Vote + to improve this toplist's ranking
Report Abuse

TOP 20 HARRY POTTER PLOT HOLES

273 items ranked

What happened to these characters and objects?

Rated 213 points - posted 7 years ago by clementine in category Books.
Click on up and down arrows to affect item's ranking
Visit our Books forum



Pages:
2

101.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Using weak spells when fighting Report Abuse
As of book four, the Stupefy-charm is widely used. It is strange that Harry and his friends still used weak spells like Expelliarmus, Petrificus Totalus or Impedimenta when fighting with the Death Eaters. Older wizards use it frequentley, but Harry didn't. How does he want to defeat Death Eaters or even Voldemort with first- and second-year spells? You can recover from Petrificus Totalus perhaps more easily than from Stupefy.
1 point - added 6 years ago by guest - 19 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
because more experienced spells use more energy if he used easy spells he could do it quicker and be more advanced at them. thankyou
Added 4 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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 !
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, -4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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?
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 8 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I think it's a metaphor for taking away someone's power.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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...
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
It's better than Flipendo.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 14 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Remember that even Harry's Expelliarmus was a match for Voldy's Avada Kedavra in the 4th book (graveyard).
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

102.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why not find Sirius by sending an Owl? Report Abuse
In Prisoner of Azkeban, when everyone is looking for Sirius Black, why not send a note to him by owl and follow said owl on a broomstick? Harry corresponds with him by owl a lot. Surely someone from the ministry (even a low level minion) could think of doing the same and following said owl?
1 point - added 6 years ago by guest - 7 comments
Comments:
Might be reaching a little, but maybe they wanted to keep Black at large to use as a scapegoat.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I doubt that it would be that easy. J.K. Rowling answers this on her website; almost all of these are answered on her website. Why does no one ever check her website? If it was that simple, they certainly wouldn't have had such a time finding Voldemort. Sirius knew of and approved Hedwig. Maybe that had a factor in it; that only if correspondance was welcomed it could be sent.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Dumbledore knew that was Sirius was innocent and in the fourth book, when he talks to HP in fire, he says he couldn't reply because the ministry WAS trying to track him but he stayed in "doggie disguise".
Added 6 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
What good would that be? If they follow it?
Added 6 years ago by guest, -3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
the minestry of magic may have tried but he would have kept the owls so they wouldn't know if the owl was sucessful
Added 6 years ago by guest, -4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I think that the reason why the Ministry didn't search for Sirius directly, using their own Aurors, was that Fudge is essentially a coward. He preferred to leave the dangerous work of tracking Sirius to the Dementors rather than risk his own people. He also probably had an inflated opinion of how effective the Dementors were, and he expected them to find Sirius quickly. After Book 3, of course, there were Ministry officials who were actively sabotaging the search for Sirius, so that's why they didn't find him at that point.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I'd surmise that the MoM may have tried this but that owls don't know how to recognize wizards transformed into dogs. While Sirius was on the run I'm sure he spent almost every moment in his doggie disguise. Also, the ministry seems, at this point, to be relying on dementors to do the job of finding Sirius.
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

103.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Electronics working within Hogwarts? Report Abuse
Several times throughout the series, we read that Hogwarts students are "checking their watches" or "looking at alarm clocks". But we know from Book 4 that electronics go haywire and do not work within the Hogwarts grounds. Easy to overlook, but mysterious all the same. How are these clocks working? Magic? Gimme a break.
0 points - added 1 year ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
They're obviously mechanical clocks and watches.
Added 1 year ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

104.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Time-Travel terror Report Abuse
If hermione and harry threw the rock, and freed buckbeak, when harry got hit in the back of the head by the rock hermione threw, (the first time, when ron, hermoine, and harry first went to hagrids house) why wasn't buckbeak freed? How could they see buckbeaks exocution if buckbeak was freed?
0 points - added 2 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
They didn't see it. Executioner washidden by a rock. They heard where the executioner chopped pumpkin and just assumed
Added 2 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

105.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
The prophecy concerning Harry and Voldemort Report Abuse
Trelawney uttered the prphecy before Harry was born, in late 1979 or early 1980, and Snape overheard half of it. He immediately relayed what he got to Voldemort, and he chose Harry But when Snape swore loyalty to Dumbledore on that hilltop and begged him to hide the Potters, it was october 1981 Either Voldmeort knew about the prophecy, but waited a year to choose Harry; Snape waited to amend his mistake; or the Potters were in hiding before Harry was born
0 points - added 3 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
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
Added 2 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

106.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Remus Lupin's name a coincidence? Report Abuse
Am i the only one who thinks it's too much of a coincidence that there are TWO wolf references in the man's name? Remus and Romulus are according to myth, two infant brothers who were nurtured by a she-wolf. Lupin probably comes from Lupos which is Latin for Wolf.... Did his parents know he was gonna be a werewolf when they named him? did they change his name after he became a werewolf... did HE change it?
0 points - added 3 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
It gets better. Per the Harry Potter Wiki, his father was Lyall Lupin (Lyall apparently being derived from a Norse word for wolf). So Remus is actually "Wolf Wolf, son of Wolf Wolf.
Added 2 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
it's just poetic license. JKR had a werewolf character, so she gave him a werewolf name. If you'd like a logical explanation, imagine that it was the name of the Lupin family being such a perfect werewolf name that caused Remus' father to offend Greyback somehow (like "you should be a werewolf" and "no one should chose to be a werewolf!") and Greyback specifically choosing Remus as a victim due to his name being doubly significant.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

107.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
What happens is someone force feeds you Unicorn blood, do you still live a cursed life? Report Abuse
What if like you feed it to a baby or something?
0 points - added 3 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
It might not affect you. It's explained that part of the "curse" is that occurs because of the action of attacking or taking the life of something so pure and innocent. If you yourself are not guilty or complicit in the killing of the unicorn, the curse might not take effect.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I'm not sure. But I think that its yes because u would still have drunk it whether force fed or otherwise......good question
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

108.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Harry's a Horcrux? I don't think so. Report Abuse
Apparently the last part of Voledmorts soul clung on to the only living thing left. Why hasn't this happened before. How could you accidently make a Horcrux its like accidently going to the moon. There must be a spell.
0 points - added 3 years ago by guest - 4 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 4 months ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Lots of other people have killed many during the war, so lots of people should have unstable souls. Bellatrix e.g
Added 1 year ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

109.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why wasn't Fawkes killed when he attacked the basilisk? Report Abuse
Fawkes wouldn't be able to close his eyes because he would need to know where to aim.
0 points - added 4 years ago by guest - 3 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

110.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Ron's wand that has duck tape on it Report Abuse
I know this isn't really a plot hole and it also kind of a stupid question.Anyway at the end of COS, Lock heat take Ron's wand. (forcefully) But in POA it says it is still Ron's wand. It has been a while since I have read Harry Potter, so I might have missed something in the book, but shouldn't that be lock heart's wand?
0 points - added 5 years ago by jj carlson - 7 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
He gets a new wand when he meets Harry in Diagon Alley in Book 3.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
It's actually 'duct' tape
Added 3 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
The wand didn't change its allegiance because Lockhart wasn't worthy.
Added 4 years ago by guest, -3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 4 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

111.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Ron's old wand vs Lock hearts wand Report Abuse
I know this isn't really a plot hole and it also kind of a stupid question.Anyway at the end of COS, Lock heat take Ron's wand. (forcefully) But in POA it says it is still Ron's wand. It has been a while since I have read Harry Potter, so I might have missed something in the book, but shouldn't that be lock heart's wand?
0 points - added 5 years ago by jj carlson - 2 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

112.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why didnt the other wizarding schools join into the battle Report Abuse
Does any one know why in the final Harry Potter book and battle does it not have any mention of the other schools joining in the battle
0 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 9 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 3 months ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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?
Added 3 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
You Cannot apparate or disapparate inside Hogwarts! Isn't anyone going to ever read Hogwarts, A History :P
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 3 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Could they not just apparate their? Sorry if it's a dumb question.
Added 4 years ago by guest, -3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
The other schools are in France and Northern Europe. Not even a fast owl could reach them before the battle was over.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Because it began an ended rather quickly, It would take a long time for them to travel there and help.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

113.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Children just disappear all the time Report Abuse
Don't the muggle government notice that children who are supposed to be at school just disappear without trace when they go to Hogwarts?
0 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 6 comments
Comments:
Homeschooling, sending them to school abroad, Hogwarts acting as a boarding school type disguise.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 8 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Most wizards live in separate communities from muggles, they wouldn't have records in the muggle world
Added 4 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
They're magic - I' sure it's not to difficult to sort out some fake paperwork
Added 4 years ago by guest, 9 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
They could have been at a boarding school... which they were
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

114.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Order/Cedric Report Abuse
why couldnt harry dissaperate with the aid of one of the wizards of age in the 5th book when the order takes him to sirius's house? why does harry keep saying the voldemort killed Cedric when it was wormtail using voldemorts wand?
0 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Technailly it was Wormtail, but he was acting on voldy's orders seeing as he couldt do it.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

115.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
I thought wizards were not able to conjure food. Report Abuse
Well, I'm quite a big Harry Potter fan but I think I found a little mistake in the books. Or perhaps I'm missing something, so please someone illuminate me. It is often stated in the Harry Potter books that food can't be conjured. However, in the second book, when Harry and Ron arrive at Hogwarts with the flying car and they don't make it to the start of term feast, McGonagall conjures a plate full of sandwiches in Snape's office. Moreover, the plate is said to refill itself whenever it is emptied. So how come McGonagall did that?
0 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 6 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 15 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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).
Added 5 years ago by guest, 23 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
mcgonagall probably summoned it from the kitchen with a fancy summoning charm that makes things just appear.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Probably summoned from the hall which is directly above them.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 9 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

