TOP 20 HARRY POTTER PLOT HOLES

It is very common to not want something until you can't have it. Harry didn't start noticing Ginny until he saw her kissing Dean.

Exactly, when did YOU start looking at the opposite sex THAT way? I hung out with boys/men all my life (I admit, though, that we have moved on from playing cops and robbers to spending our time with billiards, video games and darts), but I didn't start thinking about them as potential boyfriends until I was, what, fifteen? Perfectly normal that Harry thought of Ginny more as a sister or friend before, especially since they didn't hang out much...

I meant that MOLLY would be the surrogate mother and turn Harry's heart toward Albus' with the promise that her DAUGHTER, Ginny would be betrothed to Harry and always cared for, monetarily, since we all know that Harry got a lot of money from grateful people for defeating Voldemort, and he was hardly poor at the start.

Aha ha ha ha ha ha! It was all a plot! Molly had been promised that her youngest daughter would be given the honour of being the 'Chosen One's' surrogate mother. She was angry with Ron in Book 4 when he was being un-friendly with Harry over the whole Tournament thing, and had to resort to ensuring Harry's affections through a love potion. He was ruining Albus' and Molly's plan for Ginny. Albus needed someone to fight in the war--someone to make up a prophecy about--so they chose the lonely, friendless child who was too impressionable to question why he was being pitted against the most evil villain...ever. Oh, Albus, you and your machinations...

It is possible that Wormtail didn't become a Death Eater until the night he betrayed the Potters. Sirius was right that there was a spy leaking information to Voldemort but he was mistaken in accusing Wormtail, because the leaks were coming from Dumbledore via Snape.

Because Peter is evil, and he needed someone else to be blamed for it so he could be scott-free. Everyone believing that Sirius had done it would've made it indisputable that Peter was loyal.

I don't think that Wormtail was ever actually tortured. He was lying about it to get sympathy from Harry, and save his own skin.

He was sorted into Gryffindor because that's where he belonged when the sorting took place. In PoA he mentions that the information he gave up was tortured out of him. Maybe he had always had the intentions of a good wizard and only turned bad after he was tortured because he felt as though he had no other option after what he did. He had no reason to give the Potters over before. Plus you're wrong on the timeline of the Fidelius charm.

First off, you're wrong about when the Fidelius Charm was cast. We know for a fact that it wasn't done just a week before they were killed. How? Lily says that Wormtail had visited last week, not that that's when the Charm was cast. Her letter also states that James had been getting restless from being shut away for so long (like Sirius got when he was confined to Grimmauld Place) and she asked him to come by, his visit would've releaved some of that pent up energy. Since we know that the Prophesy was made before Harry's birth and that Dumbledore was aware that Snape had been listening in we can be reasonably sure that he told the Potters and the Longbottoms (both of whose child could stand the chance to be the one the Prophesy mentions) to go into hiding immediately. There's no telling which child, if any, Voldemort would decide to go after first and the Death Eaters, Wormtail included, probably spent a great deal of time trying to discover where the Longbottoms were hiding, who their Secret Keeper was, etc. so that Voldemort could make an informed decision. Remember, Wormtail was his spy within the Order, Snape was no part of it yet. By moving on the Potter information Voldemort ran the risk that he'd be revealing Wormtail as a spy, and that's not something he'd want to throw away in case he chose wrong and had to go after the other boy as well. From this we can likely suppose that they were never able to uncover who the Longbottom's Secret Keeper was or were unable to get the Secret from them and therefore Voldemort chose to go after the one boy he could get his hands on, Harry.

to the previous comment, there WAS no Fidelius Charm previously for Sirius to have been Secret Keeper for. when they started planning to cast the charm, Sirius was going to be the Secret Keeper, but at the last minute he persuaded James and Lily to use Peter and use himself as bait for Voldemort, thus drawing his attack away.

Sirius was the secret keeper for however long previously - this everyone knows hence people believing Sirius sold out the Potters to Voldemort. Peter was changed to secret keeper secretly shortly before he then went to Voldemort with the location.

as dumbledore and voldemort say, wormtail will only do something when he knows there is something in it for him, maybe he wasn't sure if voldemort and dumbledore could give him more yet...

Until the prophecy became known, Lily and James were simply two more members of the Order; sure, Peter could have betrayed them at any time, but there wasn't anything significant that he could gain by doing so. Peter was a coward, and ultimately he put his own interests first. Voldemort probably offered great rewards to any of his followers who could give him Harry Potter; Pettigrew made his move at that point, and not before, because that was when he saw a clear advantage to doing it.

It's possible that Voldemort didn't understand what such an existence would be. This is how Slughorn described it "even if one's body is attacked or destroyed, one cannot die, for part of the soul remains earthbound and undamaged." He may have believed he would keep a more stable physical form, never dreaming that he could become "less than the meanest ghost."

Voldemort was so afraid of death that he'd prefer a half life instead. As explained in Sorcerer's Stone when he'd drink unicorn blood as a last resort with "nothing to lose and everything to gain"

They're a pretty little-known branch of magic, as seen by Slughorn's inexpertise and how shocked he seemed that Voldemort knew what they were. I also think that says something about them. They weren't widely used, because those who used them did it in the belief they were a strong enough wizard to revive themselves. It was a kind of safeguard, a way of saying, "Well, if I can come back to life, great. I'm glad I gave myself this chance. What have I got to lose?" It's sort of like cryogenics, when rich old people arrange to have themselves frozen after they die. They can't know when or if the technology will be developed to revive them, but what's the harm in trying? It's a ruthless faith in themselves, a deadly pride and vanity.

Horcruxes are actually to prevent natural death.

voldemort had created more horcruxes than ever before, the idea is a little frightening that he would have taken eternal life over happy life but diffinetly a voldemort thing to do/

I agree with the above, and would add: it is really hard to get information on the logistics of horcruxes. Riddle had to WRING the little info he got out of Slughorn--I think it's reasonable to think he didn't actually know what would happen.

The concept of Horcruxes is incredibly confusing, terrible, and intriguing.. That being said, Voldemort would never have even thought of having a body (or something) ready for such an occasion as his "death" because he always assumed that he was the worlds most powerful wizard and therefore he, Lord Voldemort, would never be killed, or actually NEED to use the Horcruxes he made. It was his pride and ego that kept him from planning ahead.

The only two Death Eaters to remain out of it were the Carrows. Luna stupified Electra, Harry crusioed Amacus, then Prof McGonagal imperioed him into giving her both wands. Then she made him go lay down next to his sister and she bound them with silver cord. I would have thought Kingsley would have told the troops what to do with stunned or captured Death Eaters. But over and over the same DEs recover and continue to fight. No wonder 50 Hogwart's defenders died.

because more experienced spells use more energy if he used easy spells he could do it quicker and be more advanced at them. thankyou

Its not really a plot-hole, as they are simple spells, but effective. The fights were overall a bit boring, I guess JKR is not that good at writing fight scenes. It was lame, but not a plot hole.

1. Expelliarmus is a disarming spell. If someone doesn't have a wand they can't fight back. 2. Avada Kedavre (rips your soul apart) 3. The spells are more effective when you are more experienced with them

One rather important point. The whole reason Harry uses Expelliarmus is to show that he isn't a murderer. They use spells that incapacitate and disarm. Their kids ! Not murders !

ok lets put it this way, u r a kid, just barely thirteen, what spell r u goin to u Avada Kedavre, where u could become a murder and spend the rest of ur life in depression city known as Askaban, or one other the "weak" spells that leaves the other person defensless for a amount of time, saving someone who does not need to be dead

Expelliarmus isn't a weak spell...isn't that the one he uses in GoF to fight off Voldy's Avada Kedavra? Even if it isn't, does it depend on the strength of the wizard as well?

I don't think Petrificus Totalus, Stupify and Expelliarmus were first and second year spells. Hermione used PT in 1st year but she has been described by JK as a 'borderline genius', and they only learn Expelliarmus in their second year whilst at the voluntary-attendence duelling club. Remember in his fourth year Harry was having trouble with Accio, which seems like a simple spell to us but is probably actually quite hard to do.

yeah i've always thought what's the point of having such a wide range of spells when you can just stun someone? like why impedimenta someone when you petrificus totalus them etc? i found when playing the computer games (years ago) i'd just use rictusempra over and over. but hey - that got boring after a while.

maybe they were scared (as any fifteen year old would be when fighting several fully-grown death eaters, who looked capable of murder) so maybe they just said the first spells that came into their heads. remember harry has known most of these spells since first/second year, so they probably become his instinct to use these spells when under pressure.

I think it's a metaphor for taking away someone's power.

After watching the fifth film, I noticed that the Grand Master of Stupefy charm is Ginny... :) It's explained in the last book, when someone mentions that expelliarmus became the "trademark" of Harry, but he refuses using stronger spells when escaping from somewhere, or not thinks it's necessarily. In another word, but he says "If I kill them just for save my life or comfort, then I don't differ from them". I think it's because of his mother, who used love & sacrifice to save him, instad of trying to duel Voldemort (and risk losing both's life) But I think it's only for Harry, Hermione starts using relatively stronger spells even in first books, then later she shows her wide knowledgement (special spells in the forest when searcing horcruxes), we can say that only one of these spells are already too much for young students, but all the time they attend the school is about dangers, so the "weak" is only weak when compare to adult magic (Death Eaters), but strong when compared to similar aged students...

I believe that Stupefy is used alot by Harry and Friends, But Sometimes you might just want to disarm them or freeze the enemy during a battle.

In the heat of battle, I don't think the first spell to spring to mind will be the enormously complicated one you just learned two days ago. Some of the earliest spells you've used are the ones you'll think of first. They've become instinctive. Also, you can't just say a spell. Have you even read the first book? There was a whole spiel about how you had to pronounce a spell and do the motion in the exact right way.

I bet Harry could use Avada Kedavra fairly easily to, I dont think thats a difficlt spell to master, would you say that is innefective too? Just because its a spell he learned early on doesnt mean it's rubbish, the spells potency increases as the wizard becomes stronger. You need to look at the effects of the spell itself, the way it can be used and not the age they learned it.. Also the reason why the expeliarmus spell was effective against Voldermort in book 4 was because both wants shared the same core, if it wasnt for that Harry would probably have been dead.

It's better than Flipendo.

simple spells are easiest for them right now though it was surprising that none of them got killed, it is entirely possible and not a plot hole.

Just because a spell is simple, it doesn't mean it isn't effective. A martial arts master a can still be defeated by a regular guy with a club if he gets a good shot in.

Remember that even Harry's Expelliarmus was a match for Voldy's Avada Kedavra in the 4th book (graveyard).

They didn't see it. Executioner washidden by a rock. They heard where the executioner chopped pumpkin and just assumed

I'm guessing it took him a bit of time finding out everyone who was to give birth in july, who's parents defied him 3 "thrice" and then decide between Neville and Harry, also you have to account for time actually getting to Pettigrew and getting him to join the enemy. It was said multiple times Harry was a year old when his parents were killed, on his actual birthday I think, so it also could have been necessary to Voldemort to kill Harry on his birthday

It was a special case, voldemort didnt expect it. It happened because his soul was unstable because of making many horcruxes. Also lilly's sacrifice made a protection on harry. The curse probably bounced back to voldemart & couldnt kill him (horcruxes) so it ripped his soul. And harry isnt a real horcrux but acts like an horcrux as it houses voldemorts soul.

Lots of other people have killed many during the war, so lots of people should have unstable souls. Bellatrix e.g

Yes Harry's a horcrux. Here is a direct quote from HBP of a convo between Slughorn and young Tom "Tom Riddle: "But how do you do it?" Slughorn: "By an act of evil -- the supreme act of evil. By committing murder. Killing rips the soul apart. The wizard intent upon creating a Horcrux would use the damage to his advantage: he would encase the torn portion" Voldemort had already killed James and Lily before he turned on Harry so his soul would have been split again anyways and when the backlash hit from killing Harry it caused the piece of the soul to latch on to Harry. It did this on it'sown because the soul was already so unstable.

In the books it states that voldemorts soul was very unstable. No other wizard made as many horcruxes as he did. Although in Half-blood prince Slughorn did say there was a spell, Voldemort's soul was already torn beyond repair. It makes sense that pieces could fly off during a shock.

It's been stated that phoenixes cannot be killed. No matter what. If you remember correctly, in the Order of the Phoenix, Fawkes swallows a killing curse for Dumbledore, all that happened was he burst into flames and was reborn again. This happens every time a phoenix is supposed to die, there is no known way to kill one in the Harry Potter universe.

If a Phoenix's tears can provide the only known cure to basilisk venom, it's probably a good bet that the rest of one should be pretty resilient against the rest of the Basilisk as well.

first of all, Fawkes is a magical creature. only humans, regular animals (like Mrs. norris) or Ghosts (like Nick) are affected by looking at a basilisk in the eyes or indirectly looking (reflections, through a camera, through a ghost). It might affect magical creatures differently if at all. maybe Fawkes caught a cold later on... or maybe he even died moments after helping harry, we just did not see it... plus he's a freakin PHOENIX, he may have just burst in to flames and came back.

It would seem that while a sufficiently talented Legilimens can read another's mind, the one whose mind is being read is aware of it. If Quirrell had gotten the information this way, Hagrid would have known it, and then not only would Quirrell be "outed" but additional precautions would have been necessary.

