Nott, Sr.'s age (Was: What were the Malfoys DOING there?)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 114109


> Potioncat:
> I think Nott,Sr. is older than LV. Tom Riddle and Minerva 
> McGonagall are close in age, and McGonagall isn't elderly. I know 
> in the RW two people can be the same chronological age yet one could 
> be "elderly" while the other wouldn't be, but I don't think 70 or so 
> is elderly in the WW.

Carol responds:
I think seventy is elderly if you're Harry! Also, Nott is Cruciod'd by
Voldemort at least once. If it's happened to him before, that could
well have aged him before his time, as the four simultaneous stunning
spells seem to have aged McGonagall before hers. (We'll see if she's
still leaning on a cane in H-BP.) At any rate, I think it's very
likely that Nott is one of the first-generation DEs, possibly a few
years older than Voldemort (who'll be about seventy in the next book,
though reborn in the form he had at fifty-five).

As I said in another post, Malfoy's father may also have been a
first-generation DE, in keeping with the family's pureblood pride, but
he seems to be dead, and Lucius has taken over his role as patriarch.
Pure speculation of course, but where are all the people of Tom
Riddle's generation, other than Neville's gran and Uncle Algie? Maybe
Karkaroff is one, but shouldn't there be more DEs in their sixties and
seventies, the leaders of VW1?

Carol