116.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Port Key In harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire Report Abuse
Mad-Eye Moody (aka Barty Crouch Jr.) makes a two-way port key but why do all the trouble when he can make a one-way port key making Harry trapped there and having no way to escape?
0 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 5 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
so Voldemort could come back and take over Hogwarts after he killed Harry
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 9 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
To be honest, this has always bothered me. But the comment below explained it. Thanks!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
"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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 18 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

117.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Number of students in Hogwarts Report Abuse
Each room at Hogwarts holds 5 students. There are 7 rooms per dorm. There are two dorms per house. 5x7x2=70. There are 4 houses. 70x4=280. There are 7 years at Hogwarts. 280/7=40. Therefore there are only ~40 students able to be housed in each year at Hogwarts. Clearly there are more.
0 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 11 comments
Comments:
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?
Added 1 year ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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?
Added 1 year ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
are there co-ed tents ?
Added 5 years ago by guest, -6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
The rooms are only for the special people. Everyone else camped out in the forbidden forrest.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 24 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 12 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Magic. If they needed more or less room/space they could make it. THEY ARE WIZARDS- they can do whatever they want
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 14 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

118.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
How can the trio say Voldys name so often in the black house without being caught? Report Abuse
The name was taboo and yet they say it five times or more. It was how they got caught before at the cafe. Major plot hole
0 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 9 comments
Comments:
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
Added 5 months ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 3 years ago by Lily Rose , -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
@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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
"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?
Added 3 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
@2 below me: some spells are stronger than others. Fidelius is stronger than the taboo.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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).
Added 5 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
The name became taboo after they left the Black house
Added 5 years ago by guest, -8 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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 (:'
Added 5 years ago by guest, 11 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

119.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Snape's Portrait Report Abuse
Since Snape was headmaster, why wasn't his portrait put onto the headmaster wall after he died?
0 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 12 comments
Comments:
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!
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
"The books says Harry made sure Snape's portrait was on the wall. Where?
Added 4 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
The books say Harry made sure that his portrait was placed in the Headmaster's office.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 9 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 28 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
All of these spurious plot breakers actually occurred because the author is actually a fairly poor writer, and while her ideas were very well marketed, her writing is poor and she often appear to have forgotten aspects of her plot during her novels!
Added 5 years ago by guest, -62 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
because they werent going to go around a praise a deatheater, were they, they only consented with harry's wish when harry explained y
Added 5 years ago by guest, -4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 9 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
i think there is speculation in that Hogwarts did not recognize him as the true headmaster which perhasp is why there was no portrait
Added 5 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
The books says Harry made sure his portrait was on the wall... so it was there.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 15 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

120.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Harry the horcrux not destroyed by basilisk bite? Report Abuse
in the CoS harry was bitten by the basilisk... but why wasnt the part of voldemorts soul destroyed then?
0 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 19 comments
Comments:
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
Added 4 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Because he hadn't stabbed the diary yet. It takes in what makes it stronger so it took in Harry horcruxness if you will and used it to destroy the diary.
Added 4 years ago by guest, -11 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Harry was not a proper horcux. It is stated in the book that Voldemort must be the one to destroy him.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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...
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 10 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 17 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
because harry had a the protection of his mum until the age of 17 thats why voldermort couldnt kill him in the first place!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 14 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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???
Added 5 years ago by guest, -3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
he has his moms protection lingering
Added 5 years ago by guest, -4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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).
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Phoenix tears. The diary did not "die" right away, either. It "bled out."
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
fair play
Added 5 years ago by guest, -3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
dis is a grate point!often wundered myself.surely it wod of been destroyed before fawkes cried on de bite?
Added 5 years ago by guest, -16 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

121.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Moaning Murtle a real ghost? Report Abuse
In CoS we see that Murtle flies down a toilet and water spashes everywhere; surley she would just go through the water? Is she a real ghost?
0 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 14 comments
Comments:
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
Added 2 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
That's a movie mistake if I am not wrong. That was never mentioned about water splashing in the books.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 4 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Disturbance. It's spelled "disturbance."
Added 5 years ago by guest, 20 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 27 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Anything like that from the movie cannot add as canon information to support the facts from the books.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 9 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
In the film it was probably done as a visual gag
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

122.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why could Lily do magic at home? Report Abuse
In the first book Aunt Petunia says "came home every vacation with her pockets full of frog spawn, turning teacups into rats"... She could have been exaggerating and Lily simply talked about the school, but if this is the case, why didn't Aunt Petunia know that Harry wouldn't be allowed to do magic at home?
0 points - added 6 years ago by guest - 3 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
7th years are of age aren't they? If i suddenly became of age I would turn everything I owned into something else
Added 6 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

123.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
How do you Cure a Ghost? Report Abuse
How was Nick nearlyheadless revived ? so far as we know GhostS remain unaffected by physcal events. Granted magic can affect them as the Basilisk Stare petrified him and there may be spells to contain violent Ghosts, but it seems there is no way the mandrake potion would have worked on Nick. On CoS it says that Distraught student wen through Nick blackened "body" without realizing it, they ended up using a giant fan to move him.
0 points - added 6 years ago by guest - 5 comments
Comments:
MAGIC!!! DUH!!! ^ ^ lol
Added 3 years ago by guest, -3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by icenine4459, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
i believe if he was effect he would get a chance to die again, but he must have wish again to remain
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

124.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Dursley's christmas present to harry in PS. Report Abuse
Not a thingy really :p but... Hogwarts is unplottable, so I dont think it can have an address. Not that the dursley's would be bothered enough to find out. Nor would they use an owl... SPOOKY o.O
0 points - added 6 years ago by guest - 5 comments
Comments:
they've already said that there must be wizard posted inside the post office.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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!"
Added 6 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
^ 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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

125.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
wormtail's house Report Abuse
what house is wormtail in? if James etc. were his friends than he should be in Griffindor yet he seems like a complete Slytherin guy, even as a kid.
0 points - added 6 years ago by hpkiller - 12 comments
Comments:
"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!
Added 1 year ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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 ...
Added 5 years ago by guest, 21 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 14 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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!
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
he was brave...and prehaps mean, but that doesn't make him a slytherine for sure
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guestb, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
^^ 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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 6 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

126.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
In the memories Snape give harry before he dies, Petunia is on platfrom 9 3/4 when Lily goes to school, yet in the 1st book she's never heard of it. Report Abuse
0 points - added 6 years ago by guest - 7 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
OR she might not have remembered (or ever even noticed) the name. She didn't exactly have fond memories of the magical world
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
she pretends she wants no connection between herself and magic
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Petunia wanted nothing to do with the Wizarding world so she said she knew nothing.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
She's a *****
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

127.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
The fate of the wand Report Abuse
Harry told the portrait of Dumbledore that he was going to put the Elder wand back where it came from. That seems incredibly dangerous, since he and Voldemort discussed very loudly in front of a large crowd of people where he got the wand "I took it from the grave of Albus Dumbledore..." and how to become it's master. Surely, a dark wizard could come along and disarm or kill Harry, fetch the wand from Dumbledore's grave, and easily be the new master of the wand. Wouldn't it make more sense to bury or destroy the wand?
0 points - added 6 years ago by guest - 21 comments
Comments:
"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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I guess if he was defeated he could go back and destroy it. Simple enough
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 11 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Who would even ask this question??? 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- and as we all know, based on when Ron's wand broke, that wands don't work (or at least, not properly) after being broken. So, Harry could still return the wand to Dumbledore's grave after breaking it, because it would no longer be a powerful, sought after wand- it'd be useless, and therefore, noone would disturb it after he put it back.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -31 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 33 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 22 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 11 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by icenine4459, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by icenine4459, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I just think that no one would dare try to steal it from Harry.
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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 :)
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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...
Added 6 years ago by chris7125, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

128.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
In the third movie Harry uses "lumos" to do his homework under the covers. Report Abuse
It was always strange to me. I didn't think the writers would have missed something that obvious. Harry wouldn't have risked pissing off the ministry of magic just to do his homework under the covers would he?
0 points - added 6 years ago by guest - 31 comments
Comments:
Actually in the book he uses a flashlight.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 11 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 4 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Underage wizards are allowed to use magic in school. Remember the classes?
Added 4 years ago by guest, -16 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
lumos is a charm not a spell. Young wizards can use some charms, but not spells
Added 5 years ago by guest, -25 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
It is a movie. Plenty of things are messed up in the movies. In the book, he uses a flashlight.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 29 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 22 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 12 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
UNDERAGED MAGIC!!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
lumos isn't acctually a spell its just like a touch, like it only makes light appear at the end of your wand.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -12 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 20 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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)
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.)
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
thats only in the film. in the book it says he uses a torch
Added 5 years ago by guest, 14 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
*sigh* MOVIE not BOOK !
Added 5 years ago by guest, 13 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I think its only illegal if its in the presence of a muggle
Added 6 years ago by guest, -3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
In the book he used a flashlight. movie directors are stupid sometimes.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
The movies are as dumb as you are if you care about the movies...it never happened in the book
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
When he used Lumos to do his work,he wasnt in the preseance of a muggle.He was alone in his room
Added 6 years ago by monsteryash122, -7 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
i know i thought that to lol but its a movie, things like that happen in movies not jkr fault
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
^^ 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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
This is the MOVIE. movies hardly ever get anything correct but like to add dramatic title openings. This is not J.K.s fault.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
That was just a device to show the title of the movie in the opening,
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
^^ 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?).
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
this did not even happen in the book.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