Hagrid is half-giant; there are some spells you cant cast on Hagrid. For instance, it took more than one person to stun Hagrid in the books.

he wasn't powerful enough without a body

You could say that the wand Ron had in the first two books was never really "his" anyways. If I remember correctly it was a hand-me-down from Charlie in the first place (Strange that Charlie would get a new wand himself, maybe he got it as a hand-me-down too). Unfortunately the point about Lockhart not taking it by magical means doesn't hold. Harry also took Draco's wand by physical force in nearly the identical manner and it's a pretty big plot point that that was good enough for it to change allegiance. The thing about wand allegiance though, I think JKR left it all as purposefully vague. Multiple parts of the book don't make sense if it's as simple as Harry explains it to Voldemort at the end. I've always felt the doubt Harry put in his mind was as important as who "won" which wand in which particular fashion. Remember that wands are disarmed numerous times in the books and its not like they stop working for their owners when they are returned.

He gets a new wand when he meets Harry in Diagon Alley in Book 3.

It's actually 'duct' tape

The wand didn't change its allegiance because Lockhart wasn't worthy.

To the person above: Ron could use his wand because it wasn't completely broken (the unicorn hair core was still intact), plus it was bound with spello-tape. Harry's wand, however, was snapped in two.

1)Lockhart took the wand using physical force not magic. 2)Ron got a new wand in the beginning of POA 3)the main confusion is how ron could use a broken wand but harry couldn't

in the 3rd buck he gets a new wand and lockheart did not win the wand he just took it when ron was not looking there was no struggle

Ron's family got him a new wand with their prize money in POA. And don't even bother trying to logic out the wandlore stuff. It doesn't make sense. As a hand-me down his original wand never should have worked well for him anyway.

1. It'd have to be taken by magical purposes or killing the previous owner. 2. Ron's wand was so messed up it probably didn't have an allegiance to anyone. 3. He got a new wand in PoA!!!! 4. Lockhart was removed to St. Mungo's after CoS and most likely was not allowed a wand, as he would be considered dangerous.

Because the schools were full of children and noone in their right mind makes children fight a war. A better question would be "Where's the international law enforcement in all this?" Because I'm certain Voldemort wouldn't have stopped with Britain, and I'm pretty sure that would've been obvious to Britain's neighbours, who would've said their piece in the ICW. Voldie should've been burried under a rain of spellfire.

Because it began so suddenly- it wasn't like "attention , wizarding world- war will commence this time next week." The other schools were in different countries, so it would've been hard to make contact so quick, and I doubt anyone would think about that at such a time. Also in answer to another comment- how could Karkaroff be fighting, when at the beginning of Half Blood Prince it states that he was dead?

You Cannot apparate or disapparate inside Hogwarts! Isn't anyone going to ever read Hogwarts, A History :P

A) The beauxbatons are not exactly renown for their fighting ability and may have been more of a burden than help B)Durmstrang have Kharkaroff( sorry if mispelt) as a headmaster who is a well-known death eater and would have been fighting for Voldemort if anything

Could they not just apparate their? Sorry if it's a dumb question.

The other schools are in France and Northern Europe. Not even a fast owl could reach them before the battle was over.

the other schools were to far away the fight was just something that happened was not planned the only people who fought were people in the school members of the da people who had connections with da members and told other order members who did not and people from the local villiage. there was no time for the other schools or other people to get involved.

Also because I'm sure the school didn't want to involve the kids in a battle to the death. Rowlin probably wanted to focus on only Hogwarts not the other school. And we never do find out how long it takes for them to get there. Like they said there probably wasn't enough time.

Because it began an ended rather quickly, It would take a long time for them to travel there and help.

Homeschooling, sending them to school abroad, Hogwarts acting as a boarding school type disguise.

Most wizards live in separate communities from muggles, they wouldn't have records in the muggle world

They're magic - I' sure it's not to difficult to sort out some fake paperwork

There have to be government officials in the muggle government who know about the wizarding community. Later in the series we see a scene where the Minister of Magic explains the wizarding world to the muggle Prime Minister. The Prime Minister cant be the only person in the muggle government who is informed. An informed government worker probably keeps track of the wizarding children or makes up fake records for them.

They could have been at a boarding school... which they were

I'm not sure this will help but the parents know they are gone to Hogwarts. They could say that there are at some camp or something. I'm not even sure if this is right.

Of course Voldemort could go it--he did kill Frank at the beginning of the book. And as for that, you know how Harry was. Wormtail, at that point, was a lost cause--and I suppose explaining who Peter was would've taken a bit of a while.

Technailly it was Wormtail, but he was acting on voldy's orders seeing as he couldt do it.

Isn't it perfectly obvious that McGonagall just did a simple, non verbal "Accio", and then did another simple non verbal replenishing spell? This is not a plothole.

Also easy. The house elves in the kitchen were probably told to make a lot of sandwhiches, so the plate could refill itself all the time. Some answers to other "plot holes" are this simple: Magic. The rest are obvious.

In CoS (I think), Molly Weasley mentions you cannot make food appear from thin air but you can duplicate already-existing food and you can teleport food from one place to another. McGonagall probably summoned it from the kitchen or great hall and made it keep on duplicating. Alternatively, she could have done a duplication spell on a sandwich in the kitchen or great hall that would make it duplicate to somewhere else (she probably would have done that only if she didn't wan't people to see the food dissappear).

mcgonagall probably summoned it from the kitchen with a fancy summoning charm that makes things just appear.

Probably summoned from the hall which is directly above them.

the house elves are making the sandwhiches and the plate is made to bring the sandwhiches from where they are placed by the house elves to apper on the plate

we will never know exactly what he meant for to happen, as Harry survived and scuppered Moody's and Voldy's plans. But it seems likely that they wanted to deliver Harry's body back, yes.

so Voldemort could come back and take over Hogwarts after he killed Harry

I actually think, Moody got the cup with portkey charm already on it. He simply cast another one "over" it. Would explain, why they don't return to the middle of the maze.

To be honest, this has always bothered me. But the comment below explained it. Thanks!

"Moody" meant for Harry's death to look like an accident - the underage, least experienced champion tragically dies from one of the hundreds of possible horrors inside the maze, not a mysterious disappearance of the Boy-Who-Lived which should be investigated. He made the portkey two-way so that they could easily send Harry right back and leave no traces of Voldemort's return.

When you think of the size of the Ministry of Magic (five hundred works to arrange the quidditch international competition) and the number of professional teams of quidditch in Large Britain, it seems the school is too small for the size of the magical community. And to only have one common room for the Gryffindoors with one fire place also seems strange. On the other hand, it is mentioned that there are several cousins of Ron in Fleur Delacours wedding : so are there more schools than Hogwarts in Large Britain?

So many illogical things with these numbers: Gryffindor has one living room and one fire place for all these children? The Ministry of Magic is very large compared to the numbers of magic people, if all magic people in Great Britain goes to Hogwarts. And how can such a small school give enough people to have a complete set of quidditch teams ? And five hundred people from the ministry working to make the quidditch arena for the international competetion?

If you go on Pottermore there is a section revealed called "The Original Forty". I'm not sure exactly where, but it is the 40 students in Harry's year. So yeah. 40 students.

There is only info about harrys year, which can be expected to be a smallish one due to the war happening when most of them were conceived - people were too busy dying to get married and have kids! Also each house isn't going to take on exactly the same number of kids e.g. slytherin has very very high expectations whereas hufflepuff accept anyone so you math doesn't really make sense

Well that's not totally confirmed. Just because there are only 5 boys and 5 girls in Harry's year doesn't mean that its the same in every year. After all, they just invite all the wizards who are 11 at that time, so some years there could be a lot more than other years. It won't neccesarily be even. Its not like they pick how many people they let in each year. Like I said they have to take in however many wizards turn 11 in that year.

two words...MAGICAL SCHOOL...need i say more, well just in case, whos to say there arent more rooms or dorms and that there just not specific on that matter

are there co-ed tents ?

The rooms are only for the special people. Everyone else camped out in the forbidden forrest.

JK has said that there are more dorms per year than shown in the book, as seen by the appearances of characters like Bem in POA, she simply stated the others have not been properly identified/ created as it was not necessary to the story or the main 3 characters (HP, HG, RW) , also there are only 5 beds in each dorm room, but there may be multiples of these for each year to allow for larger numbers

Magic. If they needed more or less room/space they could make it. THEY ARE WIZARDS- they can do whatever they want

When the students in Harry's dorm were born, it was during the Wizarding War. People were probably not that eager to have kids. Several years before that, however, people might have been having over twice as many. Just because there are only 5 students in Harry's dorm (Gryffindor boys in his year), there could very well be over 10 in a 7th year dorm.

Someone said why not send snape in to grimmauld place. Maybe Voldemort did early on before they showed up and that's where his memory from taking the photo of Lilly laughing comes from and then he collected himself and went back to Voldemort and said they weren't there

This is not a plot hole. The house had many ancient protection charms on it. We also know that the Fidelious Charm is in place. This charm overrules all other magic. The whole point of the charm is to be unplottable...if it would break because of a Taboo, what would be the point of it? Snape does not know that they are in there. This is mentioned in the book. Ron asks "reckon they know we're in here?", to which Hermione replies "I don't think so, or they would've sent Snape after us, wouldn't they?". @4 below me: "not a valid reason" says who? You, lol? Who are you to say what spells should overwrite others and what is valid and what isn't? Obviously this a world that J.K Rowling has created, and she decided that Fidelious Charms are more powerful than Taboos, and that it is a valid reason. The secret was shared to Yaxley because Hermione (a Secret Keeper) effectively gave him the secret by bringing him inside the Fidelious Charm, which is a VALID reason. It is a completely different situation to the Taboo.

@4 below me..Why would you decide which spells are more superior? You didn't write the books, you didn't invent the spells. "Not valid reasons" uhh, says who? You, lol? Obviously J.K Rowling disagrees with you. This isn't a plot hole...it has been said that Grimmauld Place has many ancient charms on it, and we know that the Fidelious Charm is in effect. The Fidelious Charm rules out all other magic...you can not be traced. And this point is proven in the books...Deathly Hallows, Chapter 11 The Bribe. 'Two cloaked men had appeared in the square outside number 12, and they remained there into the night, gazing in the direction of the house that they could not see. "Death Eaters for sure," said Ron as he, Harry and Hermione watched from the drawing room windows. "Reckon they know we're in here?" "I don't think so," said Hermione, though she looked frightened. "Or they'd have sent Snape in after us, wouldn't they?" Also, the reason why Yaxley found out the secret, was because Hermione, a Secret Keeper actually showed him the location. Completely different situations and magic. The whole point of the Fidelious Charm is that it unplottable...it would be pointless if Taboos could break it.

"The name became taboo after they left the Black house" No it didnt, Ron explains after his return that the Taboo was the reason the DE tracked them to the cafe on Tottenham Court Road. Also, as part of this hole, if Snape can get into the house why didnt Voldemort send him instead of random DE who couldnt see it?

@2 below me: some spells are stronger than others. Fidelius is stronger than the taboo.

Death Eaters showed up at Grimmauld Place when they said the name but they couldn't get in the house because it was under the Fidelius Charm. Even though everyone who knew about the house was a secret keeper since the original secret keeper died, none of the death eaters knew so it was still hidden to them.

This person's actually correct. This is a potential plot hole. It shouldn't matter that Grimmauld Place is protected by enchantment since they should have been stripped when they broke the Taboo. It being Unplottable is also not a valid excuse since the enchantment that made it so should've been stripped away at the same time. It being under the Fidelius is ALSO not a valid reason for its continued protection since both Harry and Hermione, both being Secret Keepers, said the Taboo'd name several times, thus revealing the Secret of their location. The only way to fill this plot hole would be if either the enchantments on the house were more powerful than the Taboo (such as the ancient protections around Hogwarts) and that the Fidelius Charm's Secret cannot be revealed in this way (though if the Secret can be shared by grabbing someone when they Apparate into the protected zone it should conceivably be shared by breaking a Taboo too).

I've said it already, but I'll say it again 'The house of black (or Grimmauld place) is un-plottable and under the fideus charm (sp?) ergo, even if they were alerted of people saying his name in the house, they wouldn't be able to trace it or find it. this also explains why death eaters stood patrol outside the row of houses (:'

J.K Rowling has said the the reason his portrait did not appear was because he abandoned his post. Maybe the person who said that he didn't abandon his post should be the one to read the books! Chapter 30: The Sacking of Severus Snape When Harry looked up again, Snape was in full flight, McGonagall, Flitwick and Sprout all thundering after him: Snape hurtled into a classroom door and, moments later, Harry heard McGonagall cry "Coward! COWARD!" "What's happened, what's happened?" asked Luna. Harry dragged her to her feet and they raced along the corridor, trailing the Invisibility Cloak behind them, into the deserted classroom where Professors McGonagall, Flitwick and Sprout were standing at a smashed window. "He jumped," said Professor McGonagall, as Harry and Luna ran into the room. "You mean he's dead?" Harry sprinted to the window, ignoring Flitwick and Sprout's yells of shock at his sudden appearance. "No, he's not dead," said McGonagall bitterly. "Unlike Dumbledore, he was still carrying a wand...and he seems to have learned a few tricks from his master." With a tingle of horror, Harry saw in the distance a huge, bat-like shape flying through the darkness towards the perimeter wall. Chapter 31: The Battle of Hogwarts "Where's Professor Snape?" Shouted a girl from the Slytherin table. "He has, to use the common phrase, done a bunk," replied Professor McGonagall, and a great cheer erupted from the Gryffindors, Hufflepuffs and Ravenclaws. It does not state in the books that Harry made sure his portrait was added. But J.K Rowling has said this, so I'm sure the poster was just confused over that!

"The books says Harry made sure Snape's portrait was on the wall. Where?

He didnt abandon his post!!! He was murdered by voldemort!!! If any of you read the books, you would know he was usually in his office during his time as head master. he was truly there to help, secretly. he was amazing!!! He was much more of a head master than Umbridge ever was! You cant compare those two one bit. Harry made sure his picture was put up eventually.

