[HPforGrownups] Re: Whose prophecy? (was Re: Why Harry?)

[Troels Forchhammer]

No: HPFGUIDX 54681

At 08:18 02-04-03 +0000, sevenhundredandthirteen wrote:
>Well, on a relevant point, Harry was born on 31st of July. Therefore
>he was conceived on the 31st of October- Hallowe'en.

The 'nine months' is actually quite a simplification - it's
'close enough,' but not useless for finding the exact date of
conception - when they calculated the expected day of birth
for my children they added 40 weeks to the first or last (I
don't remember) day of the last menstruation. Add to that
that natural pregnancies can vary with at least a month in
either direction (also the average pregnancy becomes shorter
the more kids the woman has had), then it it will be obvious
that the nine months is just a nice round figure that is
close to the average.

That would not, of course, stop Rowling from using exactly
nine months /if/ the date of Harry's conception ever
becomes important.

>I wouldn't think it was that significant, except that there
>seems to be a pattern of significant things happening on
>Hallowe'en - James and Lily dying is the big one.

Precisely.
That is the reason Rowling may have chosen an exact nine
months pregnancy - because she /wanted/ it to happen on
Hallowe'en.
If she has not thought about it, then we have a whole
range of possible dates - with mid-October being the most
likely (and the average).


>I think that this would tie in perfectly with a prediction -
>as in 'a child conceived on Hallowe'en night' is a
>suitably general, yet specific way of fortelling a great leader in a
>spooky fortune-telling way. Does it hold any superstitions in pagan
>beliefs?

The date of conception?
That might very well be - I don't know for sure, but I would
imagine that it carried some importance.
Or Hallowe'en?
Hallowe'en is entirely Christian - IIRC it is purely a
protestant thing, originally.


>It also might open up the ideas for Harry being 'bred' as a weapon to
>defeat Lord Voldemort, but I don't like that theory.

No, that wouldn't reflect well on James and Lily, would it?
And, IMO, it would ... stain Lily's love for Harry, which
again wouldn't fit with Dumbledore's explanation in PS.

>I much prefer Trelawney making the "correct" prediction after
>Lily is already pregnant. I mean, why did Voldemort wait until
>that night to go after the Potters? Especially considering that
>for the time before that there *was* no secret-keeper and charm
>to hide them. So, perhaps Trelawney's 'prediction' only came
>into things later on, after Harry's birth...

Let's see: Dumbledore told the Potters that Voldemort was
after them, and adviced them to go into hiding using the
Fidelius Charm - they do so, and then barely a week later
Voldemort shows up at Godric's Hollow.
Allow a bit of time before word reaches Dumbledore from
his spy, and allow a bit of time for the Potters to ready
their affairs and the spell - still it can't be much more
than about 4 - 5 weeks after Voldemort learned whatever it
was that sent him chasing the Potters.
The real joker is the time it took for Voldemort to find
out (assuming that there is something like e.g. a prophecy
to find out) - if it was kept strictly secret, it might
have taken him a bit longer. Still, I don't think it's
possible to move it back 15 months or more (to before
Harry's birth).

Troels