Yeah, there's something that doesn't seem right there, alright.
Legolas Send a noteboard - 10/08/2010 02:24:37 PM
There's one thing I never thought of before though. Dumbledore was born around 1840. Why did it take Grindewald 80 years from 1860 to come into power? It *felt* like while reading it that he started coming into power soon after he left Dumbledore. I'll have to read again to find out why it seemed that way to me.
Somehow I didn't get the feeling in DH that the whole business with Dumbledore's sister had happened over hundred years ago, either, but it must have.
This message last edited by Legolas on 10/08/2010 at 02:24:44 PM
Harry Potter question- not prisoner of azkaban. (Dumbledore and Voldemort)
- 10/08/2010 12:17:06 AM
698 Views
No.
- 10/08/2010 12:28:28 AM
392 Views
Who's that? Wjy did I think it was Voldy? *NM*
- 10/08/2010 12:42:53 AM
139 Views
because they were both evil dark lords? Grindewald is
- 10/08/2010 01:43:57 PM
372 Views
Yeah, there's something that doesn't seem right there, alright.
- 10/08/2010 02:24:37 PM
338 Views
do you know why you thought he was 150?
- 10/08/2010 02:53:01 PM
351 Views
Dumbledore's age was never mentioned in the book. And Harry was joking in the movie 
*NM*
- 10/08/2010 03:01:12 PM
229 Views
*NM*
- 10/08/2010 03:01:12 PM
229 Views
but I'm asking Legolas because he thought the same thing, and I don't think I thought it from HBP
- 10/08/2010 03:03:13 PM
288 Views
Ah got it. Btw I remember her saying he was 150 many years ago in an interview *NM*
- 10/08/2010 03:10:29 PM
127 Views
maybe I did read it and then just forgot about it and it stuck in my brain as being from the books *NM*
- 10/08/2010 03:17:23 PM
141 Views
Incorrect. Dumbledore was born in 1881
- 10/08/2010 02:47:17 PM
363 Views
JK Rowling is known for screwing up numbers
- 10/08/2010 02:50:57 PM
497 Views
- 10/08/2010 02:50:57 PM
497 Views
In the early years she said a number of things that never panned out
- 10/08/2010 02:59:27 PM
317 Views