The books say Harry made sure that his portrait was placed in the Headmaster's office.

Because he abandoned his post as headmaster before he died. I mean. There's a whole chapter called "The Sacking of Severus Snape." In other words, he wasn't headmaster anymore. Snape was no more of a headmaster when he died than Umbridge was when Harry went to find her in the Ministry in the seventh book. And did you see Umbridge's portrait on the wall? No. Because she lost her job. Just like Snape quit his.

Well, MAYBE, just MAYBE, there MIGHT POSSIBLY not have been enough time in the FEW HOURS between the time that Snape died and the time that Harry went to the office for somebody to paint a picture and hang it up!

because they werent going to go around a praise a deatheater, were they, they only consented with harry's wish when harry explained y

It is stated that if a headmaster abandons his post or students then his portrait is never put up. Snape fled Hogwarts during the final battle, abandoning his post.

harry made sure snapes portrait was hung on the wall after the battle of hogwarts, and with what harry said to dumbledore during their final duel it can be assumed people began to realise he was acting for dumbledore/ harry the whole way through and so was indeed on the "good" side, dumbledores portrait could have also spoken to mcgonagall explaining to her, and also JK states harry made sure it was eventually hung on the wall of the heafmasters office

i think there is speculation in that Hogwarts did not recognize him as the true headmaster which perhasp is why there was no portrait

The books says Harry made sure his portrait was on the wall... so it was there.

In order for a horcrux to be destroyed its host must also be destroyed (or in Harrys case killed). And if you recall in DH Dumbledor says that for the horcrux in Harry to be destroyed Voldemort has to be the one to do it..... Not a giant snake

Harry was not a proper horcux. It is stated in the book that Voldemort must be the one to destroy him.

In the seventh book hermione states the the horcrux relies on its solid part to survive as it is the opposite of a soul. Harry wasn't destroyed as he was still alive - saved by fauwks (correct spelling??) whereas the diary and cup, inanimate objects, we're destroyed. I'm sorry if anyone else has already mentioned this...

While the comment about Harry being under the protection of him mom is correct in itself, it is incorrect in this situation. The protection from his mother only made it impossibly for Voldemort to touch him, neither physically or with a spell, not for Harry to die. He would have died, and destroyed the horcrux within him, if Fawkes hadn't saved him. The poison did not destroy the horcrux because it must destroy the entity that Voldemort's soul is attatched to, in this case Harry. Since Harry didn't die, neither did the horcrux.

A Horcrux, unless it is being destroyed by its creator, can only be destroyed if the thing it is living in dies or is ruined beyond repair. Harry was bitten by the Basilisk and yes, he was poisoned but the damage was fixed by Fawkes. Harry lived on, and so did the piece of soul.

Harry got bitten by the basilisk BUT pheonix tears are an antidote to Basilisk venom SO when Fawkes the pheonix cried onto Harry's wound, all the damage was fixed and the Basilisk venom couldn't take full effect and completely destroy the piece of Voldemorts soul inside Harry.

because harry had a the protection of his mum until the age of 17 thats why voldermort couldnt kill him in the first place!

Because the Horcrux inside Harry needs to be killed by the original source. Voldemort has been loving side Harry all these years and has become a part of him. The original source needs to kill it.

This got me thinking... I think it's because, for a Horcrux to be destroyed, there has to be NO POSSIBLE WAY for it to be fixed, in a magical way or otherwise. Since Harry is human, Fawkes' tears worked on him, because he could be fixed. If Fawkes had cried on Riddle's diary, the tears would not have healed it, because it's an inanimate object. If that makes sense to anyone other than me, problem solved.

And how come if you need a basilisk fang or the sword (or something special like that) then voldy was able to kill the horcrux inside harry with just the killing curse?? how does that make sense..anybody???

The problem with the Basilisk venom is that it would have killed Harry's physical form as well both the soul within it. A horcrux is only as strong as the object holding it! I think the Horcrux might have struggled to remain in the body as long as it could before completely destroying. When Harry was cured by faawkes, the Horcrux must have figured the body was safe again, and returned back to it!

he has his moms protection lingering

A horcrux can only be destroyed if there is no remedy, since there happened to be phoenix tears near by, which are VERY rare it was saved, (for three more years until the Deathly Hallows).

For the basilisk venom to have killed the bit of Voldemort's soul it would have had to been introduced directly into Harry's scar. Harry isn't himself the accidental horcrux so much as his scar is. Though if the venom had managed to kill Harry I assume the soul fragment would have been destroyed too.

The Horcrux can only be destroyed along with its vessel. The Basie's venom is not some specific "anti-horcrux" remedy - it's merely so toxic and corrosive it can overcome all possible defensive charms placed on the horcrux.

Phoenix tears. The diary did not "die" right away, either. It "bled out."

fair play

actually in the book the chapter "the writing on the wall" when she dives into the toilet she splashes harry, ron and hermione with water

That's a movie mistake if I am not wrong. That was never mentioned about water splashing in the books.

Ghosts can interact with things in a minimal way. If they couldn't then Harry's hands wouldn't have felt like they were being plunges into icy water when Nick took them. The Headless Hunt wouldn't have bothered to try to help save Hogwarts in DH. I think if they get riled enough (remember when the Gray Lady's cheeks become almost opaque when she thinks Harry insulted her) then they can have even more effect on thing.

Ghost CAN move water and gas, but not solid. So myrtle could splash water. This is also why sir nick could be fanned and could drink the mandrake juice

Myrtle didnt flood the bathroom, the basilisk going in and out of the pipes did. The bathroom didnt begin flooding until the attacks began, so its only logical that the chamber being reopened was responsible for the water on the floor.

Disturbance. It's spelled "disturbance."

besides other great points when there is a desterpance in the wind water does move so when a great gust of wind(lik an upset Mertal ghost) comes into countact with a full toilet of water the water has to make room for the disterbance and there for the water moving

Ghosts can interact with things that have direct connections with their characters. That's why Professor Binns can handle notes and grade papers and things; he was, and had been for quite some time, a teacher. Maybe Myrtle can interact with water because of that connection to her. You know, how she was always crying.

Anything like that from the movie cannot add as canon information to support the facts from the books.

professor Binns is constantly said to interact with physical objects such as the chalkboard, chalk and books, I would assume he doesn't really pick them up, but uses his magic to write on boards and flick pages from the book! It's possible Myrtle used magic to flood the bathroom!

I would say this is a legitimate plothole. The only thing I can think of it that she has a special reaction to water since it had so much to do with how she was killed.

We're not talking about the movie. The book states that Myrtle floods the bathroom, and she must touch things to do so. The water flooding is central to part of the plot since that's why Mrs. Norris is petrified rather than killed.

In the film it was probably done as a visual gag

Plothole. Ghosts cannot "touch" material things such as making a splash in water. Poltergeists such as Peeves can, bit JKRs definitions of ghosts and poltergeists are two completely different beings. In other words Peeves is not a wizard that died at some point and lives on as a ghost; he's a completely different type of being.

J.K. Rowling answered this on her website. She said that Petunia was exaggerating quite a bit. I mean, she would've just been caught up in the 'freak'ness of it all. Once you're a witch, it does kind of affect how you view the world. I guess Petunia was so disturbed by seeing this change in her sister that she translated it as Lily's inner witch coming out, and that's how she portrayed how witchy Lily was.

It's been ~15 years since she was a child with her sister. She most likely just forgot minor details such as Harry not being allowed to use magic.

7th years are of age aren't they? If i suddenly became of age I would turn everything I owned into something else

MAGIC!!! DUH!!! ^ ^ lol

Well, a Mandrake is a magical plant and it's possible there are spells to get the Mandrake potion to work on him. And remember how there was food at his Deathday party? and the ghosts were going through it with their mouths open and they could 'almost' taste it.

i believe if he was effect he would get a chance to die again, but he must have wish again to remain I don't agree, he mentions a few years later about how he always regretted not moving on . Seems to me that he would have moved on the first chance he got if there was an option.

i believe if he was effect he would get a chance to die again, but he must have wish again to remain

It would seem that ghosts CAN interact with ordinary matter. We know that they make people feel cold upon contact, and they also seem to have a limited sense of taste and smell (they allow food to putrefy to enhance its flavor, something they probably wouldn't do if it didn't have some real effect on them). Therefore, it is possible that a mandrake potion could be sprayed on Nick's "body" and in that way it could revive him.

they've already said that there must be wizard posted inside the post office.

Book 7, Snapes memory of childhood with Lily, Platform 9 3/4 -- Lily (to Petunia): "Severus saw the envelope, and he couldn't believe a Muggle could have contacted Hogwarts..That's all. He says there must be Wizards working undercover in the postal service who take care of--" Petunia: "Apparently, Wizards poke their noses in everywhere. Freak!"

^ That would also explain why they sent such crappy presents. They just sent Hedwig with whatever they could lay their hands on at the time to get her to go away. The first year, they sent a 50-cent piece; a fairly lousy Christmas gift, but at least it had SOME value. Each year, they sent something progressively more worthless, presumably to see how little they could get away with, until eventually they were sending a single tissue.

In Prisoner of Azkaban, while Harry is still with the Dursleys, he is not sending or receiving mail via Hedwig because he promised Uncle Vernon that he wouldn't send her with any letters if Uncle V. would allow her to be out of her cage. Harry nonetheless received a birthday gift from Hermione (who was in France w/ her folks) because Hedwig took the initiative and went to her without orders. It's not inconceivable that she could have done the same with the Dursleys at Christmas time, refusing to leave and making a nuisance of herself until they found something to send to Harry.

So? If you recall Petunia managed to send a letter to Hogwarts when she was a young girl begging Dumbledore to let her come to Hogwarts. Not to mention muggles like Hermione's parents send her stuff as well. By unplottable that simply means muggles won't see it. But it's not like they can't send letters.

"Not all Gryffindors are brave." Snape should have been in Gryffindor, Harry was considered for Slytherin, and Hermione was considered for Ravenclaw. J.K. Rowling herself admitted that the Sorting Hat has made at least seven mistakes. Plus, in my opinion, Luna should have kind of been in Gryffindor because she was not only brave, but she kept a smiling face through the thick and thin. luv ya Luna!

To quote Dumbledore [talking to Snape], "You are a braver man by far than Igor Karkaroff. You know, I sometimes think we Sort too soon ...

The Sorting isn't really a set thing, in my opinion. Sometimes you just have to use the process of elimination.... Pettigrew wasn't loyal (just to whoever seemed like a winner, which doesn't count) so he couldn't be a Hufflepuff; he wasn't ambitious (he just latched on to others' ambition) so he's not a Slytherin; he's not clever enough to be a Ravenclaw, so that leaves Gryffindor. Of course he's not brave at all, but if he's absolutely NOT any of the other House characteristics, maybe the Sorting Hat wanted some courage to rub off on Pettigrew by being around brave people, since it is (arguably) the easiest trait to "grow" for yourself.

wormtail was in gryffindor, not because he had hte qualities of a gryffindor, but becuase he valued the qualities of a gryffindor (he showed remorse on harry and ron in teh seventh book) and he chose his friends as the ones that possessed these qualities and he admired them.

Yes J K rowling never really explains why wormtail is in Gryffindor. It doesn't really make sense as he's such a weak cowardly character. I always thought that the hat was supposed to see into the future or something to where people would be most needed. It considers putting Herminone into Ravenclaw (as you would expect with her brains) but she ends up in Gryffindor where she is of course very important to Harry's survival throughout the books. I fail to understand how wormtail could ever have been put there though!

This is the same thing for Snape, people saying that he should be in Gryffindor really because of what he came out to be. Remember though that Harry wanted to be in Gryffindor and he made that choice. Snape obviously wanted to be in Slytherin at the time. Also remember in Chamber of Secrets Dumbledore said that its our choices are what matter.

he was brave...and prehaps mean, but that doesn't make him a slytherine for sure

It is suggested in the books that Wormtail felt he was in Harry's debt because Harry spared his life in the shrieking shack his third year. This shows that Wormtail has some capacity for loyalty, a Griffindor trait.

Wormtail was in Gryffindor, as is shown in several flashbacks in the books. Clearly as he grew older his nature changed- Dumbledore says at one point that he sometimes feels the students are sorted too early.

^^ adding further to my own comment... Wormtail was a bad guy, but he lacked many of the qualities that Salazar Slytherin respected. He had zero ambition, for instance. He seemed reluctant to take any sort of decisive action, even when it furthered his own ends. Furthermore, remember that when the sorting hat was considering Harry's placement, he said that Harry "could be great", and that Slytherin House would help him to get there. Apparently, the hat bases its choice at least in part on what is best for the student. It might have hoped that some of the Gryffindor bravery would rub off on Wormtail. It seems to have worked for Neville, after all.

Remember that the sorting hat takes your choice into account. Wormtail liked being around people who were stronger and braver than himself; he was probably scared of the Slytherins, and begged the hat to put him into Gryffindor, where he would have more protective friends.

Nothing says that friends have to be in the same house. Cho Chang and Cedric Diggory were respectively a Ravenclaw and a Hufflepuff and they were dating. Wormtail very well could have been put in Slytherin

In the books Harry asked Vernon about going to King's Cross. It doesn't say that Petunia was there. She wouldn't have told Vernon so he wouldn't know. And Petunia wasn't going to come out and tell him.

She is mad at Dumbledore for not letting her come, even though I never heard mention when Dumby comes to the Dursleys in HBP. And she came across the fact that wizards are nutters.

OR she might not have remembered (or ever even noticed) the name. She didn't exactly have fond memories of the magical world

she pretends she wants no connection between herself and magic

Petunia wanted nothing to do with the Wizarding world so she said she knew nothing.