129.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Dumbledore as DADA teacher? Report Abuse
This is just a minor item - why didn't Dumbledore teach Defense Against the Dark Arts himself? The fact that he spent long periods of time away from the school during books 2, 5, and 6 indicates that Hogwarts can get along just fine without Dumbledore devoting all his energies to Headmastering. At the very least, one would think that he would take up the job himself before offering it to someone like Gilderoy Lockhart (which raises another point concerning why Dumbledore would deliberately hire such an idiot and a fraud to teach what was arguably the most important subject in the school!)
0 points - added 6 years ago by guest - 20 comments
Comments:
But Sluggy was at Hogwarts for more than 1 year. The appointments goes to show that Dumbledore is getting old beyond normal wizarding years.
Added 6 months ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
the below comment is wrong, it is explicitly stated that no DADA teacher has remained at Hogwarts since Voldemort was declined the job.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, -4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
In HBP Voldermort is shown as an orphan. Then who paid for his school supplies and his wand??
Added 5 years ago by guest, -8 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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?
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
All but Slughorn, anyway. Unless I'm forgetting something.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Lockheat doesn't try to kill him at any point that I can recall. Just tries to erase his memories
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
^ 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'.
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Anyone else notice that all the dada teachers accidently or on purpose try to kill Harry ?
Added 6 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guestb, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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?
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
^^ "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?
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Um... I think you need to look up the word "bravery".
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
So, Dumbledore was letting dozens of others take the fall for him over time? Doesn't sound like Gryffindor bravery to me.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

130.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Morphin being blamed for death of the Riddles despite the fact that would have been detected as underage magic Report Abuse
Although Voldy couldnt have been blamed for those deaths because 'underage magic can be detected but not the perpetrator', the ministry would certainly have known it was UNDERAGE magic, and Morphin, not being underage, would clearly not have been the culprit. So why does he spend the rest of his life in Azkaban?
0 points - added 6 years ago by guest - 32 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 9 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 13 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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)
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 26 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
^ exactly.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Because he admited to it, they would have seen the underaged magic as perhaps an error in the system.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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!
Added 6 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
the MoM can't see if its under age magic only that it iss in the vavinity of a person who is under age
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
You might want to try reading the books, pal. This was fully explained in HPB.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
"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!
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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...
Added 6 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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"
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
AND they blamed Morphin because they do not know who to blame, and there should be someone responsible for killing the Riddles.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Didn't he give a full confession?
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
"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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, -4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
That was a long time ago, maybe the Trace was a new thing
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

131.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Polijuce (?) potion in HBP Report Abuse
I'm probably wrong here, buuut.- In the "seven Harrys" chapter of HBP where all of Harry's friends transform into him using polijuce potion to throw the death eaters off, Fleur is one of the ones chosen to be turned into Harry. We learn earlier on in the series that Fluer is part Veela. How is it she can transform into Harry? After Lupin returns to the burrow with his partner after the mission, he pulls Harry aside, and questions him to prove that he is the real Harry. Hagrid then confronts Lupin, saying something along the lines of "Then why aren't you questioning me then?" Lupin answers that since Hagrid is part giant, polijuce poition would not work on him, therfore he must be the real Hagrid. Then Why is Fleur able to transform into Harry if she is part Veela?!?!?! Why is she able to succesfully use the potion???
0 points - added 6 years ago by guest - 21 comments
Comments:
...it can be used on non humans though. Hermione turns herself into a cat in the CoS.
Added 2 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 7 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Because Veela's ARE human. Extreme beauty is just a trait they posess. Who knows, maybe some people's whole bloodlines are drop-dead gorgeous and people just wanted something that could explain that. Maybe 'Veela' isn't a real thing, it's just what witches and wizards call stunningly beautiful witches. Then again, if Veela's really ARE creatures, Giants and Veelas species could just have different properties regarding magic.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -10 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
it was in the deathly halos
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 8 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
"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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I find out from the bottom comment :)
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
vila are a different creatures and can be closer to humans plus fleur is 1/4 vila where as hagrid is 1/2c giant.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.)
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
*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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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?
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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?
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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?
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

132.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
why didnt harry see peter pettigrew on the marauders map in PoA? He was with ron all the time... Report Abuse
0 points - added 6 years ago by guest - 7 comments
Comments:
wouldn't the weasley twins see scabbers? Im sure peter's death was publicly known.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
"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
Added 6 years ago by guest, -3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
he could easily have been running around at night with out ron knowing
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
He did in the movie... He saw "Peter Pettigrew" outside the door and walked outside to find Snape coming
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
didn't peter run away from ron
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guestb, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

133.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
How does Harry get the Marauder's Map back from the fake Moody??? Report Abuse
In the fourth book the fake Moody borrows the map off Harry and never gives it back yet in the fifth, sixth and seventh books he uses it all the time. How does he get it back???
0 points - added 7 years ago by guest - 20 comments
Comments:
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
Added 4 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 4 years ago by guest, -4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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 :)
Added 5 years ago by guest, 9 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
this is more thatn 20.....
Added 5 years ago by guest, 27 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
J.K. Rowling mentioned in an interview that Harry sneaked back into the office and retrieves it!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 13 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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...
Added 6 years ago by icenine4459, 14 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
People. Not everything that Harry does in the books makes it into the pages. Come on. You're really reaching now
Added 6 years ago by guest, 19 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
in the days that he was a little lost in himself he could easily have gotten it from moody's office
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I bet anything Dumbledore gave it back to him. That's what I always assumed anyhow.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 6 years ago by guest, 8 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.... :)
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
"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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Lupin gave it back to him!
Added 6 years ago by guest, -12 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
He just sneaked into the office at the end of term and retrieved it
Added 6 years ago by guestb, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Or maybe he managed to get it back after the real Moody was discovered?
Added 7 years ago by dayna, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
He gets it back via J.K. Rowling being a faulty/weak writer.
Added 7 years ago by gilbertosullivan15, -15 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

134.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Wouldn't wearing an invisibility cloak in front of a boggart reveal what one truly looks like? Report Abuse
Boggart is locked up, throw on an invisibility cloak and let it out. It can't see you, it can't make eye contact. Suggesting that a boggart may be able to see through an invisibility cloak but are repeatively thwarted by locked dressers would be silly, so seriously someone should know what they look like.
-1 point - added 2 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
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
Added 7 months ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

135.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Time-Travel confusion Report Abuse
If hermione and harry threw the rock, and freed buckbeak, when harry got hit in the back of the head by the rock hermione threw, (the first time, when ron, hermoine, and harry first went to hagrids house) why wasn't buckbeak freed? How could they see buckbeaks exocution if buckbeak was freed?
-1 point - added 2 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
They didn't. They heard the pumpkin being chopped and heard/saw the crows flying away, but didn't actually see him killed.
Added 1 year ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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).
Added 2 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

136.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Harry is a Horcrux, so why didn't those closest to him get affected? Report Abuse
It is explained that if you get too emotionally close to a Horcrux, you are in trouble, e.g. the diary affecting Ginny in book 2, and the locket affecting Harry, Ron, and Hermione in book 7. Why, then, isn't there an adverse or any affect on Harry's friends at all throughout the years? It does affect Harry tremendously, and is the reason for his connection to Voldemort's mind, but wouldn't other people who get attached to him be affected by this as well?
-1 point - added 2 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
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.
Added 2 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

137.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Which horcrux did voldemort come back from? Report Abuse
When Voldemont's spell backfired, killing him, which horcrux did he use to resurrect himself? Did he then remake that horcrux and hide it again?
-1 point - added 3 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

138.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
LILY AND JAMES POTTER Report Abuse
Why didn't Lily and James just apparate out of the house when Voldemort appeard? They would've been able to take Harry and just leave.
-1 point - added 3 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
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....
Added 3 months ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
It was a sudden attack, they didn't even have their wands on them, that's cleared stated.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

139.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Dumbeldore's Army - Dumberldore leaving Hogwarts Report Abuse
When the're in Dumbeldores office, and Mariette (spelling) got her memories altered. They used the "List of D.As members" as evidence that the lessons took place.. I mean.. what... How is that evidance, that list could have been there since the day they had the meeting in the pub. It doesn't prove anything, other than that the group, which they already knew since the pug was planning to have meeting in the What ever the english name of the room is.
-1 point - added 3 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

140.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Molly Weasly producing food Report Abuse
Goblet of Fire, chapter 5, pg. 58-59: "Mrs. Weasley slammed a large copper saucepan down on the kitchen table and began to wave her wand around inside it. A creamy sauce poured from the wand tip as she stirred". Explanation?
-1 point - added 3 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
She summoned it from somewhere.
Added 3 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

141.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Selecting the prefects Report Abuse
I just don't understand how the prefects are selected and if they hold their positions through years 6-7? Like why does hermione get to be a prefect in her 5th year when there was already bound to be someone in their 6th or 7th year that would be better/already was a prefect
-1 point - added 3 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

142.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
The Elder Wand's rightful owner Report Abuse
Grindelwald stole it. he did not disarm or defeat anyone to acquire it. Therefore it never really BELONGED to him, therefore it could not belong to Dumbledore, or Draco, or Snape or Harry or Voldemort or ANYONE who defeated or disarmed its previous "owner".
-1 point - added 4 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 3 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

