Harry and Hermione being siblings...

[Devika]

No: HPFGUIDX 53642

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theultimatesen" 
<ultimatesen at a...> wrote:
> > Greicy:
> Aren't premature children smaller than others throughout their 
> life?  Being that Harry is small could mean he was a premature 
> baby.  Mabye Lily was so stressed about the whole Voldemort thing 
> she caused herself to give birth earlier than expected.
> 
> me:
> Could be, but I don't think they remain small. Someone correct me 
if 
> I'm wrong, but aren't seekers usually the smallest build of the 
team? 
> This would (could) mean James was small at his age too. I think 
> Harry's size is related to having a cupboard for a room and not 
being 
> fed properly.
> 

I think you're right in saying that seekers are usually small.  
They're supposed to be light and speedy (QTTA and Oliver Wood both 
say this), so it would make sense that they have small builds.  

James is described as being a tall man in GoF, but that's not 
necessarily evidence that he wasn't small for his age at Hogwarts.  
He could easily have had a huge growth spurt at the age of 16 or 
more. However, just to nitpick slightly here, we don't know that 
James was a seeker on the Gryffindor quidditch team.  I know that the 
movie said so, but JKR said in an interview that James was a chaser.  
I guess it depends on which one you take as canon.  Or maybe he could 
have been both?  Maybe he was originally small for his age, but then 
he grew between his 5th and 6th years (or around there) and then was 
no longer the ideal build for a seeker.  However, still being the 
excellent flier that he was, he decided to be a chaser instead?  It's 
possible.  

I think it's possible that Harry's size is at least partly due to his 
upbringing by the Dursleys.  However, that doesn't necessarily have 
to be the case.  I wouldn't be surprised if Harry becomes tall just 
like his father.

Devika, who was a premature baby, but isn't *that* small anymore--and 
certainly wasn't as a child.