Petunia wanted to keep herself as far away from magic and wizardry/the wizarding community. She just didn't want to be associated with the wizarding community at all.

She's a *****

Actually in the book he uses a flashlight.

Probably because lumos isn't considered as that much of a spell even when harry uses it in the fifth movie they do not mention it in the hearing

It is a movie. Plenty of things are messed up in the movies. In the book, he uses a flashlight.

This stupidity, which I blame the screenwriter and director for in equal measure, is precisely why I was unable to control myself when I said, "OH COME ON!" quite loudly in a packed movie theater on the day it came out.

It can easily be mistaken for a toy flashlight! in one of the books it states that lumos is the one underage spells allowed! it either says that in a book or she says it in one of her interviews. I don't remember which.

UNDERAGED MAGIC!!

It's a loophole in the movie, not in the book. In the book he has a flashlight in his hand, in the movie he's practicing the spell Lumos Maxima, but in the book he is writing about the Witch Hunting in the medieval times!

In one Book it says that the Trace does not pick up a single underage wizard, but alot of the space around him (thats why in the COS dobby's spell almost gets Harry expelled) and that at wizard families the parents are supposed to control their children. As if they could do that (in case of the Weasley twins)

Maybe it's a fault of filming, it's also possible that the law is not as strict as we think. Just remember the first meeting of Harry, Ron and Hermione on the train in the first book. Ron tries a spell on the rat, when Hermione arrives, and says "I already tried some of easy spells, they all worked for me" (from hungarian translation) SO, Hermione also used spells even before she began to attend school :) Maybe the most important point in this regulation is "not in presence of muggles" (so maybe if a muggle sees the result of 'lumos' spell it's also not problem if believes that it's a regular light source etc.)

thats only in the film. in the book it says he uses a torch

*sigh* MOVIE not BOOK !

I think its only illegal if its in the presence of a muggle

What I don't understand about the trace, is that I think in the sixth book, someone tells Harry, Dumbledore I think, that the way the trace works is that they show an underage wizard is living there with no adults. I think he specifically mentions that underage wizards can use magic in wizarding families and no one would know, and it's up to the parent's to keep their kid's magic in check. But then in the 7th book, all of a sudden the trace is everywhere Harry goes.

Yeah, in the movies they also forgot to have Sirius give Harry the mirror, and then NEVER explained what the heck all the weird warped images were in the 7th movie. Essentially ignore the movies. They make TONS of stupid mistakes.

In the book he used a flashlight. movie directors are stupid sometimes.

The movies are as dumb as you are if you care about the movies...it never happened in the book

When he used Lumos to do his work,he wasnt in the preseance of a muggle.He was alone in his room

i know i thought that to lol but its a movie, things like that happen in movies not jkr fault

^^ The Quidditch World Cup ended in sheer pandemonium. There were probably underage wizards casting spells all over the place; whatever alarms are set off by the Trace were probably producing something along the lines of a sustained blast of white noise. Not to mention that underage wizards casting "lumos" was probably rather close to the bottom the priority list.

But even then, Hermione used Lumos in the forest at the Quidditch World Cup. I don't think Lumos is actually a spell, it is probably something to light your wand.

This is the MOVIE. movies hardly ever get anything correct but like to add dramatic title openings. This is not J.K.s fault.

That was just a device to show the title of the movie in the opening,

the ministry would have noticed it, but as sirius black had escaped, they did not want him to leave the house and get in trouble, this is also why he didn't get in trouble for blowing up his aunt

this one needs no explanation. apparently this site is for the books! the movie makers have no respect for the original masterpiece and alter the story whenever they feel like it, making hundreds of plot holes along the way.

Ah... yes, in the MOVIE Harry uses "Lumos Maximus" under the sheets, but that's not really JKR's fault. To put it quite simply, the third movie sucks.

^^ They're not supposed to do any magic, and nowhere in the books does it say that students are allowed to do "little" spells over the holidays. First years are not allowed to do magic, and first year spells are the only ones they would know... Harry got in trouble when Dobby used the levitation spell after his 1st year. In this instance Harry was using a torch (flashlight): "It was nearly midnight, and he was lying on the front of his bed, the blankets drawn right over his head like a tent, a torch in one hand and a large leather-bound book..." - page 1 of POA There are discrepancies in the books pertaining to the underage use of magic. Petunia said that when Lily was home during school breaks she was turning teacups into frogs (or something like that), which she shouldn't have been allowed to do. Hermione wasn't allowed to show her parents what she had learned at school (though she had practiced spells before school started; perhaps on the train though). Also, many explosions came from the Weasley twins' room (maybe potions don't count?).

this did not even happen in the book.

I believe that maybe the trace might only pick up significant activity such as "blowing up" and aunt or a highly advanced Patronus. To believe creating a bit of light would be signifigant means that just because he is of age to be in school he has lost the ability to perform uncontrolled magic. I'm sure that the tiny uncontrolled magic children do is similar to a Lumos charm, but they are not picked up by the trace. Lumos is also a weak spell, one first years are able to master. It's concievable that it has a strength meter. These are only guesses, of course, but it seems quite simple to me. However, was this part in the book as well? I forget.

But Sluggy was at Hogwarts for more than 1 year. The appointments goes to show that Dumbledore is getting old beyond normal wizarding years.

the below comment is wrong, it is explicitly stated that no DADA teacher has remained at Hogwarts since Voldemort was declined the job.

there is not a real curse of DADA teachers, it's just coincidence that they're either inept or have other mitigating factors. the "curse" only started with quirrell, hogwarts had existed for centuries before that with long-tenured DADA teachers. the real answer is simple: dumbledore had a lot on his plate. no one asks the dean of a university to teach classes

In HBP Voldermort is shown as an orphan. Then who paid for his school supplies and his wand??

Snape never tries to kill Harry either (the Prophecized stuff/his role in it doesn't count). He just wanted to annoy him for as long as he could while being able to look into his eyes. Also: "Umbi*ch intentionally tried to kill Harry when she sends the dementors to suck out his soul." WTF are you talking about?

All but Slughorn, anyway. Unless I'm forgetting something.

Lockheat doesn't try to kill him at any point that I can recall. Just tries to erase his memories

The answer is really simple, the curse on the DADA job doesn't mean that that any DADA teacher will die... it just means that they will only be at the school for 1 year. Dumbledore clearly knows he needs to be at the school to protech the students and wants to stick around for a bit.

^ Dissagree, Lupin accidently puts Harry, Ron, and Hermione's lives in danger when he transforms in their presence, and Umbi*ch intentionally tried to kill Harry when she sends the dementors to suck out his soul. His heart may have stiil beat afterwards, but he would basically be a 'vegitable'.

lupin never tries to kill harry in anyway. neither does umbridge, really, she tries to hurt him in the beginning and tries to use crucio in the end, but not kill him

Anyone else notice that all the dada teachers accidently or on purpose try to kill Harry ?

dumbledore has a lot or responsibility with the school the ministry and killing voldemort he had priorities, but hogowartz would not be with out him... -dumbledores man through and through.

Dumbledore was gone A LOT, in case you didn't pick up on that. Someone's always asking "where's dumbledore now?" He's constantly off on his 'trips' you could call them, working to defeat Voldemort. He doesn't have time to teach a bunch of classes.

Dumbledore was firstly a transfiguration teacher. Although he could have taught it, by the time the situation for a DADA teacher had got serious, he had other important things happening, eg. stopping Voldermort and leaving for weeks at a time to search for horcruxes.

Where do you think dumbledore got alll the memories in HBP? he even says after he saw the diary he spent as much time as he could learning about voldemorts life and tracking down the horcruxes and harvesting memories so when he died harry could know what to do and finish him off

I think the point being made here is, if Dumbledore had died being a DADA teach, Voldemort would have had one hell of an easy time being evil and whatnot. Dumbledore is, by his own admission, quite brilliant- would it not have been a waste to risk his life when he knows he is so integral to victory?

^^ "BRAVERY- courage: a quality of spirit that enables you to face danger or pain without showing fear." Yep, that's the word I meant to use. Your point?

Um... I think you need to look up the word "bravery".

So, Dumbledore was letting dozens of others take the fall for him over time? Doesn't sound like Gryffindor bravery to me.

DADA curse: All the DADA profesors we know have either died, been permanently harmed or in Lupin's case has his "bad secrets" come out to light.

No, it wouldn't have been detected as "underage magic". Morphin lived in the area and was of age, AND his wand was used, AND his memory was altered. And someone asked about whether or not the trace was in effect at that time - I believe so. In book 7 you find out that very soon after Dumbledore graduated he had a part in crafting the Statute of Secrecy (part of which is the detection and control of underage magic) so it would have been utilized from that point on - so definitely when Tom Riddle was in school.

The Ministry only detects magic. For example, a magic detector (?) goes off in Scotland, so they check if you are in Hogwarts, if you are at school no one cares, if you aren't they check for adult wizards. If there is an adult wizard the magic is attributed to them, and the underage Magic gets away with it. If there isn't an adult wizard, they track the magic by the Trace on the wand and send them a nasty letter.

By this point, Morphin had aged YEARS! Tom Riddle was seventeen years old, adding seventeen to eighteen years to Morphin's age since his attack upon Tom Riddle Sr.

THEY CAN'T DETECT UNDERAGE MAGIC! they can only detect magic... morphin was blamed because he was the only wizard around! If you'd read the books you may have realized that the ministry can't tell it was doby... because they can only detect magic... not the user.

because they didnt know tom was there, the only way the ministry can tell if u used underagd magic is if theres no other resitrated witch or wizard there. its like the reverse of harry's second year (Dobby and the pudding cake)

Ignore my last two comments, I'll post the correct version here: About Lily and the frogspawn / transfiguring things, I'm pretty sure JKR said on her website or an interview that Petunia was exaggerating. The ministry blamed Morphin as he was living close to the Riddles and was the only wizard (and one condemned for harming muggles at that) in the vicinity. They went to question him, he confessed. Voldy used his wand, so it showed the murder. Case closed as far as the ministry was concerned.

By that point, Tom Riddle WAS of Age. He was born on December 31, and entered Hogwarts when he was eleven--thus turning twelve in December of his first year, you see. So when he killed his father & paternal grandparents in his 6th year, he would already have been 17, not 16. So it is not underage magic. ~Catherine

I think the explanation is that this event took plus 50-60 years before the main plot of the book, and thus they probably didn't have the laws in place, i.e. it wasn't illegal to do magic outside of school.

When the Riddles were killed, the Ministry officials detected the magic and came to the closest magical person living there, the Gaunts, after arriving there they asked Morfin and he admitted to the crime (because his memory was modified by Voldemort)! Because he had previous charges on being arrested for having used magic on a muggle (I think it was Riddle Sr. back then too) a trial wasn't held and he was taken to Azkaban!

they did not know voldy was there because dat area was morphin's and wen he did the spell everybody knew wizards lived around the area so it was not considered a big deal

^ exactly.

What should be said, isn't "stop trying to explain plot holes" but "Stop trying to find plot holes" (1) it ruins the books if you start trying to find mistakes (2) Most of them aren't even plot holes just people missing things or being stupid.

Because he admited to it, they would have seen the underaged magic as perhaps an error in the system.

Tom Riddle was born on december 31th 1926 according to HP lexicon and HPwiki there fore like Hermione, and ginny he was a year older than is peers and was 17 in his 6th year! No more trace. Plus, Morfin was the only wizard they knew to be around, he had already served time in Azkaban, they needed a culprit,and he gave them a confession with a wand that probably revealed to be the murder weapon with priori incatem. End of the story. Thought IF they'd cared to investigate the case more into details they have realised the muggles were related to one brilliant orphan wizard that was still at Hogwarts, and that he was born from Merope Gaunt and Riddle Sr. An irphaned wizard resenting his muggle familly for abandonning him, meeting his fanatic uncle seeking revenge... Investigators could've at least made it very dangerous for LV to stay around. Imagine what effect it would've had on his plan if it was revealed to his fellow slytherine student he was a mudblood!

the MoM can't see if its under age magic only that it iss in the vavinity of a person who is under age

You might want to try reading the books, pal. This was fully explained in HPB.

Actually, the Trace is a new thing. Because there's a mention of Lily demonstrating magic for her parents at home while she was at school. Keep in mind that there are also people who homeschool their children in magic (as stated by J.K. Rowling) and it seems that Morphin did NOT go to Hogwarts, so he would have performed underage wizardry on a daily basis because of his schooling. That, and the Trace is a relatively new development.

"I can think of four plausible explanations for this: (1) It is possible that the Trace wasn't in use at the time. I don't recall J.K. ever stating when the Ministry started using it. (2) Tom Riddle, being very knowledgeable about magic even at 16, may have figured out a way to avoid detection. (3) The Ministry may have detected the use of magic via the Trace, but then concluded that an underage wizard was simply nearby at the time and wasn't the one who cast the spell. Indeed, they may have been simply unwilling to believe that a child could have murdered three people in cold blood with the Avada Kadavra curse. (4) With a confession from Morfin - who was probably someone the Ministry wanted locked up anyway - they simply closed the investigation without bothering to tie up all the loose ends. It happens in real life all the time." Thank you for giving this some thought. While I don't find #1 very plausible (I think Dumbledore would have told Harry there was no trace at the time when Harry asked how Valdy wasn't traced) the other 3 are quite possible. Also, we couldn't have found out which answer was right because Dumbledore couldn't know which happened. Although maybe he should have discussed the possiblities with Harry when he told him about the murders. Thanks again!