143.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why didn't harry's parents just apperate away Report Abuse
okay, so this my have already been explained, but when voldemort came why didn't lilly just apperate away when she heard voldy killed James. Apperating is fast so she easily could've done it with harry and both of them survived
-1 point - added 4 years ago by guest - 4 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I would assume Harry had a trace on him, and the infiltrated MoM could have tracked them down to no end.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

144.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
The potion Report Abuse
Why did Dumbledore drink the potion. It says that only the cup could go through the barrier and get the potion out, so why not scoop out some potion and dump it on the floor, continue until the potion is gone? Or better yet, why not use the cup to fish the locket out?
-1 point - added 4 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
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?
Added 3 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

145.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why do they only sing the school song once in Harry's first year? Report Abuse
?????????? Any ideas? Just a bit weird, you know?
-1 point - added 4 years ago by guest - 3 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 2 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Its a kind of "Whoo First Day Back!" thing, I think.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Not enough time throughout the movies. The other more important plot points won out.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

146.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
They say repeaditly that Harry and Voldemort are very similar? Report Abuse
They go on to elaborate that one of the similarities are their parentage, and that Harry's a half-blood like Voldemort but both of Harry's parents were wizards. Is it because he grew up with muggles? I've never understood this and it's frustrating because it doesn't make any sense to me at all.
-1 point - added 4 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Harry has muggle blood due to his mother being muggle-born. Therefore, he is not a pure-blood wizard.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

147.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
why did no one but Sirius know who the secret keeper was? Report Abuse
In the letter from Lily that Harry reads, she mentions that Batlida Bagshot comes over frequently wouldn't she have known then who the secret keeper was, since the secret keeper is the one who has to tell you where to find the place? Sirius and Peter couldn't have been the only ones who knew where the house was.
-1 point - added 4 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
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
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

148.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Not really a plot hole but how do they use a basilisk fang to destroy the diadem or the cup or anything else made of metal? Just doesn't make sense. Report Abuse
-1 point - added 4 years ago by guest - 4 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
the correct term is venomous snakes not poisonous snakes
Added 3 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

149.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Sirius Black isn't Innocent Report Abuse
Sirius is always said to be innocent, and that he shouldn't be in Azkaban, but he's an unregistered animagus. In book 5, hermione threatens Rita Skeeter to tell someone that she is an unregistered animagus, and that she will sent to Azkaban. Sirius might not be a murderer, but he's not inocent
-1 point - added 4 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

150.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why aren't mandrakes used in combat? Report Abuse
their fatal if you hear them, all you would have to do is were ear muffs
-1 point - added 4 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
They are, it is mentioned in DH.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
they were used in the battle of hogwarts
Added 4 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

151.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Cho at Hogwarts in Deathly Hallows Report Abuse
When Cho was first mentioned, it said she was a year above Harry. So unless she was held back a year(which is highly unlikely since she was a Ravenclaw), Cho would not be at Hogwarts during Deathly Hallows when Harry arrives.
-1 point - added 5 years ago by guest - 7 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 2 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Cho must have been contacted by Neville through the galleon. It was in the film were she wore the uniform. Not JK's fault!
Added 4 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
In the book she arrives after Harry, having been contacted by Neville along with the rest of the D.A. and the Order.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.....
Added 4 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 13 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

152.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
How does everyone know that Harry has a lightning bolt scar? Report Abuse
The only people that knew that night were Voldemort, Hagrid, Sirius, Minerva, and possibly Peter (personally, I think Peter had to have been in the house to snatch up Voldy's wand and run, no other reason on how he had it when Tom rose again). Personally, it may have been a really drunk Hagrid in a bar, followed by a "Shouldn't 'ave said that," but has there ever been a canon excuse?
-1 point - added 5 years ago by Rihaan - 4 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
It's not like it was on his ass or anything.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 10 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 19 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

153.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Underage magic Report Abuse
hermione says on the train that she has been practicing magic at home wouldnt that be underage magic?
-1 point - added 5 years ago by guest - 3 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 10 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

154.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Voldys name is taboo Report Abuse
Yet they say it over and over again in the black house but it is supposed to undue magical enchantments. Therefor they should have been caught. This is how they were tracke at cafe in muggle world so we know taboo is in effect.
-1 point - added 5 years ago by guest - 6 comments
Comments:
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).
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 10 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
They don't use the fidelius charm in the forest, just a lot of protective charms.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
It was only turned into a taboo in the 7th book
Added 5 years ago by guest, -6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
In the forest they use voldemorts name and it breaks the fidelius charm, shouldn't that have happend in grimmauld place too? assuming the taboo was already in place.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -14 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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 (:
Added 5 years ago by guest, 9 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

155.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
In hbp, Dumbledore drinks the poison around the locket, and cries out for water. Harry picks up the goblet, MADE BY VOLDEMORT, and fills it with water from his wand, which disappears. Instead of pouring water directly from his wand into Dumbledore's mouth, which he should of done in the first place, he takes water from the obviously inferi-infested lake. WHY? Should Harry be in the mental section of St Mungo's? Report Abuse
-1 point - added 5 years ago by guest - 6 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
The aguamenti spell would be to strong to put directly into someones mouth and also it wouldent have made it as interesting!
Added 5 years ago by guest, -3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Dumbledore conjured that goblet.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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. >_>
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

156.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Snape and Dumbledore Report Abuse
In the Chapter the Prince's tale it features Snape talking to Dumbledore's portrait in the Headmasters office talking about confunding Mudungus and giving the right dates of Harry's departure. He also tells Snape to protect the students from the Carrows. However this happens before the ministry falls and Death Eaters take control of Hogwarts. How can Snape be at Hogwarts talking to Dumbledore when he is seen as an criminal at the time and how would Dumbledore know specifically that the Carrows would be the Death Eaters posted at Hogwarts?
-1 point - added 5 years ago by guest - 3 comments
Comments:
just rating this down because it's discussed better in another question above.
Added 3 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
And Snape, as the future headmaster, would have known Voldemort's plans for the school and would have told Dumbledore.
Added 5 years ago by guestb, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
He probably knew at least some of the secret passages into the school, so he could have snuck back in during the holidays.
Added 5 years ago by guestb, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

157.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
How come Hagrid/Draco/Filch speak about werewolves living in the forbidden forest (in book 1) but up from book 3, werewolves are actually human beings? Report Abuse
And I'm pretty sure they once spoke about werewolf cub's living in the forest too, or something like that. It's disturbing!
-1 point - added 6 years ago by guest - 6 comments
Comments:
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?
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by icenine4459, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
^ 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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

158.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
the point of the prophecy Report Abuse
what does voldermort really gain by hearing the prophecy in #5?
-1 point - added 6 years ago by hpkiller - 8 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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 ...
Added 5 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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?
Added 6 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

159.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why didnt Dumbledore or Lupin visit Sirius Report Abuse
If Siruis was in the original Order why didnt Dumbledore or Lupin interigate him after the death of the Potters. Also the "plot" that Dubmledore didnt know he and James were Arigaums is a bit week - they would have used these skills in the "War2
-1 point - added 6 years ago by guest - 6 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
not really proven that dumbledore hadnt guest
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

160.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why does Hermione need a Time Turner in Prisoner of Azkaban? Report Abuse
It is stated that Professor McGonagall had given it to her (or something along those lines) so she could take all twelve classes. What I have a problem with is that she could fit all twelve classes into her schedule. Each student has each of their classes once a week, four classes a day. That means that each student can fit 20 classes into their schedule! Even with three classes a day, that is 15: more than enough. Even if, somehow, this math is wrong, or that i missed something when reading, why would Hogwarts offer twelve classes, but not allow room in the schedule for twelve classes? Furthermore, why is it that when she drops Divination, she no longer needs a Time Turner to make her schedule work? I don't understand how eleven classes is fine, but twelve is overbearing.
-2 points - added 2 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
She also dropped Muggle Studies
Added 1 month ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 2 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

161.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
The Elder Wand never belonged to anyone Report Abuse
Grindelwald stole it. he did not disarm or defeat anyone to acquire it. Therefore it never really BELONGED to him, therefore it could not belong to Dumbledore, or Draco, or Snape or Harry or Voldemort or ANYONE who defeated or disarmed its previous "owner".
-2 points - added 4 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
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
Added 3 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

162.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
The Elder Wand never rightfully belonged to anyone Report Abuse
Grindelwald stole it. he did not disarm or defeat anyone to acquire it. Therefore it never really BELONGED to him, therefore it could not belong to Dumbledore, or Draco, or Snape or Harry or Voldemort or ANYONE who defeated or disarmed its previous "owner".
-2 points - added 4 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

163.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Elder Wand Fate? Report Abuse
When you think about it, Snape killed Dumbledore whether it was a favor or not. But then Voldemort doesn't kill snape, Nagini does. So since Neville killed Nagini, wouldnt that make Neville the master of the elder wand, not Harry?
-2 points - added 4 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
Snape was never the owner of the wand. Malfoy was because he disarmed Dumbledore, then Harry disarmed Malfoy. So Harry's wand
Added 4 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 4 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

164.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
SEVEN POTTERS SIX BROOMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Report Abuse
When trying to let Harry escape fm voldemirt the decoys.were a good idea but why have Harry ride on a motercycle and not a broom? Just makes him a giveaway why?
-2 points - added 4 years ago by guest - 4 comments
Comments:
who would want to go near a flying hagrid, when you are riding on a flimsy broom?
Added 4 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 12 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
It wasn't 6 brooms, 1 random bike. A few of them had thresthrals also, so it was more of a mix.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 8 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 4 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

