindetroit

    on Y12 “circa August 13” you show Harry “arrives at Borgin and Burkes just in time for the amnnoiuncement” He does indeed accidently arrive at the Dark Arts shop but the announcement is made after Hagrid reunites him with the Weasleys at Flourish and Blotts.

  • Pteris vittata

    well, my mind is blown…. thanks. i’ll be in the corner with the straightjacket on, mumbling dates and timeslines…. great.

  • Vivian

    I don’t think that Riddle’s wearing the ring at the time he asked Slughorn about horcruxes, proves that he hasn’t yet made a horcrux…remember Riddle is a master at concealing what he doesn’t want the other person to know.

  • Grace has Victory

    Vivian, you may be right, but I don’t think this throws any light on the question of timelines.

    We are trying to ascertain the dates (or at least the chronological sequence) of three events in Riddle’s life: his murder of his family, his murder of Myrtle, and his questioning of Slughorn. As you say, his questioning of Slughorn may not absolutely prove that he doesn’t yet know about Horcruxes. The point is, he is already wearing the ring that he acquired on the day he killed his family. So he must have killed his father BEFORE he asked about Horcruxes.

  • Reader2

    Take it from someone who has already covered this site with complaints about the events of early 1940s in the book, the dillemma of the hocrux-making is critical to the story, which means that JKR is bound to resolve it in book #7, waiting is the best solution we have for it.
    The question of the true age of the Marauders – JKR might not resolve.
    As for the Quirrel question – does she even remember that part of the book?
    Those would be OK for us to speculate about, or may be to ask JKR.

  • Alma Wands

    If Harry will visit his parents’ graves in Book 7 we’ll know when they were born.. it mut be written on the gravestone… or not 🙁

  • Pat Pat

    Reader2, that was what I meant when I said we should wait for JKR to resolve the issue. You said it better than I did. I hope I didn’t offend you, Grace Has Victory. I simply meant that I believe the issues critical to the story such as the horcruxes will be resolved by JKR in the final book. I’m not sure any of us are going to figure it out before then. I have a feeling there is still critical information that we don’t have.

    The small points may be worth asking her about. I’ve got to agree with you about the Marcus Flint situation. We have seen time and again that, though the students are special in many ways, they are still human and still children. It makes sense that some students would end up repeating a grade just like in real life. I liked it better before it was corrected, as well.

    Alma Wands, that’s an interesting point. Will their dates of birth be on the gravestone? Do they even have a gravestone? Who buried the Potters? Could this be part of what was happening during the missing 24 hours after the Potters were attacked?

  • Pat Pat

    I’m actually surprised that no one has asked JKR about the Quirrell question before. Or have they and I just didn’t see it? This seems to be an issue that people have been wondering about for a while.

  • Jinx

    When the HBP was released I wondered why Voldemort would let Snape, a half-blood wizard, become a Death Eater. If Eileen Prince did attend Hogwarts at the same time that Voldemort was there, then that could be the explaination. Her connection to Voldemort could have led to introductions to some of the Black family members. That in turn could open the door to let Snape join the Slytherian gang in his first year.

    With regards to Myrtle, the time line says she died in circa May 1943. In the diary memory Voldemort told Hagrid that Myrtle’s parennts were coming the next day. I see no reason why Voldemort would lie about that. So I would think that Myrtle either died earlier in the day or the day before. I can’t see Hogwarts taking two weeks to notifiy Myrtle’s parents that their daughter died, or that it would take two weeks for the parents to get to Hogwarts.

  • Alma Wands

    About the Weasleys: In OP when Ron is made prefect, Molly sayd that Ron was the 4th Prefect in the family. Before him Percy and Bill were prefect, so who is the 4th one? Arthur maybe?

  • Reader2

    Alma, that conversation in OoP suggests that the 4th prefect was Charlie. It also sounds like “4th” meant 4th among the siblings, and Arthur and Molly also were prefects in their days.

    On a completely different topic. The book mentions Paracelsus, there is also a Paracelsus trading card. The card does not give the dates of birth and death, but who needs those when you can find those dates for the real Paracelsus? Why not add those to the timeline? (in the muggle world, of cause)

    Also, if you plan on adding the dates from the vampire-cards, you might want to consider the dates for Vlad the IMpaler or Dracula (also in the maggle world), since there is a trading card of Drakul, who is supposed to be his father (which makes sence).

  • Grace has Victory

    Pat Pat, of course I wasn’t offended. I just meant that I didn’t think JKR would be offended, either, if we asked her a question. She is very good at refusing to answer if she doesn’t want to, so I don’t think we’d be at any risk of spoiling anything for anyone else if we happened to ask the “wrong” question.

    I hadn’t thought about the chronological question of Myrtle and the horcruxes being resolved in Book VII. But, you’re right, it may well be.