I can think of four plausible explanations for this: (1) It is possible that the Trace wasn't in use at the time. I don't recall J.K. ever stating when the Ministry started using it. (2) Tom Riddle, being very knowledgeable about magic even at 16, may have figured out a way to avoid detection. (3) The Ministry may have detected the use of magic via the Trace, but then concluded that an underage wizard was simply nearby at the time and wasn't the one who cast the spell. Indeed, they may have been simply unwilling to believe that a child could have murdered three people in cold blood with the Avada Kadavra curse. (4) With a confession from Morfin - who was probably someone the Ministry wanted locked up anyway - they simply closed the investigation without bothering to tie up all the loose ends. It happens in real life all the time.

Underage magic...? Avada Kedavra is an unforgivable curse guys... The Mom ll find it out for sure... Thats how they found... And in the Half Blood Prince, its mentioned that Voldy was in 6th yr or 7th yr at Hogwarts, which means he's not underage...

2 things: Petunia was too young to be accountable. Ron covers this somewhere, can't recall where, sorry. Book 4 mentions small children riding mini broomsticks at the World Cup campgrounds. MoM pays attention to underage for 11-16 year olds. 2nd: The Ministry failed to perform Priori Incantatum. Or did V use Morfin's wand? And wouldn't it be clear that Morfin was confunded, or was he too off the deep end already for them to notice or care? LOVE the books, but this one always bothered me.

Please note that with regards to the underage magic rule, I find it hard to believe that the Ministry was really looking very well considering PETUNIA would say this in Book 1, Ch4: " Oh she got a letter just like that and disappeared of to that - that school - and came home every holiday with her pockets full of frog spawn, turning teacups into rats." Meaning magic was being done at the Evan's homes before Lily (first witch of the family) was of age.

The book does explain this. Dumbledore says that the ministry did not care to closely investigate the muggle murders because a) they were muggles, and b)Morphin was a hateable person who fit the crime so perfectly that no investigation was seen as needed.

um.. this is explained in the book.. voldy tampers with his mind to make him think he did it, hence him confesing to the MoM , when he confessed, the MoM didnt do further investigations and just went with it, morphin said he did it, MoM passes judment of the " confessed culprit"

AND they blamed Morphin because they do not know who to blame, and there should be someone responsible for killing the Riddles.

yea the MoM can only detect magic and where it is used. Thus if magic is used in a muggle house (the Dursley's) they know it was Harry. Harry is explained this but I forget which book. They even give the example of Fred, George, and Ron being able to use magic at the Burrow because no one would be able to know who casts it.

MOM only detects underage wizardry where there shouldn't be any (like Privet Drive, for example,) they don't detect who used magic, just that there was a usage of magic.

Didn't he give a full confession?

"That was a long time ago, maybe the Trace was a new thing" *facepalm* STOP TRYING TO EXPLAIN PLOTHOLES! It doesn't matter if mistakes like this one can be explained, the point is that the book *DIDN'T* explain it, thus it is a PLOTHOLE.

That was a long time ago, maybe the Trace was a new thing

I noticed this flaw as well. Even if the MoM thought that Morphin had killed the Riddles they would have seen that Voldy was there when they died, because the magic was done around him.

the ministry can see where magic happens but they dont know who is doing it. Say ron does magic in his house it may look like his mom does it.

...it can be used on non humans though. Hermione turns herself into a cat in the CoS.

First of all, Veela are most definitely magical creatures, just as much as giants. Humans do not simply turn into weird harpy things when they get angry. About the thing that half-humans can turn into humans but humans can't turn into half-humans, this makes some sense, but the way Lupin says it, he seems to suggest that Polyjuice Potion is for humans and humans only. Of course, this could be a mistake on Lupin's part.

The potion only works with human hair, no one would be able to impersonate Fluer because she's not fully human, but she can impersonate Harry because he is. Lupin didn't need to check Hagrid because no one would be able to impersonate a half giant because the potion simply wouldn't work.

If Harry were to take Polyjuice Potion containing one of Fluer's hairs it wouldnt work because Fluer isnt fully human, but Fluer can be transformed into a Harry as Harry is FULLY human.

cause there is a difference between being a gaint and being a veela, it could be lik comparing a fish to a monkey for all we know

it was in the deathly halos

Great find, I wondered that myself especially since the two events were so close together. I think the best explanation is that veela are pretty much human... there isnt much elaboration on what they actually are in the species. Neither giants nor veela, goblins, and other human-like creatures arementioned in fantastic beasts.

I think he probably means that no one can take polyjuice potion to look like Hagrid since he is half giant. Then it would makes sense that Fleur can take the potion, but maybe no one can transform into her by taking it.

Veela hair has been used in wands... It's been a pretty well-known fact since book one that only components from magical creatures are suitable for that. Thus, veela are creatures and Fleur is not 100% witch. I'm gonna have to agree that this is a plot hole.

"each team brings creatures from their own country as mascots." I don't think this is a strong argument. The definition of a "creature" can be based on folklore. In the real world, dwarves where seen as 'creatures' by or mythology, although they're just humans with growing difficulties, illnesses or genetic defects etc. What I'm trying to say is that the Bulgarian team bringing Veela's as "creatures" doesn't disprove that they aren't witches- just that their 'abnormal' attribute means they're seen as creatures by folklore. Therefore, I agree with the comments that say if Fleur and Veelas in general, are just witches with an added attribute, the potion should work on them fine. Plus, I also agree with the comments that point out human>non human and non human> human transformation are two different kettles of fish. Therefore, no plot hole

I find out from the bottom comment :)

vila are a different creatures and can be closer to humans plus fleur is 1/4 vila where as hagrid is 1/2c giant.

In book 4, when we are introduced to veela at the Quidditch World Cup, it is said that each team brings creatures from their own country as mascots. Ireland has leprequauns, Bulgaria has veela. So leprequauns are equated with veela. That doesn't sound like "just regular witches with different powers" to me, it places veela squarely in the "creature" category. With Fleur being 1/4 Veela, perhaps the polyjuice potion should NOT have worked on her. (unless we are to think that she's "human enough" by being 1/4 instead of 1/2 something other than human, but that's an extremely weak argument.)

Yeah, I've always looked at as the Veela are a large line of witches who have inherited another "power" along with the ability to do magic. Just like how some wizards are parsalmouths (particularly ones descended from Salazar Slytherin), some have the gift of divination, some are Metamorphmaguses, etc.

*Facepalm* ...I think you mean the Deathly Hallows, not the Half-Blood Prince. Anyway, yeah, Veela are just different types of witches. Still basically human. Magic affects them basically the same.

Veela, according to the legends, (which JK Rowling went by as shown in her other book) are just witches, except with a different type of magic.

Polyjuice isn't made for Human into animal tranformation, but I don't think it says anything about animal into Human. Wouldn't that mean the same for Half/part humans into humans?

I don't think you're wrong, I think that Hagrids mother was a gaintess, but it was Fluers Grangmother that was veela. Maybe it's because she is more human that Hagrid?

that makes sence, but Isn't the polyjuice potion only meant for human transformation? I donj't just mean human's transforming into other humans, I mean Other animals/ half breeds transforming into humans. Or have I got it wrong too by saying that?

giants are already known to be resistant to magic and lupin says it wouldn't work on half-giants, I'd assume that the polyjuice potion doesn't work with giant blood. It could still work for other species or half-humans.

wouldn't the weasley twins see scabbers? Im sure peter's death was publicly known.

"He did in the movie... He saw "Peter Pettigrew" outside the door and walked outside to find Snape coming" don't talk about the freaking movie. you lo(except for a couple of you) are a bunch of amateurs. why would you even care about the movie, its a load of crap

he could easily have been running around at night with out ron knowing

by the time harry got the map, scabbers had already attempted to fake his own death, and was outside of the castle, (remember they discovered him at hagrids?) at that time, the map was in lupin's possession. harry never had the chance to see him on the map. the movie alters the plot and shows harry seeing him on the map, but it never happens in the book.

He did in the movie... He saw "Peter Pettigrew" outside the door and walked outside to find Snape coming

didn't peter run away from ron

I'll have to check the book, but I don't think that Harry used the map between finding out who Pettegrew was and when "Scabbers" faked his death.

that is not a plot hole nor is my what happens at 4 Privet Drive from when Harry gets there to when we read the next book i'm jk about the Durslys being a plot hole

who the heck cares! this is one of the stupidest ones on here u may as well say what happens at the Durslys when we don't read it is a plot hole for god shake

Not a plot hole. There are several logical explanations as to how he got the map back, but JKR does not tell us. Things that are not told to us are not, in themselves, plot holes.

Guys, I'm reading the defense comments for these plot holes about how JK Rowling "said in an interview" or "said later on" etc. some explaination. I love her and I love these books, but just because she covered up for the plot holes afterwards doesn't not make them plot holes. The explainations need to be within the book, not said later on. Let us just accept that even awesome things are not perfect :)

this is more thatn 20.....

J.K. Rowling mentioned in an interview that Harry sneaked back into the office and retrieves it!

during fake moody's confession he distinctly mentions "themap " dumbledore asks him for a clarification, and moody/crouch replies"potter's map of hogwarts". dumbledore is also the one who opens moody's trunk, so wouldnt he have searched it again (after the interrogation,probably returned like that invisibility cloak was in the first book) and given harry his map back? especially so because it has been repeatedly mentioned that harry was dumbledore's favourite student at hogwarts, regardless of his rule-breaking, so he wouldnt have thought twice about returning it, since its also one of harry's last possesions from his father...

People. Not everything that Harry does in the books makes it into the pages. Come on. You're really reaching now

in the days that he was a little lost in himself he could easily have gotten it from moody's office

I bet anything Dumbledore gave it back to him. That's what I always assumed anyhow.

You could speculate an hour about this, but I wouldn't mark this as a plot hole. If Rowling should explain everything what happens, it would be ridiculous. E.g. there is a Quidditch training and suddenley - the next paragraph - Harry is back in the Common Room of Gryffindor. Strange? How is that possible? Did they Apparate? That's not possible at Hogwarts... and so on

After knowing it is fake Moody and when Harry was remembering about the Marauder's map, he could've simply said "Accio Map"... A simple summoning charm.... :)

JK Rowling says he walked backed into the empty office and got it from Moody's desk. Wow, wasn't that simple? Have an open mind, people.

He gets it back when they're in Moody's office at the end. ^ It's not really due to J.K. Rowling being a faulty writer- if she stated every single thing that happened to everything, it'd be like every other children's book. The fact that it makes sense in a believable way (not the magic part) means that she doesn't have to state every single detail and we still get the whole story.

"It doesn't specifically say how he got it back (which it should), but it also doesn't negate the possibility of there being a very simple explanation, unlike with other errors." Wheter the explanation might have been simple or not, the books didn't explain how Harry got the map back, therefore it's a PLOTHOLE. "Lupin gave it back to him!" *facepalm* Lupin gave him the map in book three. We're talking about the book FOUR.

It doesn't specifically say how he got it back (which it should), but it also doesn't negate the possibility of there being a very simple explanation, unlike with other errors.

He just sneaked into the office at the end of term and retrieved it

Or maybe he managed to get it back after the real Moody was discovered?

Maybe ita not a matter of seeing you but more of a matter of sensing a soul or presence and knowing whats on their mind

They didn't. They heard the pumpkin being chopped and heard/saw the crows flying away, but didn't actually see him killed.

1. The rock-throwing incident never happened in the book. 2. Buckbeak's execution was implied, but not actually seen (in both the book and the movie).

People miss the point that Harry both is and ISN'T a horcrux. That is to say that Voldemort's proper horcruxes he made with a spell and were meant to work in certain ways. Harry was not like that, he was just an accidentally shed piece of soul. So, no, he wouldn't have the same properties. Plus, as Dumbledore noted, it's not wise to create a living horcrux, because the will of living being is separate from, and can overcome, the influence of the hidden piece of soul placed within.

That isn't how Horcruxes work. A horcrux houses a part of your soul, because a part of your soul is kept safe it tethers the rest of your soul to existence. When Voldemort's body was destroyed what was left (less than spirit, less than the meanest ghost) was the portion of his soul that was in his body, trying to find a bodily host again.

They were also inside the Fidelius charm ... from what I gather, you can't aparate or disaparate within it's confines... also it was sudden and they did not have their wands as stated in the other comment....

It was a sudden attack, they didn't even have their wands on them, that's cleared stated.

Marrietta had already confessed that there was a meeting in that room at that time and because that list was found in the room an explanation had to be made for its presence. So Dumbledore came up with one that explained it in a way that covered up that they had been meeting there for months. -- It's also doubtful that they could explain that they had put the list there on the day of the meeting because, as was overheard, they hadn't decided on a D.A. meeting place at the Hogs Head.

But even if she summoned it,it wouldn't come out of her wand,it would come towards her from wherever she summoned it from.this is proven by the firebolt in the fourth book, it didnt appear next to Harry,it flew from the place it was TO him.

She summoned it from somewhere.

I think that prefects were two fifth and two sixth graders from each house every year. I´m not absolutely sure, though. And as for them being selected, I would imagine the Head of House discussing the matter with Dumbledore. Tonks says in the 5th book that her Head of House stopped her from being a prefect and later on Dumbledore explains to Harry why he didn´t want him to be a prefect. That shows that both the headmaster and the head of house can influence the choice.

He stunned Gregorovitch after taking the wand. He did defeat him by force. It says so in the book.

The better question may be how exactly did dumbledore defeat grindlewald in the first place, if the wand was truly unbeatable? The book clearly states it was used in that duel.

he stole it so he forcefully took it without the previous owner's consent...I think that's enough to make him the rightful owner if I'm not very much mistaken

To the person who said Harry had a trace on him - the trace does not go into effect until after the wizard's/witch's 11th birthday - this is how they can do accidental magic and not get caught.

