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

[potioncat]

No: HPFGUIDX 114128

-- 
> > 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. 

Potioncat:
Actually, my interpretation is that after reaching maturity, 
Magicfolk age much slower than Muggles.  If you read the description 
of McGonagall in SS/PS you would never guess she was 70. And Hagrid 
is around the same age.  He isn't elderly. So I don't think it would 
be typical for a 70ish wizard to be considered elderly or to appear 
elderly.

I'm going by JKR's comment in her website that T. Nott's father is 
an elderly widower, her viewpoint, not Harry's.  So in this case, I 
think elderly means old.  I think McGonagall, Hagrid, Riddle might 
be middle-aged by Magic standards.

Severus and Sirius, you see, were just young pups!
Potioncat