165.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why didn't Regulus Black appirate out of the cave with Kreacher and continue his fight against Voldemort? Report Abuse
He should have appirated out with Kreacher having drunk the Potion and obtained the locket and then perhaps try to find (and destroy) more horcruxes. If he believed that there weren't any more horcruxes he should have tried to Kill Voldemort believing that he was now mortal.
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 5 comments
Comments:
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?
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
It said in the books that you could not apparate into or out of the cave. Kreacher could because House Elves use different magic.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

166.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Fred and George with Marauder's Map/Ron and Pettigrew? Report Abuse
Fred and George tell Harry in the Prisoner of Azkaban that they've had the Marauder's Map since their first year when they stole it from Filch's office. However, if they've had it all this time, they've obviously looked at it quite closely. Shouldn't they have seen Ron sleeping with Pettigrew or going everywhere with him? And shouldn't they wonder who Pettigrew is and ask Ron? Maybe then Pettigrew would be caught and never gone back to Voldemort... can anyone explain this?
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 3 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
My assumption is that when animaguses are in their animal form, they don't show up on the map.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -8 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Already above: #7
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

167.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why is it improper to bury Dobby using magic? Report Abuse
When Dobby died, Harry wanted to bury Dobby "properly" without magic. Is Harry's idea of being proper meant not using magic? So is he hiding an aversion against magic all along? This scene jeopardizes the whole idea of magic in the story, its like Harry telling us that magic is like child's play. Of course its understandable that Harry grew up in muggle world, but Doby is within the magic realm. Is it safe to say that giving Doby a muggle burial, the most honorable thing Harry can do?
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 5 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 1 year ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 24 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

168.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Perys takes points from Harry and Ron Report Abuse
In book 2, percy takes 5 points from harry and ron for being in the girls toilets, however in book 5 you find out that Prefects can't deduct house points. He could have just been bluffing, but it is unlikely
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 3 comments
Comments:
*sigh* Read carefully. In the fifth book, prefects can't dodge points from EACH OTHER. They can deduct points from everyone else.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
you can take points if you're a prefect, ron had it wrong in book 5.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

169.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Magic was used outside of school Report Abuse
In Goblet of Fire, Hermione used "Reparo" on the train when the glass pane of the compartment door broke when Ron slammed it shut. And in Half-Blood Prince, Ginny used "Scourgify" in the train when there was Stinksap all over the compartment that had been squirted by Neville's Mimbulus Mimbletonia. How come these went unpunished by the Ministry of Magic? They were under-age when they did this? There were also other incidents of magic being used by under-age students on the train. Shouldn't these incidents have been punished? And if it is actually legal to use magic on the train, why are Hogwarts student constantly reminded that they cannot use magic outside SCHOOL? Why wouldn't they be told they could also use it on the train if they wish?
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
well they were on the HOGWARTS train
Added 5 years ago by guest, 7 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 12 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

170.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
why didnt ron know of the deatlhy hallows? Report Abuse
ron knows the story of the 3 brothers, why would he not be knowledgable about the deathly hallows?
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 3 comments
Comments:
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?
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
This is Ron you're talking about.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 11 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 16 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

171.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Invisibility Cloak- a deathly hallow, why does Harry assume his cloak is the deathly hallow if Ron claims at the beginning that 'these are really rare', suggesting there are a few of them? Report Abuse
When Harry first receives his fathers' invisibility cloak as a Christmas present from Dumbledore, Ron instantly knows what it is 'Wow, those are really rare' he claims. So, when Harry discovers (6 whole books later) that there are three deathly hallows; the stone, the wand and the cloak, why does he assume his cloak is one of them if it is suggested that there is not just one invisibility cloak? Surely, if only one existed, Ron wouldn't say something like 'those are rare'. Maybe there's something I have completely over-looked but this plot hole really bothered me when I recently read all 7 books in a row.
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 13 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
seriously? did you actually read the book?
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
because they make nock off invisability cloacks that are rare and start to fade after awhile, says so in the books
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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...
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Ron said that "invisabity cloaks" are rare "not cloaks made by death".
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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".
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

172.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Hagrid is expelled from Hogwarts Report Abuse
Hargid was expelled from Hogwarts and isn't allowed to use magic anymore because he is seen as the one that opened the Chamber of Secrets. In the books I don't read anything about him being allowed again to use magic or given his wand back after the Chamber of Secret case is solved.... He just remains the gamekeeper and Keeper of Keys and Grounds of Hogwarts. Doesn't the solving the attacks change anythingto his privilages??
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 7 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Albus is like the US government--giving hand-outs to the undeserving and then not fighting for anything of value.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -19 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
umm..... his umbrella is his wand.....
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Clearly things did change, he was allowed to teach classes after the problem was solved.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 15 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

173.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Harry's mother protection in the Burrow? Report Abuse
DD said that as long as Harry living with his aunt in Privet Drive he will be protected by Lily's magical protection because Petunia is Lily's sister therefore they are related by blood. Voldemort will never be ableto find him even if his nose was on their living room window. However, many times Harry went to the Burrow in his summer holidays where he was living far from his aunt. How come Harry was still protected when he was not at Privet Drive?
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 9 comments
Comments:
It's not about home, it is about coming into contact with a blood relation of Lily's at least once a year.
Added 4 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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?
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 8 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Dumbledore clearly states Harry only has to return to Number 4 once a year and legally call it home for the protection to work.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

174.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
How did Voldemort's wand surve the blast that obliterated his entire body? Report Abuse
We've seen in DH, that wands are not indestructible. Harry's wand was broken when it was caught in Hermie's blast. Yet the point-blanc explosion that demolished the roof, if not the whole house and completely annihilated Voldemort's body, did nothing to his wand?
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

175.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Wizards vs. Muggles Report Abuse
Voldemort's death toll: probably around 5,000, each killed individually, one at a time. "avada kadavra, avada kadavra avada....****, this is taking forever..." VOLDEMORT, MEET HITLER. muggles do more damage daily. just sayin.
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 9 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Never thought Godwin's Law would apply to a message board about Harry Potter......
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Wormtail killed twelve people with one curse. Voldemort, being much more powerful, likely could have killed several dozen with one curse.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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...
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
he had tons of time ,many years, he could kill hundreds a day
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

176.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why didn't voldemort enter Harry's house?? Report Abuse
If Voldemort could touch Harry after using Harry's blood to get his body back, why did everyone think voldemort couldn't get past the charm again? and why didn't Voldemort try to destroy harry in his house? I know Harry can't die as long as Voldemort doesn't die. My question is why Voldemort never tried. And in the movies Voldemort removes all the protection around Hogwarts so that the death eaters can enter. So it can't be a question of magical protection blocking Voldemort either, can it?
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 8 comments
Comments:
The real question here is why the Death Eaters didn't just blow the place up or something like that.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
He didn't know that so he never bothered trying. Plus Dumbles had charms too :P
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Harry, unlike his parents, had a trustworthy SecretKeeper.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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?
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
voldemort only broke the protection when he had the elder wand
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
voldemort didn't know harry was a horucrux
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

177.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
What about the rest of the world? Report Abuse
Why is this only happening in England. Do the rest of the world not realise something wierd is happening?
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
It's not just happening in England. Hogwarts is, in fact, in Scotland.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 12 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

178.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Liquid luck Report Abuse
The potion is supposed to make the drinker succeed with anything they try, why didn´t harry try to kill voldemort...
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 5 comments
Comments:
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!
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

179.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Voldemort's age Report Abuse
if he was like 16 when the chamber of secrets was origanly opened, and it was 50 years before he died, and 14 years past before he had his body back didn't it makes him like 80?!
-2 points - added 5 years ago by T.Black - 6 comments
Comments:
yeah but he was dead for part of that time, and wizards live longer than muggles
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
check the harry potter wiki page for a lot of birthdays. voldemort was 71 when he was killed
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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
Added 5 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

180.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
136. Dumbledore Voldemort Battle Report Abuse
If Dumbledore was the owner of the elder wand how come he did not destroy/defeat Voldemort with ease when they met in the ministry of magic in the 5th book?
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 5 comments
Comments:
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.
Added 1 year ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
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.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Because the Elder Wand was actually not all that good. It wasn't unbeatable and it was JK's way of showing that Wizards are flawed and they'll do things for power like muggles. Dumbledore managed to defeat Grindelwald back in 1914(?) when Grindelwald had the Elder Wand and Dumbledore just had a normal wand.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
^Even if Dumbledore know about the horcruxes killing his current body would have crippled Voldemort and retarded his rise to power long enough for Dumbledore to track and destroy all the horcruxes. Off course this bring a sticking point that the only way for Dumbledore to destroy them all will include the killing of Harry. The only way Harry would survive is if the body that Voldemort made with his blood at the end of Goblet is still alive. "Neither can live while the other survive!" Get turned around to neither can die while the other live. At least until Voldemort get tricked into destroying his own horcruxes.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Cuz Dumbledore had the hunch of horcruxes. He knew by killing old Voldy then and there would not help his case of finding all the horcruxes. Plus, it would put Harry in more danger with the death eaters.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