Honestly this one is easy. For 2 reasons. The book reason: both were described as NOT having wands when Voldemort attacked. They couldn't leave. You can't apparate without a wand. And, if you don't like that one...the logic reason: They, most likely, had a charm on their house to prevent people from just apparating in or out like Hogwarts does. They have the most powerful dark wizards and witches after them, I'd rather my friends have to walk a bit than possibly be surprised by Bellatrix sitting in my living room.

I would assume Harry had a trace on him, and the infiltrated MoM could have tracked them down to no end.

I just don't think that she'd be able to leave James there, but just a thought. But anyway, if they did apparate (Sorry forgot how it's spelt), because of the prophecy, Voldermort would still go to hunt them down anyway.

If there was a spell to evaporate water as soon as it was conjured, forcing someone to go to the lake and drink water, don't you think there was a spell preventing all of the things you mentioned?

I believe J.K. has stated that she wanted the books to start off with an innocent, carefree atmosphere at Hogwarts, and have the place become gradually more somber and even dangerous as time went on. In any event, I don't think it was ever specifically stated that they did NOT sing the school song.

Its a kind of "Whoo First Day Back!" thing, I think.

Not enough time throughout the movies. The other more important plot points won out.

They were living in Godric's Hollow long before they were being protected by the Fidelius Charm, which would have been when the letter was written. After it was set up, she presumably wouldn't have been able to visit anymore

The secret-keeper isn't necessarily the only one who KNOWS the secret - he's just the only one who can tell anyone else. The Potters may have arranged for Peter Pettigrew to tell Batilda where they lived, because they trusted her and wanted some company. But according to the way the charm works, Batilda would not then have been able to tell anyone else, so the secret would remain safe.

The other day, I saw someone who must have been in his late 50s wearing a University of Colorado sweater. People often wear clothing showing their school long after they stop going there. The fact that Cho was wearing robes with a Hogwarts crest doesn't mean she was still a student.

In the book it makes special note of the fact that Cho is one of the people who shows up through the painting after being notified by Neville. In the movies I don't think it was ever mentioned she was a year older, just that she was a Ravenclaw, so it isn't necessarily a movie plot hole if she shows up. Even Katie Bell's presence could be explained, as realistically, anyone who misses almost an entire year of school should repeat it.

The book didn't show the train leaving for Hogwarts during Harry's seventh year. The movie erroneously showed Cho Chang on the Hogwarts Express--and Katie Bell as well--when both would've already graduated. If, in the book, Cho was in the Room of Requirement with the other Hogwarts students when Harry got there, she may have arrived either to hide from the Ministry and Death Eaters, or to help the DA eventually defeat Voldemort.

Cho must have been contacted by Neville through the galleon. It was in the film were she wore the uniform. Not JK's fault!

In the book she arrives after Harry, having been contacted by Neville along with the rest of the D.A. and the Order.

I have to agree with you, Cho was wearing Hogwarts robes like she was still attending the school, which she wasn't... And she was in line with the other Ravenclaws.....

Realky? Harry's old quidditch was there too. So where the twins. You also forget Cho was in d.A and had a coin she would have got the message Neville sent on the coin.

Of course they know. DE: Hey look, I got a notification on my phone, it says that there is a taboo broken at (insert GPS coordinates) . 5 minutes later: DE: Why can't I see this place? Basically, it lets people know that there is a alert at this place. All the DEs know there is a house here, they just can't get in. Merely knowing that the house is there is not enough, otherwise Voldemort wouldn't need to Pettigrew to betray the order he, would just need to know that the house is there

This person's actually correct. This is a potential plot hole. It shouldn't matter that Grimmauld Place is protected by enchantment since they should have been stripped when they broke the Taboo. It being Unplottable is also not a valid excuse since the enchantment that made it so should've been stripped away at the same time. It being under the Fidelius is ALSO not a valid reason for its continued protection since both Harry and Hermione, both being Secret Keepers, said the Taboo'd name several times, thus revealing the Secret of their location. The only way to fill this plot hole would be if either the enchantments on the house were more powerful than the Taboo (such as the ancient protections around Hogwarts) and that the Fidelius Charm's Secret cannot be revealed in this way (though if the Secret can be shared by grabbing someone when they Apparate into the protected zone it should conceivably be shared by breaking a Taboo too).

In the book, it clearly says that THERE WERE DEATH EATERS OUTSIDE THE HOUSE, they just couldnt get in because of the enchantments done on the house

They don't use the fidelius charm in the forest, just a lot of protective charms.

It was only turned into a taboo in the 7th book

The house of black (or Grimmauld place) is un-plottable and under the fideus charm (sp?) ergo, even if they were alerted of people saying his name in the house, they wouldn't be able to trace it or find it. this also explains why death eaters stood patrol outside the row of houses (:

This doesn't have any technical explanation, but there is a mention of why this happens. The potion he drinks is designed so any water other than the lake water... will not be able to come near it. So, even by spraying Aguamenti (which can be sent out in great jets or in a fountain like stream... said in the book) directly in the mouth, the water would still not be able to go near it, much like when Dumbledore was putting his hand over the basin. He couldn't go past a certain point. As I said earlier, Aguamenti doesn't always come out like a jet, it's like any other spell. It can be weak or strong, depending on wizard and intent.

The aguamenti spell would be to strong to put directly into someones mouth and also it wouldent have made it as interesting!

The problem was the potion, not the cup. Harry wouldn’t have been able to pour water into Dumbledore’s mouth. The potion made sure that the only water he could drink was from the lake. The cup has nothing to do with it. Even though it was Dumbledore’s cup.

Dumbledore conjured it, and I'm pretty sure that Harry was panicking. He wasn't thinking straight and wasn't going to think about sending water straight into Dumbledore's mouth, the lake was almost logical. Also, he could have killed Dumbledore. The water could get stuck in his throat, and having the water that fast when he needs it so much is dangerous.

Dumbledore conjured that goblet.

Haha I wondered that. He could have conjured water and poured it from the wand into Dumbledore's mouth, or poured it into his hands, or something... but naw, I guess waking the zombies was a better idea. >_>

just rating this down because it's discussed better in another question above.

And Snape, as the future headmaster, would have known Voldemort's plans for the school and would have told Dumbledore.

He probably knew at least some of the secret passages into the school, so he could have snuck back in during the holidays.

JKR has offered an explanation to this, I think it has its own flaws but it is an explanation of a sort. There aren't any wolves in the forest but there is a wolf pack. The core of this pack was born from the very rare union of two werewolves that mated under the full moon while they were werewolves. The offspring are wolves, a bit more beautiful and intelligent than normal wolves, but still only wolves. A speculation on The Harry Potter wiki is that the werewolf cubs that diary Riddle says Hagrid was raising under his bed were these wolf cubs. And JKR confirms the idea that Dumbledore and the staff are fully aware that there are no werewolves in the forest, but let the rumor spread in order to frighten the students away from exploring inside......... To me this still explanation has the problem that even if they were conceived while the pair were werewolves, they would have still gestated while the mother was human, 27 days out of 28 days in a cycle. It seemsto me that that should still mean they'd be more human than wolf... or did the poor woman actually give birth to puppies?

I think it was a like wives tale type thing to scare children from the forest. I don't think werewolves were living in it. I think it was just something the wizarding world finds scary so they attributed it to sounds they heard in the forest.

hagrid never actually mentions, it, also some werewolf live away from human civilisations, also rumors might still be circling from lupins or other werewolfs days

^ continuing my comment above... the only werewolves described in the books are Lupin, Greyback, and an unfortunate fellow in St. Mungo's. All of them are wizards. We do not know what happens when a muggle is bitten by a werewolf. It may be that, just as only wizards can come back as ghosts, only wizards can cycle back and forth between human and wolf. Muggles who are bitten by werewolves simply become wolves and stay that way. Pure speculation, of course.

It seems that a werewolf is considered to be a very horrifying creature to most wizards; much more so than, say, dragons or thestrals or even vampires. Since the Forbidden Forest is supposed to be, well, Forbidden, it may be that these rumors are spread deliberately to keep the students out. It's also possible that there are different degrees of lycanthropy, and that under certain conditions, the change into wolf form can become permanent. Fenrir Greyback certainly seemed to be tending that way.

It was later explained that many werewolves (maybe most even?) live segregated from wizard society due to the extreme prejudice they face. It seems like the forbidden forest would make an excellent place for a werewolf to reside.

The only reason for the order to guard it instead of just having somebody smashing the prophesy is that they used the prophesy as bait to force Voldemort into the open. Except for Arthur Weasley getting maimed and Sirrius getting killed the plan worked almost perfectly.

The prophecy actually gives subtle hints about Harry being a horcrux, stating that the Dark Lord "will mark him as his equal". This would have alerted Voldemort to what Harry really was, and that is why Dumbledore wanted to keep it from him. Voldemort was at a disadvantage for evidence that Harry was a horcrux.

It seems Dumbledore already knew details about the prophecy and the order simply did not want Voldemort to have access to it . So easy enough solution ... sneak Harry into the ministry one night make him retrieve the prophecy and destroy it ... why all the fuss about guarding it ...

Well, for one he wanted to find out how to kill him. But also, he needed to know that Harry wasn't the stronger wizard, that there was another factor that night. It was his pride getting ahead of him; he needed reassurance that he was the most powerful wizard in existence.

he wanted t hear the rest of the prophesy he only heard apart of it he wante to know if the prophesy said anything about how to kill harry

I think the Order wanted to guard because Voldemort wanted it so badly and was concentrating basically all of his efforts on something that he really didn't need. This way he was sort of distracted from his usual regime of killing people and taking over the world.

As it turns out, he would have gained nothing at all - except for the knowledge that he had made his own worst enemy. But of course, he had no way of knowing that in advance. The odd thing is that Dumbledore would have known this to be true, and so I have to wonder why the Order of the Phoenix bothered to protect it. It had no useful information for Voldemort anyway, so why not just let him have the darn thing?

Having been thwarted a number of times, Voldemort wanted to know if the prophecy said anything about how to overcome the odd connection between he and Harry.

Dumbledore may have visited Sirius there is no proof he didn't and if he didn't it's probably because he couldn't but he must have helped him keep sane for all those years somehow with hope and some form of communication, but remember at the time he was chasing Voldemort's leads and probably knowing Sirius was innocent, Sirius wasn't a must talk to regarding Voldemort's whereabouts. When Snape almost got accidentally killed by Lupin (as a werewolf) Dumbledore told Snape not to say anything. I assume Dumbledore knew what they were doing as he kept a close eye on his students and must have noticed rip closed or nude James, Sirius and Pettigrew transforming back at some point. I think he knew personally.

Dumbledore by being Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot would not have any problem securing a visit. He did it for Morphin after all. So the only conclusion is that he chose not to. Kind of surprising since it clear that Dumbledore spent the better part of two decades tracking down any and every bit of information on Voldemort. I would have expected him to interrogate every death eater in Azkaban including assumed traitor Sirius Black.

Apparently you can visit people in Askabam. Crouch was able to with his wife anyway but maybe he was high enough in the ministry to bend the rules a bit.

not really proven that dumbledore hadnt guest

I don't believe it was ever stated that you *could* visit an Azkaban prisoner. Other than the Minister of Magic himself, as he did in the third book. For your second question (which was worded weird, but I think I got it), it does make sense that Dumbledore didn't know that James, Sirius and Peter were animagus. Just as Lupin stated in book 3 they were all too ashamed that they had broken such huge laws and risked people's lives by having a werewolf on the loose with them. James and Sirius probably DID use there powers to transform in War 1 (not 2), just didn't let Dumbledore know what they were up to.

I didn't understand your second question, but for your first one: I guess they just went along with what the ministry said. They both found him to be guilty and so they decided not to interrogate him. He was described to be a nut job who killed many innocent people, so the Minsitry, no matter what Albus said, would still put him in jail.

"You obvioulsy didn't even read the end of the last book or watch the movie- in both it says/shows that Harry BREAKS the wand" No. YOU obviously haven't read the last book. Harry doesn't break it.

This is a very valid point. To everyone who says that only Harry, Ron, and Hermione (plus the paintings), would know where it was is ignoring the fact that if Harry was defeated, and the wand was not on him, or if the wand they took from Harry, his original Phoenix feather wand, did not perform like the Deathstick was supposed to it'd be logical to assume that Harry must have hidden the real wand somewhere. It's not hard to learn who Harry's two best friends were at the time where Voldemort said he took it from originally. Any dark wizard worth their salt would have realized that they needed to either go after the information directly from Ron and Hermione or to investigate the former resting place on the off chance that Harry had returned it there long before.

I guess if he was defeated he could go back and destroy it. Simple enough

He said where he got the wand from in front of the crowd, but he only told Ron, Hermione, and Dumbledore's picture that he was going to put it back. A random dark wizard would have no idea what he did with it.

HARRY DOES NOT BREAK THE WAND IN THE BOOK, ONLY IN THE MOVIE! I was disappointed that he broke the wand AND neglected to fix his phoenix and holly before he made such an idiot move in the movie. Break it, fine-- but fix the phoenix wand FIRST!

He did break it in the movie... And he didnt even fix his old wand. I was a disappointed lady at the end of that movie.

She did that in case she goes bankrupt and needs another books deal Dark Wizard takes the wand, stalks Harry in order to kill him and become the master... Auror Harry must figure out who the Villain is and overcome him... I'd read it.

No one other than Harry, Ron, Hermione and the portraits at Hogwarts know what happens to the wand! Everyone believes that it's true allegiance lies with Harry, but also that it is the wand of destiny, it couldn't be destroyed or taken away unless by a really powerful wizard, if that was the case, I'm sure Harry would first retrieve the wand!