    Jinx, I think the precise date of Myrtle’s death (May vs June) has to do with the authors of the Lexicon not understanding the British education system. They guessed a date in May because they probably assumed that Hogwarts would close at the beginning of June. But this never happens in Britain. Summer holidays are only six weeks, usually from around 20 July to 31 August. Hogwarts seems to have a slightly longer summer break of 8-9 weeks (presumably because it doesn’t have half-term holidays), so the school year probably ends in the first weekend in July.

    There is thus no problem with having students running around school for the whole of June. That’s what always happens in Britain.

    Steve van der Ark, I think the Lexicon is wonderful, and with such a huge body of information to process, I think there are astonishingly few errors. But when it comes to matters relating to the British education system … please, please, ask somebody British to help you put it in order. Many things that have mystified you are completely obvious to those of us who have experienced the system at first-hand.

  • Grace has Victory

    P.S. Reader 2, I think JKR made a mistake here. Vlad III (Vlad the Impaler) is Dracula. He used this name in his own lifetime, and Bram Stoker was thinking of him when he named his vampire.

    JKR seems to be under the impression that his father, Vlad II (Vlad Drakul), is the prototype of the vampire. But this is not correct. It was only ever Vlad III.

    Another question to ask JKR? There is no tradition that BOTH Vlads were vampires, but she has chosen the wrong one for her famous vampire cards. So should the Lexicon follow JKR, follow tradition, or harmonise artificially (by postulating two vampires) when writing up the details?

  • Reader2

    Actually, Grace, I think JKR made the mistake on purpose. As much as I like Bram Stoker, I find the real life version of Dracula much more impressive. Real life events can be much scarier than any books.
    JKR simply offers a way to combine both versions of the story.
    I must note though, none of this answers any of our questions about vampires in the Potterverse.
    She sure knows how to keep us guessing, doesn’t she?

  • Alma Wands

    In reality there was no ruler Vlad born in 1390. The first Vlad mention in Romanian and Wallachian history was Vlad I the Usurper, who ruled between 1394-1397. Then there was Vlad the second Dracul or Dragon the first ruling member of the Dr?cule?ti branch who had 2 reigns(1436 – 1442 & 1443-1447). Vlad II Dracul received his title “Dracul” from his induction into the Order of the Dragon. And as Grace has Victory said Vlad III (the Impaler) was known as Dracula, who, as his father had also 2 reigns: 1448 & 1456-1462. The nickname Dracula was “inherited” from his father who later joined the Order of the Dragon.

    P.S. Dracul is translated as The Devil, not Dragon

  • Reader2

    Good research, Alme, but what you gave us here were the dates they took power, not their birth dates.

    My guess is the birth date wont match any way, it would not be like JKR to actually use a hystorical date.

    As if that does not make thing wague enough, we don’t even know what JKR means by birth of a vampire. If they are not born as vampires, 1390 might be the year the man became a vampire.

  • serious

    I agree Eileen Prince should be included. Also, I think Tonk’s starting and leaving Hogwarts should be included. Also, where are the dates of publication of the novels?! That should definitely be on there since you included all the other things about JKR.

  • Reader2

    Just one more suggestion.
    You’ve got Ancient Egyptian era in the timeline.
    Why not also add the Ancient Greek era.
    The Chocolate Frog Cards tell us of two important events that occured in that period: the creation of the first basilisc and the creation of the largest patronus ever.

  • Reader2

    OH, and one more Chocalte Frog Card, not an official one, but mentioned in the book: Ptolemey.
    Again, who needs life dates for the Ptolemey in the book when you can include the real-life ones?

  • CONFUSED aussie

    okay. hello to everyone. i am a big harry potter fan & i ahve just found & heard of this site. i have been reading many pages of information and theories.
    i am very curious about snape & his mother on the whole deal of them being princes? his mother being an eileen prince & snape being a half-blood prince?
    & how come dumbledore couldn’t live; he’s the strongest wizard in the world supposedly.
    & i have never realised the real importance of the harry potter series and everything going on about it. there’s a lot about it; which i have never realised. & it makes me think.
    so thanks for all the theories & stories & information.

    it is extremely interesting!!!!!

    as im only a young teenager =]

  • CONFUSED aussie

    i know now about the “prince” deal.
    i didn’t realise that snapes mum was called eileen prince. & since he was half blood; he called himself “half blood prince”!

    soz agen.

  • loony

    hey this lexicon is really good.though i have a doubt that’s killing me!in HBP 28 the initials R.A.B are mencionated in the letter that dumbledore was holding and harry found. who is she or he? i would love opinions or at least suggestions about it’s meaning. i’d already thought about one but i’m not so sure regulus black but is missing tha A…waiy for opinions about my curiosiity!

  • meepy

    RAB is regulus black.

    All this stuff with timelines…its a very great effort y’all put through, but as a writer I doubt JKR really sat down and made a concrete timeline. This happens with everything…happens with Star Trek all the time. So we can either chaulk it up to the writing, or we can make up reasons like “approximate years” or the fact that people give all these dates in the book and that people often dont get things right.

    No sense harping and driving yourself mad about things that are probably not important or will be answered in the 7th book.

Sources