181.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why would the Elder wands power end with Harrys 'natural death'? Report Abuse
Ok, lets assume that Harry just dies becasuse he is to old 'natrually', why would the elder wand loose its power, surely Harry dying 'naturally' means 'death' defeated him (i dont mean death the 'hooded figure'/grim reaper, i mean death as in death), why should the elder wand give its power up? Why not just regain its power and the first person to touch/take the wand has its power? It seems a stupid the the most powerful wand throughs a hissy fit and gives up all of its power just becasuse its true master has died naturally. So the wand is also defeated by death, when it was made by someone to not be defeated by death, huhh??
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 7 comments
Comments:
The EW wouldn't lose it's power. Dumbledore is naive to think it would. Voldemort's right when he said that he would have gained the ownership of the wand by defeating Dumbledore's plan to have it remain in his grave. This is nothing more than Rowling poetically saying that death loses it's power scare us when we no longer afraid of us.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
the EW has such a bloody history (combined with it being such a powerful magical tool), maybe it became impossible for its true loyalty to pass on unless its previous owner was killed by its present owner. like in CoS, legend usually has a basis in truth.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
because the legend of the Elder Wand caused a bloody trail as it passed from owner to owner. each new owner killed the last to gain the EW's loyalty. AND as Hermione said in CoS, all legends have some basis in reality. it is, perhaps, possible then for the EW's loyalty to pass on ONLY through death, just the way the EW works. maybe?
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
You have to remember where the EW's power comes from. All the magic that has flown through it. I see that you're taking the "Death" as a real figure aspect seriously, but it's not meant to be. If the wand give's it allegiance to someone and it's will won't bend unless the wand has been forceably taken from it's living owner.... why would the wand change to an owner who was never disarmed or had the wand taken. It wouldn't, so basically the wand wouldn't work as the Elder Wand should because it's still serving a master that has never fallen by another hand and the person using it never actually won it.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
The elder wand would not have accepted a new owner. It would have been like Harry and the blackthorn. Just another wand. Nothing special
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Because death killed the true owner of the wand, death became the true owner of the wand but since he doesnt need a wand he doesnt need to claim it. Eva :L
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
with the three unforgivable curses they have to said with full intent, like harry failed to do after Bellatrix killed Sirus but when he tried to do it she fell down and when voldemort used the crusiatus curse (sorry for the spelling) on harry he was just lifted up and down but there was no pain. to get to the point if imperio is used my a weak wand the curse could be easily lifted with willpower with crusio pain would be felt but the killing curse is the killing curse, u cant water down killing. aaaannnndddd it can also be argued that the weak curse was enough to kill a part of harry but not he whole self
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

182.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why didnt Voldy keep the Horcruxes with him? Report Abuse
If the horcruxes were as important to Voldy as the books imply then why not just keep the horcruxes in his robes and with him all the time. Its not like anyone would dare try and steal from him or even attempt to Avada his boney arse. Its his soul insid so it not like its going to affect him in anyway. He kept Nagini close with him and it turned out to be very difficult to kill the snake.
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 7 comments
Comments:
because, thats putting all your rotten eggs in one basket.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 10 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Because what would be the point of Voldemort making Horcruxes at all if the next time he got blown up they were all destroyed too? They were a precaution, and it happened that he did have to use them.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 7 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Why did he dump one at the bottom of the sea for that matter! Or made a new one the moment he realised that Potter was destroying them.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
why didn't he just keep them all in a bottomless bag like Hermione has and make that invisible or something and keep it on his person - then nobody would know he had it and if anyone were to catch him unawares (unlikely) they wouldn't be able to see it?
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
yee but hees Voldermort, who can kill him,
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
That would defeat the purpose... Horcruxes are there as a safety net in case he actually does die. So if he dies carrying the horcruxes in his pocket...
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
maybe it can be labelled as deux ex machina, but this develops Voldy's trait of constantly underestimating others. Anyway every horcrux (except the diary, obviously intended) happened to be very difficult to reach.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

183.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
If Harry is a horcrux... Report Abuse
How come he can still get hurt? He is still able to bleed and such but he's a horcrux, such things shouldn't be able to hurt him otherwise.
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 8 comments
Comments:
Harry was healed by pheonix tears. in turn it could possibly have healed the Horcrux as well...
Added 5 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
only something more powerful than the horcrux can destroy a horcrux, like the basklisk venom, but fawkes took care of that
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Think of the Horcrux like a tumor. It was just there, if you had a tumor on your arm, in theory you could cut it off and you'd be just fine.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Harry is not *quite* a Horcrux. Voldy didn't do all the dark spells you're meant to do which is also why his friends weren't possessed and stuff. So I suppose Harry is a container for part of Voldy's soul but he can still get hurt because he is not a Horcrux in the sense of being a fragment of soul that relies on its physical container to survive.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
In book two Harry was stab by the basalisk and poisoned shouldn't the hoercux have died before book seven?
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Mayeb you didnt notice, but Voldemort has made a buttload of mistakes. Horcruxes that are OBJECTS can be indestructable. Think about it, Nagini was NOT indestructable. She had to eat, didnt she? if she didnt, she would die. I am pretty sure if she were NOT killed by the sword of Gryfindor, then the soul would attach to the next living thing, seeing as its "casing" is not not able to be used.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
No, horcruxes by their nature ARE nearly indestructible. That's why only certain things can destroy them such as basilisk venom and fiendfye. What I don't know is what would have happened if Nagini had been killed with something other than the sword of Gryfindor. Could she not be killed? And if she could be killed then what happens to the piece of soul? Its different than an inanimate object. Also why would Voldy make a horcrux out of a living crcauses that could die of natural causes?
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I don't think that horcruxes by their nature are indestructible; Voldemort simply added protective charms to his horcruxes to make them as invulnerable as he could. He did not do that to Harry.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

184.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
The Prince's Tale Report Abuse
In the Chapter the Prince's Tale in the Deathly Hollows, it features Snape talking to Dumbledore's portrait in the Headmasters office talking about confunding Mudungus and giving the right dates of Harry's departure. He also tells Snape to protect the students from the Carrows. However this happens before the ministry falls and Death Eaters take control of Hogwarts. How can Snape be at Hogwarts talking to Dumbledore when he is seen as an criminal at the time and how would Dumbledore know specifically that the Carrows would be the Death Eaters posted at Hogwarts?
-2 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
Please see comments on the "Snape and Dumbledore" question- currently number 41, just below this.
Added 5 years ago by guestb, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

185.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
why do they go by brooms in book 7 Report Abuse
Would't it be safer to use side along apparition ever one else could aperate or a portkey they use it to get from teds house to the wesley house could't they use it from the dusleys house to the wesleys house
-2 points - added 6 years ago by guest - 8 comments
Comments:
They should have just entered the Forbidden Forrest, subdued the Weasley's old Flying Ford Anglia, fixed the Invisibility Booster, stuffed Harry into the trunk so he'd be out of sight, and driven him and the Dursleys away from Privet Drive. They could have then taken the Dursleys into hiding, released the car back into the wild, and spirited Harry off to the Burrow.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
For that matter if you learn that the head of a department in the Ministry of Magic is being imperiused should your first priority be to immediately alert the Minister and the aurore office. Hell Harry get the chance to tell the minister in person a week later and did not. It no wonder Voldemort managed to take over when the peoples opposing him did not talk to each other.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I still believe the smart solution would have been for Harry to just get the hell out of that house alone on foot under his invisibility cloak. Flag a cab two or three block away and maybe use a portkey at the other end of the city!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
they explain this very clearly in the book. Thicknesse was imperiused and was head of a department in the Ministry of Magic, and placed spells on the Dursley's residence to prevent apparation, and disallowed the house to be connected to the floo network (all in the name of keeping harry potter safe by preventing Death Eaters from getting to Harry).
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
They weren't planning on using any magic at all. Once they did the trace would have activated and shown Harry's location as being somewhere in the sky which was useless to the Death Eaters. No one was seen communicating with them telling them which harry was real. They would have known where Harry was up until he used the Port Key anyway which was the real escape root.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Wait wait wait.... Harry used magic either way, during the chase. Why didn't anybody just use apparation during the chase then, since he already used magic? As far as I could tell, harry could use appartion (apparated himself and dumbledore), but you could argue that he couldn't concentrate while flying and being targeted. However, mundungus fletcher used appartion in the face of voldermort (thats much more scary)- but this could also be aruged thats hes had much more practice. Concerning the question at hand, side along apartition doesn't mean harry used magic, madeye would be- therefore ot breaking the trace rule. It's not like appartion can be diverted away to the minstry of magic (since its not menstioned, dont even bother suggesting this).
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
J.K. made it clear that the original plan (Moody taking Harry via side-along apparition) was scrapped due to security concerns. It comes down to the Trace; Harry was an underage wizard, and apparating with him would probably have set it off. They were therefore stuck with using methods which did not require the casting of spells. Even once it became clear that the escape plan had been compromised, it was still dangerous to apparate with Harry, as he was the only underage wizard there and it would have been immediately clear who he was (and in any event, Hagrid probably can't do it).
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
It was to risky to use any other method, everything was being watched by the ministry.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