I assumed by "where it came from" that Harry was referring to Death. The easiest method of getting rid of the Elder Wand (or any of the Hallows) would be to toss them through the Veil at the Department of Mysteries, thus returning them to Death.

Also wanted to mention, Because Harry is not carrying around the wand, there could be a long long chain of new owners who don't even know they own the wand. Someone could disarm him and not know of the wand and then someone could disarm that person and so on and so on. So by the time someone is searching for the wand he will have a very hard time finding the chain of people who were the owners. It's much easier to track when the people carry around the wand.

I believe that he did mean Dumbledore when he said he will put it back where it came from. Dumbledores grave from then on probably had every enchantment/protection put onto it as they could. And Harry only told like 3 people that he was placing it back and I don't think destroying it was feasible because of its power. Also he would not have given it to Olivander because Harry never really liked or fully trusted him because of his admiration of dark powers.

In addition to everything above, I would imagine that Dumbledore's tomb will probably be given a great deal of magical protection going forward. Dumbledore was well-loved and many people were probably outraged that his tomb would be opened and desecrated. The wizarding community would likely see to it that such a thing would not happen again.

I just think that no one would dare try to steal it from Harry.

everybody would assume harry had it and would not check dumbledore's grave, plus its creepy to take the wand out of the grave of such a great wizard. Harry could have ment somewhere else, but i doubt it :)

I assumed 'where it came from' did refer to Dubledore's tomb; returning it to the Peverell brother's grave wouldn't be back where it came from because that was Ignotus Peverell's grave- the youngest brother and owner of the cloak. The eldest Peverell brother who originally owned the wand was Antioch, and I don't think his grave is ever mentioned...

An amendment to the above: Harry wasn't public about what he was going to do with the wand. Voldemort announced where the wand was taken, so a clever dark wizard could figure out where the wand was if Harry wasn't using it.

I like the theory of returning it to the Peverell brother's grave, but a clever dark wizard with the knowledge of the Deathly Hallows tale may search the graveyard in Godric's Hallow as well, given Harry's public clues about returning the wand. Grindelwald and Lovegood knew that the Peverells were buried in Godric's Hallow, so it must be somewhat common knowledge. I think JK has opened a gateway to writing another book

Voldemort never had the Elder Wand. Dumbledore had it, but then he was disarmed by Draco Malfoy, who was then disarmed by Harry. When he said "back where it came from" he meant the Perverell brother.

Harry did indeed tell everyone about where the wand came from and why he was its master. I suspect that he may have done this in part because he was really telling the WAND about it - which may not have been necessary, but Harry was covering his bases. So that may not have been as stupid as it seemed. Insofar as his plans to return it to Dumbledore's tomb, only he, Ron, and Hermione know about that; he said that part while in Dumbledore's office. Well, all the portraits know it too, but I imagine that they have enough respect for Dumbledore that they'll keep quiet about it. Harry could then go on to tell the rest of the world that the Elder Wand has been destroyed. Why not just destroy it in the first place? Well, perhaps he thinks that MAYBE he'll need it someday. Harry's had a difficult life, and keeping this powerful weapon in reserve just in case he needs it again sounds like sensible long-range planning to me.

I've wondered about this one too. It seems that Harry is betting that no wizard will ever defeat him in a duel for the rest of his life. I can certainly foresee that some dark wizard wannabe might want to take on the Great Harry Potter who defeated Voldemort, just to prove himself. It really would make a lot more sense to snap the wand in half. Or, perhaps he could give it to Ollivander - the wandmaker would certainly respect the Elder Wand enough to keep it out of the wrong hands, and he's probably not too far from dying a natural death.

She also dropped Muggle Studies

Schools don't tend to schedule classes for the convenience of a single student. Classes overlap in any school schedule. I can't tell you how may times I've looked at a course list and found courses I'd like to take overlapping with each other.

Grindelwald fired a stunning spell at gregovitch before leaving, so he defeated the rightful wonder of the elder wand and the wand's allegiance passed to him

I like the first response to this question. We don't know how Gregorovitch came into possession of the wand either, he might not have gotten in a grand or impressive manner either but we do know HOW he used it, he used it as an aid in his wandmaking, as a model for his other wands, and presumably didn't use it to perform great magic by itself. If a wand can chose its master then it does make sense that the Elder wand would choose Grindelwald, who meant to use it in its "proper" fashion.

The wand chooses the wizard. That's repeated throughout. the books. If the wand chose Grindelwald, it belonged to him. Voldy also thought you had to kill the wizard to gain the wand, but he was wrong as described by Dumbledore in the last book.

Both Harry and Tom grew up in less then ideal environments. They both saw only Hogwarts as home. They are both parselmouths and look somewhat similar, at least when Tom is still Tom. As the hat wanted Harry in Slytherin obviously Harry and Tom shared personality traits. Everyone who comments that Harry is like Voldemort actually say he is like Tom. Rowena was reminded of Tom not Voldemort. After Tom started splitting his soul is when the similarities started to fade until Voldemort was created and most of the similar things between them ceased to be. Also both of them are Half-bloods.

Harry has muggle blood due to his mother being muggle-born. Therefore, he is not a pure-blood wizard.

A Horcrux is made od two things, a bit of soul and the object it is housed in. The objects by themselves aren't indestructible, it's the soul that makes the object a horcrux that makes it so strong. The fang (or whatever) doesn't destroy the object, it destroys the soul hidden in the object and it is the destructive action of destroying the hidden bit of soul that destroys the object. Like the diary, a normal diary would be destroyed (or at least greatly damaged) by flushing it down the toilet, but as Hermione explained in DH at the Burrow, it couldn't be destroyed by normal means.

the correct term is venomous snakes not poisonous snakes

JKR chose to refer to her basilisk as "a bloody great snake." Poisonous snakes do not have venom in all of their teeth. Ron and Hermione need not have taken them all. But I would have thought that in the intervening years the venom would have dried up.

Well, first, the diadem was destroyed by Fiendfyre. As for items of other precious metals like the locket or the cup, it all has to do with basilisk venom; it doesn't necessarily destroy the object, but the venom itself (whose only known cure is phoenix tears) poisons and kills the soul inside the object, hence destroying the Horcrux aspect of it. The basilisk venom is the only reason the Sword of Gryffendor can destroy the locket, for having killed the basilisk in Harry's Second Year by stabbing it in the mouth, the Sword's magical property of taking in what can make it only stronger permitted it to infuse itself with the venom.

Snape was never the owner of the wand. Malfoy was because he disarmed Dumbledore, then Harry disarmed Malfoy. So Harry's wand

Snape killed Dumbledore but Draco Malfoy disarmed him therefor the elder wand responded to him and Harry disarmed Malfoy when he was at Malfoy Manor so the wand was rightfully Harry's..this is explained in the MOVIE and the BOOK

He is however innocent of the crimes he is accused of.. I find it unlikely he would be sentenced to Azkaban for life for this. It would only be for a short time, a few years, at most, which he had already served.

They are, it is mentioned in DH.

they were used in the battle of hogwarts

who would want to go near a flying hagrid, when you are riding on a flimsy broom?

Death Eaters would have expected Harry to use a broom so that anyone on a broom would be who they would go for first. He was safer not being on a broom. Pretty sure that was in the book.

It wasn't 6 brooms, 1 random bike. A few of them had thresthrals also, so it was more of a mix.

actualy its not because 1)harry likes brooms and 2)the death eaters dont really expect the OoP to trust hagrid with somthing as important as this

There are BOOKS written about Harry. Don't you think there's a passage in some history book saying "a baby boy defeated the most powerful Dark Wizard of all time and left with nothing but a scar in the shape of a lightning bolt"? They probably interviewed Dumbledore for the info.

It's not like it was on his ass or anything.

I'm officially done reading this now. These "plot holes" are just becoming Q&As. There are several ways that other people might have found out.

Dumbledore or someone in the Order was probably questioned about it and that's how the information got out. After all, him having a scar from the curse isn't that important, is it? It's not like they wouldn't find out when he turned up at Diagon Alley 10 years later for his school books. No need to keep it quiet.

It's never said WHERE Hermione uses magic, on the train she said she has but not where. I always thought she was saying she used magic on the train.

It seems to me that children are allowed to do magic before they enter school, probably because the Ministry assumes they will not know much at age 11 and younger without any training. Once they begin to learn, that is when they are forbidden from using their new-found knowledge.

nope cause it could have been accidental magic for all the ministry kuse itnows it is said in the book that u cannot get in trouble for casting magic before u have learned how to

but then why did harry and ron need dobby in the basemen. They could've just disarm wormtail and use his wand to apparate couldn't they?

House Elves cannot take humans with them when they Apparate/Disapparate in an area that the humans themselves cannot, I'd assume. I know, you'll ask why Dobby could Apparate the prisoners out of the basement; it wasn't that there was magic that prevented them from Apparating/Disapparating, its that they had no wands.

While these comments explain why he himself couldn't apparate out of the cave it doesn't explain why he doesn't have Kreacher take him out with him. Although there's a question as to whether or not the potion would have been lethal to him even without being dragged to his death by the infieri. Dumbledore survived in a very weakened state because he was such a powerful wizard but may have died anyway soon without aid, and maybe Kreacher survived because he has a house elf. Regulus might not have been able to. I also think it's quite possible that Regulus was suicidal by that point anyway.

It said in the books that you could not apparate into or out of the cave. Kreacher could because House Elves use different magic.

The potion apparently makes one relive the very worst moments of one's life. Regulus was a Death Eater; he'd probably done some pretty terrible things. After finishing the potion, it's likely he didn't want to live anymore.

I dont think Fred and George knew who he was. They might of thought that he was a Hogwarts student as he apeared alot on th map. Also they might of only been focusing on the passages and rooms not the people walking around.

My assumption is that when animaguses are in their animal form, they don't show up on the map.

Already above: #7

There is always something to be said for doing something by hand, the hard way, such that the effort itself shows something about how much you care for someone. I gave my mother a spice rack for Christmas last year, one which I constructed myself. I could have bought one for the same price, and considerably less effort, which would have objectively been sturdier and more attractive... but part of the gift was the effort I put into making it, and my mother appreciated it much more than a store-bought item. By digging the grave, Harry was essentially giving Dobby the gift of that effort, and demonstrating that he felt Dobby was worthy of it.

I'd also like to add that it may have seemed improper to bury an elf because they were generally regarded as less than human. They were slaves and people assumed that they don't deserve to be buried.

I think it was for a few reasons. Like the person above said it is more personal and he wanted to put some effort into it. Secondly, I think he was frankly sick of magic for the minute. It killed Dobby and loads of other friends, so he just wanted to do it normally and not worry about spells. Thirdly, he was so shaken up he probably didn't remember the right spell or want to think through how to magic it all together. When someone dies you are so shaken up you just dont want to sit there and strategise :P

is there some kind of story board version of the series without any actual text that i'm unaware of??? like SERIOUSLY, did you skip the paragraph where the EXACT answer to your EXACT question is answered? ... sheesh

Burying him with shovels probably felt much more personal than just zapping dirt out of a hole. Dobby was a close friend, and he wanted to make the effort to bury the elf himself, rather than move dirt with a flick of his wand.

*sigh* Read carefully. In the fifth book, prefects can't dodge points from EACH OTHER. They can deduct points from everyone else.

Well, even though it's never actually said, I believe that prefects CAN take points- but from their OWN house. If they could do it to any house, they would abuse it for little things because the houses dislike each other, but they wouldn't take points from their own house unless the person really deserved it, because they wanted to win the house cup.

you can take points if you're a prefect, ron had it wrong in book 5.

well they were on the HOGWARTS train

The train is property of Hogwarts, and is considered a part of the school. There has never been a single point in the book to contradict this fact. Also, since the Trace only detects magic being used around a child, most children around Wizards aren't paid any mind. It's mentioned several times that in places of high magic, the Trace is ignored because of-age wizards are using magic all the time and the parents of the children are expected to keep them in line.

Right. Because you recently sold your cow for magic beans when you were short on cash, right? Then you climbed up the beanstalk, stole the magic gold stuff and ran like stink when the giant chased you?

This is Ron you're talking about.

Not a plothole. Xenophilius states that one who doesn't look won't know, or something like that. Ron would never have thought to look at the Tale of the Three Brothers as anything more than a morality/fairy tale.

most invisibility cloaks wear out over time, because of spells or any other number of things. Harry's cloak on the other hand had been in his family for generations and it was still in perfect condition. Therefore, even Harry could tell it wasn't just a 'normal' invisibility cloak.

No one on here actually reads the books do they? Ron and Xeno both explain how so many rip off cloaks have been made which go fuzzy or blurry. Xeno is intrigued that after a whole generation Harry's is still crystal clear.

seriously? did you actually read the book?

because they make nock off invisability cloacks that are rare and start to fade after awhile, says so in the books

harry and co. always thought his cloak was really good, but only when xeno lovegood is like "but have you ever heard a cloak that NEVER wears out?" do they realize that harry's is the hallow

It is made far more likely when it is revealed that Harry is related to the Perevells, who were the original three brothers. But I've no idea otherwise...

To quote a person below me, "...a cloak imbued with a Disillusionment Charm, or carrying a Bedazzling Hex, or else woven from Demiguise hair, which will hide one initially but fade with the years until it turns opaque," and Ronald Weasley, "...but I've heard stuff about charms wearing off cloaks when they get old, or them being ripped apart by spells so they've got holes in. Harry's was owned by his dad, so it's not exactly new, is it, but it's just ... perfect!" Ron's statement is the exact same thing that Harry thought.

this can be explained by the fact dumbledore had it in his possession to examine it, and he wouldnt need it to use as he could perform a powerful enough disillisionment charm to become invisible anyway, also the fact his cloak was very old at least belonging to his father, and was still completely flawless and unaffected by charms such as accio, which other cloaks are affected by, and the fact most become faded or damaged over time. it is also obvious there are more than one as moody has at least 2 in the order of the phoenix, it was simply deduced from all this information as well as the fact there was a potential for harry to be descended from ignotus peverell that his cloak was the fable hallow

Ron said that "invisabity cloaks" are rare "not cloaks made by death".

That type of invisibility cloak is one of a kind, true. But, there are others. We learn in OOTP that Moody has at least two, and in GOF, it's mentioned that Barty Crouch Jr uses his father's cloak throughout his life as a fugitive, so obviously others exist. To quote Xenophilius Lovegood - " a cloak imbued with a Disillusionment Charm, or carrying a Bedazzling Hex, or else woven from Demiguise hair, which will hide one initially but fade with the years until it turns opaque." Obviously, there are ways of making invisibility cloaks, but they're probably not very easy or accessible, meaning that even this type is "really rare".

Actually, this is not really a plot hole, but more an obvious change of plans from JKR. I mean, it is so CLEAR that she made up the Hallows half way (though it's hard to say for the Horcruxes) - and I'm not blaming her for ANYTHING, I'm actually astonished by the way she managed to keep her story pretty much coherent (a part from a few understandable plot holes) while inventing and reinventing it book after book. Back to the invisibilty cloak, IMO it's obvious that she had no idea when she wrote PS that the cloak had to be unique, it was just a rare device that made Harry special and create a nice bond with his dead father. And actually, it's not that big a deal, because the idea of the cloak being one of an unknown amount of others is only brought up by a single sentence from Ron. In the end, it was only a mistake - it could have been worse, of course, it Harry had met someone else with a cloak similar to his. But it didn't happen.

I agree. There are many invisibility cloaks that are made by enchanting a cloak or similar, but the deathly hallow cloak is flawless and will be completely invisible forever.

Harry assumes his cloak is "the" invisibility cloak because it is flawless (i.e. no wear and tear what so ever, and its charm never seems to wear off). Its stated in the books by Dumbledore (i believe in book 7 after Harry "dies") that most lose there effectiveness over time. So many cloaks could possess the ability to conceal things, but not make them truly invisible like Harry's cloak.

Albus let him stay because he always respected Hagrid and believe him to be innocent. The MoM wouldnt let him keep his wand without proof of his innocence, so they snapped his abnormally large wand in half. Secretly, Hagrid kept his wand and mended it using spell-o tape to keep it together. Then he transformed it into a pick umbrella so no one would know that he still had it!! hehehe He was expelled as well, so that is another thing done so generously on Dumbledore's behalf. And SERIOUSLY how can you say that Albus doesnt fight for anything of value!!!!!!!!!!! that is utterly absurd and false. He fights for the rights of others, exhibited in this post, and so many other things that are a whole other conversation. Hagrid cant be reissued another wand because he never finished school. And why should he want to, he still has his very unique, story filled wand in an umbrella thing. Revealing it and asking for it to be fixed would just get him in more trouble for using magic without permission.

He wasn't a "qualified" wizard. He never finished school. I imagine he would need to complete school before being considered qualified, and perhaps unqualified wizards cannot use magic once they leave school.

as Dumbledore was master of the Elder wand which as revealed in DH has the power to repair wands, added to the fact dumbledore both like and believed hagrid to be innocent it can be assumbed he repaired the wand for hagrid and it was then hidden inside the umbrella

umm..... his umbrella is his wand.....

Clearly things did change, he was allowed to teach classes after the problem was solved.

Since his wand is supposed to be snapped and Dumbledor had given it back to him and he was using magic underhandedly for so long, I don't think he bothered to bring it up with the MoM

It's not about home, it is about coming into contact with a blood relation of Lily's at least once a year.

It's not about being near to his aunt, it's about him 'calling number 4 privet drive home'. Harry might not like the idea, but he never denies that – aside from Hogwarts – privet drive is his home.

It never says it's a Fidelius Charm that protects Harry. Which is why Voldemort and the Death Eaters were waiting for them when the group takes off (Seven Harrys). There were other enchantments to hold them off, but they still knew where Harry was. If there had been a Fidelius, the only way Voldemort would have known where to find them would have been for the Secret Keeper to tell him. No one is mentioned to be the Secret Keeper, but if one was, it would likely be Harry himself. I don't see him going around telling Death Eaters where he lives, do you?

It was my understanding that the remaining protection in Petunia's blood manifested as a Fidelius charm upon Number Four Privet Dr. with Dumbledore as Secret Keeper. When Harry is home for the summer, he is presumably the only Wizard for miles around (except for a certain Squib), so he depends on this protection. At Hogwarts and the Burrow, Harry is surrounded by his friends and protectors, with Dumbledore in toe or not too far off. Methinks this would be enough of a deterrent for a wary almost-defeated Voldemort.

Because Lily's spell protected him as long as Petuni's house was still his HOME. He went on vacation to the Burrow, he didn't live there.

I agree with the comment below . So it is definetely a plot hole. Lily's protection is not working when Harry is not in 4PV. Voldemort and DE should be able to find him in the Burrow or other places except Hogwarts.

in reply to the former comments; even if the "wards get recharged at nr4 during the little time he lived there harry would not be protected when he was living at the burrow, unless you stipulate that the "ward" follow harry himself and not nr4, witch cant be the case since he would then be protected against harm at hogwarts too (and hes obviously not), so that means that the "wards" only exist at nr4. And what is the point then of harry having to live with "abusing" relatives at all if hes not going to use this "superallmighty ward agains all evil at nr4" would it not then be better if he just stayed at the burrow or someplace better for his wellbeeing (emotionaly)? given that dumbeldore can cast the fidelious, and other strong wards.

because the only thing harry had to do to keep the project is called privet drive his home n returned every summer for a little while because after that its just him goin on vacation privet drive is still his home ever the very little time he spent there

Dumbledore clearly states Harry only has to return to Number 4 once a year and legally call it home for the protection to work.

Harry's wand was hurt by another wand's curse. I don't think wands can harm themselves and all that destruction was causes by the wand in question.

It's not like Hitler was known for killing people personally. He used troops, and raided towns, and had his people round up undesirables to kill or imprison them. Voldemort does all of this too. Destroying bridges and sending giants to destroy villages with hurricane force don't usually result in anything less than massive casualties.

To the guy with the extremely long comment below :D He did in fact start out like Hitler, if you really want to compare them. I believe it is the 5th book, where Sirius tells Harry that his brother Regalus was part of Voldemort's Death Eaters. He also goes on about how his parents supported them, and says something along the lines of: At first, a lot of wizarding families agreed with Voldemort's point of view. It wasn't until he started killing and generally becoming evil, that people find out what he was really like.

Never thought Godwin's Law would apply to a message board about Harry Potter......

READ THE BOOKS, my god. Voldemort wasn't necessarily about genocide, that may have been his ultimate goal, but he was not at that 'phase' in the books. Multiple times in the series he mentions how he wants to keep the 'pure' wizarding population as intact as possible. His goal first was to gain control of the wizarding world, THEN move on to take over the entire world get rid of muggles blah blah. Both wars he failed before completing the first 'stage' (though the second time he got significantly further). Also, like someone mentioned, Hitler didn't kill each person personally. I'm no WWII buff, but I actually doubt he did much killing at all... anyhow. Voldemort only killed important people/those that go in his way. Someone at some point in one of the books (specific I know ha...) quotes that some character "wasn't important enough to get killed by Voldemort himself". So yeah, Voldemort wasn't a terrorist or wanted to commit genocide. His goals were very different, hence, not as much killing. However, I would argue Hitler was much smarter. I've always been under the impression Voldemort went about it the wrong way... terrorizing and doing everything underground. At least Hitler won the public's trust and respect, rose to power "legally" and THEN used that trust and respect for his own evil purposes, and by then it was too late. Do you think he would have rose to power had he made his intentions clear from the beginning? Lol, forget about it. Essentially, that's what Voldemort did. Made it much harder on himself by outright declaring 'I'm evil, I hate muggles, let's purify the wizards and kill everyone else'. But that is another argument lol.

Wormtail killed twelve people with one curse. Voldemort, being much more powerful, likely could have killed several dozen with one curse.

Not to mention most of the people killed were killed in his name, by Death Eaters, not himself. Obviously all the deaths attributed to Hitler were not personally carried out by him but by his minions.

Voldemort was one of the most powerful wizard in the world. I am quite sure he knew how to use nonverbal spells as you start using them in 6th year (HBP: Snape's, McGonagall's and Flitwick's lessons). Furthermore, Voldemort didn't kill all of them, only the ones who were worthy his attention

who ever said he had to use the avada kedavra, he could have set a house with people in it on fire, cut their heads of or just plain blown them up...

he had tons of time ,many years, he could kill hundreds a day

The real question here is why the Death Eaters didn't just blow the place up or something like that.

The protection Harry has is a 2 parter, firstly, his mother dying for him (the act of protecting him itself) initiates it. Secondly, the charm/spell has to be sealed. Dumbledore realizes the opportunity and does the charm, he says so himself. In short, if Dumbledore never did the spell Harry would still have the first part, his mother's love as protection, in theory. But it was really Dumbledore's charm of blood/love that finishes it. So if you follow the logic, Voldy only overcame 1/2 of the obstacle. He never figured out or even realized he had to get around Dumbledore's part.

He didn't know that so he never bothered trying. Plus Dumbles had charms too :P

Harry, unlike his parents, had a trustworthy SecretKeeper.

The charm that stopped voldie from attacking harry at the dursley's was a charm that linked harry to his aunt petunia=> being safe under the protection of blood relatives. The charm that was undone by the resurrection using harry's blood was that of lilly's which was the sacrifice for safety. It undid lilly's charm but not dumbledore's

I recently read a fanfiction that referred to this in a roundabout way. The protections over #4 are blood wards, but Voldemort was resurrected with Harry's blood and therefore should be immune to them. So why; at any point after regaining a body, didn't Voldemort just find out where Harry lived and go directly there to kill him?

voldemort only broke the protection when he had the elder wand

voldemort didn't know harry was a horucrux

For the same reason that no one did anything when Hitler invaded Poland, perhaps. "It's not our problem" is a very common excuse not to get involved in foreign affairs. In addition, it is logical to assume that there are dark and dangerous wizards all over the world, and that while Voldemort may be the worst of them, the others are bad enough to keep their local authorities busy.

It's not just happening in England. Hogwarts is, in fact, in Scotland.

I think it's Hermione that expounds on that. Felix Felicis only goes so far, you are still limited by your own abilities. Liquid luck will only give you the luck to accomplish something you could normally do under the right circumstances - with LUCK!

Felix Felicis is extremely hard to make and if made incorrectly would be extremely dangerous. You have to be a very skilled potions master to make this. Harry doesn't know how to make it. It was given to him by Slughorn after Harry winning the competition making the best draught of living death potion. People need to read the book properly. Luck can only get you so far.

Alright, so maybe using the Liquid Luck wouldn't make everything go perfect, and enable them to find the Horcruxes stright away. But it seems weird that no one ever thinks of using it before setting off into these dire situations. Harry knows how to recreate it, it appears to be pretty simple to do, and the ingredients can't be hard to get if they are able to use them in potions lessons. It's kind of like the Time-Turner, an object easily accessible and definitely useful but never mentioned again.

Even if Harry had decided to drink the potion to find Voldemort and found him within the time limits, he still needed to destroy the horcruxes. Now, how much 'luck' it might have given him, I doubt that he would be so lucky that Voldemort had suddenly decided to taken them all to his hiding place to possibly polish them and HArry would just find him with a pile of horcruxes annd something to destroy them with and then kill Voldemort. I find this very unlikely.

Felix Felicis is very volatile and does not guarantee success, it just makes it more likely. Think of it in a muggle metaphor 'liquid luck' is like crack it can make you strong (lucky) but it doesn't make you a heavyweight champion.

yeah but he was dead for part of that time, and wizards live longer than muggles

check the harry potter wiki page for a lot of birthdays. voldemort was 71 when he was killed

Ron's aunt Muriel was born in 1889 or 1890. We just have to accept that these people became very old, possibly because of the magic.

Yeah, and Hagrid is actually 82 by now. In 1997, he was 68. That actually blew my mind! And JK stated somewhere (Sorry, not exactly sure where) that Dumbledore was born in the 1880's. So, let's say he was born in 1885. He would only be 111, NOT 150, when he died in 1996. Like JK has stated, she's not very good at math. :D

Voldemort is 3 years older than Hagrid. Hagrid was expelled in his third year for opening the chamber. Tom Riddle was a sixth year when he turned him in. Also, if the chamber was opened 50 years before the second book. Tom was 16ish. then he would be 66 in the second book and 71 in the seventh. But, he also spent 14 years without a body, so it may only be 57.

Yes. He is supposed to be that old. Dumbledore is like 150 or something when he dies at the end of the sixth book. I think it is stated somewhere (maybe not in the actual books) that Voldemort is supposed to be in his 80's.

The hallows do have their limits; they are not all-powerful devices. The cloak, for instance, is described as quite extraordinary compared to other such cloaks, but Moody's magical eye can see through it and Dumbledore is able to detect Harry's presence. The wand is powerful, but not undefeatable, or it would not have changed masters. We never learn much about the ring, but presumably it has its limitations as well. In a nutshell: a more powerful weapon does not guarantee victory.

In DH, Kings Cross, Dumbledore tells Harry that he was allowed to tame the elder wand and not to boast about it or kill with it. Besides if he had killed Voldy there would be no book 6 or 7.