186.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why Voldemort would want to create horcruxes that can think and feel and come to power autonomously from himself? Report Abuse
To try to make this clear...in CoS the piece of Voldemort’s soul begins to regain strength through Ginny (the diary horcrux). Maybe I’m wrong, but if he succeeded, wouldn’t there be TWO Dark Lords running around? That doesn’t seem like its too advantageous of a situation for Voldemort (not to mention convoluted). Also, why did I take him 14 years to regain power? Granted, yes, he wasn’t dead, but shouldn’t the horcruxes helped in some way? Why did he have to look for other methods of regaining life (the stone, unicorn blood, the potion at the end of Gof)? Assuming the above situation did only produce ONE powerful Voldemort, why didn’t he focus on using his horcruxes to come back? Basically it is very unclear what the function of a horcrux is, beyond keeping one alive.
-2 points - added 6 years ago by guest - 10 comments
Comments:
The horcruxes don't bring you back, they just stop you from dying. When a horcrux-less person dies, they would just die, but in voldemorts case, the horcruxes stop him from dying, so they act as a aort of safety net, and he turns into the horrible baby creature Harry sees in GoF. The potion is just used to restore him to his proper state - which is a proper human. So, the horcruxes don't actually help to bring him back, because that is what the potion is for.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I think youre looking at it backwards - the horcruxes think andf feel BECAUSE they have a piece of soul in them. I myself wondered why the snake was a horcrux - being a living thing itself.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
That diary was used as a weapon. It started thinking for itself because it IS Voldemort. Voldemort does not care about muggleborns as much as he preaches, he just uses it as a way to gain power hungry followers. J.K. Rowling states that if Diary Riddle had succeeded, Voldemort would be much stronger.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Diary Riddle was just a memory, a tool. If he rose again as that memory, it would make all the other Horcruxes he had made obsolete. All one would have needed to do to kill him is stab a book with a Basilisk fang or use Fiendfyre.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Voldemort did not know about the diary's actions. He makes no mention of it after being revived in the Goblet of Fire and I think, though I could be wrong, it says later on that he was angry at Lucius for causing his diary to be destroyed. Its possible it would of revived his main body but it wasn't his actual plan
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
A horcurx is for sure I think to protect somebody from natural death.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
no there would not the riddle leaving the diary would not be able to survive with out it
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I don't think riddle's diary was acting autonomously, especially since Lucius Malfoy put the plan in motion. Voldemort clearly had many ideas as to how he would regain a body, feasibly this was one of them. If the plan had worked and the horcrux had produced a physical body, I'm sure Voldemort's free spirit would have inhabited it. It wouldn't have created two of him.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
As for the 2 dark lords, I would imagine that the strongest part of Voldemort's soul would take over. He also did not expect to be waiting 14 years. He thought his followers would look for him and help him.
Added 6 years ago by guestb, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
he never told anybody about the horcruxes and he cant just go after them on his own because he wouldnt be strong enough. in HBP, the note that regulus left read "i have discovered your secret" so i take it voldy just never told anyone out of fear of one of them being destroyed.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

187.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
How did hermonie practice spells? Report Abuse
In the first book, just after ron trys to transfigure scabbers yellow, hermonie says " are you sure thats even a real spell, i've tryed some and they've all worked for me" but when has she been able to try them out? she couldn't have done them after buying her wand, because of the trace and the ministry, and she can't possibly have had time on the train, because she had already got changed??? x
-2 points - added 6 years ago by guest - 4 comments
Comments:
^ Plus we don't when she boarded considering the kind of character JK wrote for Hermonie it likely she boarded hours before departure.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Actually there's no reason why she could not have practiced on the train! Getting changed is nothing in time considering the journey from Platform 9 & 3/4 to Hogwarts!
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
she hadn't been to school it was considerd out of her control.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
It's only until you go to Hogwarts and are taught to control your magic that the trace is enforced. Snape said so in DH.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

188.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
SO THE RESURRECTION STONE IS JUST LEFT IN THE WOODS? Report Abuse
-2 points - added 7 years ago by clementine - 10 comments
Comments:
He dropped it right outside of the hollow where he met Voldemort, which was originally the home of the acromantula. Wouldn't the acromantula return to this hollow after the battle? Personally I'd think that being buried in the ground right outside, or even right inside, an acromantula nest would be an excellent deterrent to anyone accidentally stumbling upon it and finding it again.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Ascio Resurrection Stone.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
YES. and that is not a plothole!!!!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 7 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
a link to the fan fiction would have been helpful...
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Yes. Harry didn't want to acknowledge its presence any further, and if he put it somewhere with any meaning, the meaning could be found and the stone as well. He didn't want anyone else to find the stone, to become as unhealthily obsessed with it as Dumbledore, and the second brother, did.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I actually read an amazing, albeit depressing, fan fic (google the term if you dont know it) about George Weasley walking in a daze int othe forest and stumbling accross the stone which seems to 'call to him'. Not knowing what it is or what it does, he picks it up and idly turns it in his hands while thinking of his dead twin. A shade of Fread apears and they have a heartbreaking conversation before George drops the stone (causing Fread to vanish) and AK's himself. :*( sad but a very good read.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
its lost
Added 6 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Then an earthworm comes along and accidentally nudges the ring a couple times, and his long-lost earthworm lover comes back to life (kind of)! And the fact that the stone was left in the woods was more of an awesome decision on J.K.'s part than a plot hole.
Added 6 years ago by guest, 15 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Jk rowling said that a centaur stepped on it and buried it into the ground..
Added 6 years ago by tedshr3d, 7 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Yes
Added 7 years ago by barikby, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

189.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Where is Harrys' extended family? Report Abuse
Lily had a sister, what about James, or was he an only child as well. what about there cousins then? Harry was the Boy Who Lived, Chosen Boy etc so wouldn't any distant family members come forward and claim his as family, share in the reflected glory of being related to him?
-3 points - added 3 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
It says Petunia is his only living relative, so we have to assume there were no extended family
Added 1 month ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

190.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Snape and Voldy in Book One Report Abuse
So this has always really bothered me. Voldemort was on the back of Quirrell's head for the entire school term at Hogwarts. Snape frequently threatened Quirrell, thwarted his attempts to kill Harry at the Quidditch match, and basically made it pretty clear "where his loyalties lay"-with Dumbledore. So why didn't Voldemort-on the back of Quirrell's head-attempt to contact Snape, who he claimed was his most faithful servant before his fall and after his return to power? Didn't Voldemort suspect that Snape was working for Dumbledore? And since they didn't appear to have any contact, since Snape was not even pretending to want Quirrell to get the stone, which would have been his course of action if he were a spy for either side, (aside from the fact that I don't think Snape suspected that Quirrell had Voldy on the BACK OF HIS HEAD, just that he was working for him) how did Voldemort not know that Snape wasn't loyal? And in later books when he claims that Snape "never betrayed him and was always faithful", isn't that totally excluding the entire first book when Snape was blatantly sabotaging his plans?
-3 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 4 comments
Comments:
I'd just like to add that perhaps Voldemort didn't attempt to approach Snape simply BECAUSE he feared Snape had turned and was working for Dumbledore. Without his powers, would Voldemort (who is unable to trust others) risk turning himself over to one of Dumbledore's pets? Sure, he could take the chance that Snape was still on his side... but that would mean revealing himself at his weakest to someone who might possibly be an enemy, a prospect he probably didn't favor at all.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Voldemort wasn't in the back of Quirrels head the entire time. Quirrel says later that Voldemort 'had to keep a much closer eye on him'. READ THE BOOK.
Added 4 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Well, maybe it would stop bothering you if you 'bothered' to read the 6th book at all, where every one of those questions is directly answered.
Added 4 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
This was all clearly answered by Snape himself when questioned by Bellatrix at the beginning of HBP- HI SANOBER
Added 5 years ago by guest, 18 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

191.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
in half blood prince dumbledore asks for watter Report Abuse
harry puts watter in the basen but it doesent work so why doesent he just put his wand in dumbledores mouth and conjour water
-3 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
Don't you think that Voldemort would have seen through that, though? He probably put a curse, making it impossible to conjure water is the cave.
Added 3 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

192.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
HORCRUXES... why not make more? Report Abuse
why didn't voldemort just make more horcruxes once he learned what harry was up to? he certainly killed enough people when he heard about the cup being stolen
-3 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
It weakens the heart to an unstable point where he could possibly die
Added 5 years ago by guest, 6 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

193.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
WHY--when Harry is quite obviously the Master of Death, having all the Hallows--is his 'rebirth' explained away by partial-soul death? Report Abuse
No, really. Harry should be Master of Death. Why does this NEVER come into play in the novels? He should be able to decide who lives or dies, essentially. Why is the excuse of the inner-Horcrux even necessary? Couldn't Harry just 'wish' Voldemort dead?
-3 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
where are you getting the definition of "master of death" as being able to wish someone to be dead?
Added 5 years ago by guest, 13 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

194.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Why doesn't the ministry of magic use veritaserum to decide whether to send someone to azkaban? Report Abuse
it really makes no sense
-3 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 6 comments
Comments:
oh my god, read the book. it explains clearly that dumbledore accepts that slughorn is a clever wizard who would do almost anything to keep it secret. he also says something to the effect of "i wouldnt be surprised if he had taken to carrying an antidote to veritaserum on him." slughorn probably avoids dumbledore just like he started avoiding harrry after he asked him for the memory, too.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
I agree Veritaserum would be hard to make but I'm sure they stock it in the ministry with hired potions masters. It makes more sense to believe that wizards like Severus can resist it using Occlumency, but people don't broadcast the fact they know occulmency which would explain why they don't really rely on it. Though I'm sure that children may be more suceptible to it but they need parent permission to use it. It seems that they use veritaserum sometimes to get a picture of what happened if they can and then find evidence to prove or disaprove what was found. I think they should use memories to see weather a person is innocent, becasuse it's easy to see when it's been tampered with. Innocence is decided by a jury according to the evidence presented, just like muggles.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Then Why didn't Barty Crouch carry veritaserum with him so that he could lie while being interigated
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
are there co-ed tents ?
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Cause veritaserum is EXTREMELY hard to make...
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
because many wizards are able to counteract the effects using occlumency or with certain spells or antitodes. there is no way to know whether the veritaserum is really working or if the wizard they are trying to use it on blocked its effects. it's like using a lie detector test...there are ways you can fool it.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

195.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
If Voldermort was an orphan then who paid for his school supplies and wand Report Abuse
-3 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 1 comment
Comments:
Dumbledore mentions hogwarts has a scheme for paying for such students supplies..read HBP again..
Added 5 years ago by guest, 11 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

196.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
Dumbledore could not know the true number of Horcruxes! Report Abuse
Voldemort had to make all (or at least some) of the Horcruxes before he killed Harry's parents. If Voldemort made all 7 before he killed Harry's parents, and he inadvertantly (and unknowingly) made Harry a Horcrux then there would be 8 Horcruxes. If there were actually 8 total Horcruxes, there is still one to go and Voldemort can come back to life. Alternatively, Voldemort thought he was invincible. If Voldemort made only say, for example, 5 Horcruxes before killing Harry's parents, then Harry would only be the sixth Horcrux. Harry would have spent an eternity trying to find the other two Horcruxes, because Voldemort did not know Harry was a horcrux and needed to make 2 more. Finally, why did Dumbledore count Harry as a Horcrux when Voldemort did not know Harry was a Horcrux and would keep trying to make 7 Horcruxes (if he did not make all 7 before killing Harry's parents) until he hit the magical number of 7?
-3 points - added 5 years ago by hp1234 - 8 comments
Comments:
Voldemort didn't use Harry in GoF to make sure he got back the part of his soul in Harry. He ha no idea part o his soul went into Harry. He used Harry's blood to that he could (1)complete the regeneration Potion that requires blood of an enemy and (2) SO that he could touch Harry and not die... (Not knowing that it would take in Lily's protection as well, tethering Harry to life as long as Voldemort lived...) Also, there are not 3 ways to destroy a horcrux. There are things that we know of that are able to destroy them. EX: fiendfyre, Sword of Gryffindor, Basilisk venom... but these are only so because in the case of the spell and venom, they're really extremely powerful. And for the sword, it takes in what makes it stronger, which are things like fiendfyre and basilisk venom. And for Voldemore to truly destroy his own horcruxes he would have to feel remorse for them completely (which he isnt capable of) and the soul would cease to exist. As for the soul in Harry, as well as the bit in Nagini, they can be destroyed when the vessel dies. That is the reason the horcrux in Harry is gone, because he died. In this instance, It did not matter that Voldemort killed him. The horcrux would have died anyway. BUT because of Voldemort using Harry's blood to regenerate, and therefore taking in Lily's promise/protection, he tied his life and Harry's together. BECAUSE Voldemort killed Harry, that made it possible for the tie between them to allow Harry to come back, following the tie between them, that was then severed when he returned.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
In HPB Slughorn's memory shows us that Voldemort wants to split his soul into 7 pieces. This means 6 horcruxes, not 7, because he needs to leave a piece for his body but that doesn't make him a horcrux. He made 6 (ring, locket, cup, diary, snake, diadem) and then the entire 7th part that was inside, not just piece, him moved to Harry when the curse backfired. Then in GoF when Voldemort uses Harry to return to his human form, part of the 7th piece of his soul returns to him, but not all of it, leaving some inside of Harry, making Harry the 7th (unwanted/unplanned) horcrux. Voldemort needed to use Harry to come back because he needed to take his own soul which was only available in Harry since you can't extract blood from an inanimate object. Later Harry must be killed by Voldemort because there are only 3 ways to destroy a horcrux (basilisk venom, sword of Gryffindor, or to be killed by person from which the piece of soul came from (Voldemort)). So unless they wanted to stab him with the sword or a fang, it had to have been from Voldemort's spell. Dumbledore knew about the original 6 horcruxes because of Slughorn's memory and figured out that Harry was the unplanned 7th by using his logic and just common sense.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
look the horcruxes are: the ring, diary, hufflepuff cup, ravenclaw crown thing, harry, snake,, and voldemort himself. u see voldemort wanted 7 peices of his soul, so he had that when he unwittedly made harry, adn then he tried 2 make his 7th peice of his sould and really made an 8th peice
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
For whomever posted about there being 8 Horcruxes... incorrect. Harry/Tom Horcrux is one. It's the same soul fragment in both... the part that was never meant to leave Voldy. So basically, the base part of the soul that is in Harry is Voldemorts true soul. Hence, all the speech and weird connections with V, Harry has. It's not another individual Horcrux fragment, it's one fragment split into two, if you follow the logic.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Actually nagini wasn't made a horcrux until after voldemort got his body back in the fourth book. So when he tried to kill Harry the first time he had the diary, ring, locket, cup, diadem and himself and he was trying to make the 6th and the 7th would be himself. So after the diary was distroyed in book 2, when he made nagini a hot tux he still would have only had a total of 7 parts of the soul.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
And by the way, Dumbledore could know that since tom riddle asked prof. Slughorn whether it was possible to split a soul in 7 pieces. Slughorn said it was possible but didn't see why anyone would do that. That memory harry got from slughorn in book 6 and saw it together with dumbledore. So they both knew riddle was planning on making 7.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Ow come on people!! There are 8 pieces of tom's soul!! Diary, ring, locket, CUP FROM BELLATRIX' VAULT, diadem, nagini, harry and tom himself!!
Added 5 years ago by guest, 0 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Firstly, a horcrux is just a part of your soul, so both Harry and the part still inside of Voldemort count as horcruxes. That's two. The other five are the diary, ring, locket, diadem, and Nagini. Voldemort's intentions were to make 7, but stopped at "6" instead. What he thought was his 5th horcrux was the diadem, and what he thought was his 6th was Nagini. He stopped at "6" because his body was getting too fragile and unstable to survive. He accidently made Harry a horcrux as well, his was really the 6th, making Nagini the 7th. Before he died he realized that he made 7, which was his first approach.
Added 5 years ago by guest, -4 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

197.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
In the fifth movie how did they ride Thestrals if half of them couldn't see them Report Abuse
It is just something I'm annoyed about and say they shouldn't have done
-3 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 5 comments
Comments:
Thestrals are incredibly intelligent, and they knew to protect their riders. That, along with the help of those who COULD see them, allowed those students to safely ride the thestrals. Yes, it would have been a scary ride, but it was still safe and possible.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
The people who could see them could guide the others. It's like saying a blind person can't sit on a chair.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 3 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
They rode them in the books too. Being able to see something doesn't make you unable to sit on it. Invisible cars seemed to work just fine too.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Read the books.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 8 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Even if they couldn't see them, they could still feel them. Those who could see them could instruct those who could not.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 8 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

198.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
No one was old enough for the triwizard tournament Report Abuse
The tournament started before January and students in their 7th year wouldn't turn seventeen until January. So none of the students would be old enough
-3 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
In the tournament, all 7th years and SOME sixth years could have entered. Just like us, their 6th year is the same as our 11th. entering at age 16 and leaving age 17. Unless you have a really early or late birthday. For example, Harry turns 16 barely a month before he begins his sixth year.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 1 point Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
IN the majority of the UK, the year cut off is in the middle of summer. The pupils turn 17 in their sixth year. This is why Hermione and Ron can do their apparation test in sixth year. Harry is just very young, he turns 17 just before he SHOULD be starting seventh year. Therefore, all the seventh year students and some of the sixth year stundetns (angelina johnson) are abole to take part in the triwizard tournament.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 20 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

199.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
snape Report Abuse
As we all know snape was originally a death eater but turned double agent after voldermort killed lily potter so why in the first book when snape protects harry from voldermorts/ professor quirrels curse does voldermorts not question snapes loyalty or realise snape is no longer on his side regardless of wether snape knew it is voldermorts or not harrys death was the ultimate goal. i find this very weird
-3 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
This question is completely explained in the 2nd chapter of book 6
Added 4 years ago by guest, -1 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
He said that he thought voldy was dead and didn't want to give up his cushy spot at hogwarts.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 2 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking

200.

Vote + to improve this item's ranking
Vote - to decrease this item's ranking
snape betrays voldermort Report Abuse
As we all know snape was originally a death eater but turned double agent after voldermort killed lily potter so why in the first book when snape protects harry from voldermorts/ professor quirrels curse does voldermorts not question snapes loyalty or realise snape is no longer on his side regardless of wether snape knew it is voldermorts or not harrys death was the ultimate goal. i find this very weird
-3 points - added 5 years ago by guest - 2 comments
Comments:
Because Snape hadn't gone to find Voldemort and took up a post at Hogwarts Voldemort assumed Snape had turned to Dumbledore and gone against him therefore not telling him his plans of possessing Quirrell fearing he would turn him over to Dumbledore. Snape thought Quirrell wanted the stone for himself, so tried to stop him from getting it. He protected Harry because, again, he thought it was just Quirrell being annoying and he had promised Dumbledore he would protect Harry.
Added 5 years ago by guest, 5 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
This was addressed later on when snape says something along the lines of "i've told you more than once, i had no idea the dark lord had possessed quirrel"
Added 5 years ago by guest, 9 points Vote + to improve this comment's ranking Vote - to decrease this comment's ranking
Pages:
2
ShareRanks is about ranking things that are top, most, greatest, or even worst in all categories.
Use arrows to rank one item in TOP 20 HARRY POTTER PLOT HOLES vs another.