Medieval Universities / the Bloody Baron / Charlie time line.

[Catlady (Rita Prince]

No: HPFGUIDX 188374

Geoff wrote in <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/188323>:

<< On the question of dates, Oxford University is a close contemporary of Hogwarts and the universities of Bologna and Paris were earlier European foundations. There were certainly earlier Islamic universities existing at this time, the one at Fes in Morocco being considered as the oldest degree-granting, dating from AD 859. >>

CoS begins in autumn of 1992 and Professor Binns said that Hogwarts was founded 'more than a thosand years ago - the exact date is not known'. IIRC the list decided that meant that Hogwarts was founded in the 980s.

I quickly looked on-line for information on medieval universities before writing my comment, and IIRC saw statements that oxford was founded 1140, Bologna founded 1080, and not a date for Paris, but that it began as a cathedral school for younger students before growing into a university.

And I saw that there was a university in Constantinople in the fifth century, but Constantinople is not Western Europe, and neither is Fez.

Alla discussed PS/SS Chapter Nine in <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/188337> and asked:

<< 6. When Ron hears Hermione scream after she is locked in with the Troll, he is described turning "pale as the Bloody Baron". What if anything does it mean to you? >>

To which, Carol replied in <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/188340>:

<< BTW, NHN describes the Baron as "groaning and clanking on the Astronomy Tower" (HBP) and the Grey Lady mentions the Baron's chains, but how can ghostly chains clank, how can he fly if he wears them, and how did he get put in chains in the first place if he killed himself immediately after killing her? >>

Ghostly chains can clank the same way that ghosts can speak (it is magic that moves the air molecules to make the sounds). 

The Baron's guilty conscience created the ghostly chains, either as he died, or somewhat later when he had time to think about it.

Long ago in fanfic I tried to figure out the Bloody Baron. I thought he was centuries more recent than the Founders, but I did think that the reason he refused to 'go on' was because he had killed the woman he loved (it's not murder when they're on different sides of a magic military battle). But I didn't think he had immediately killed himself after that; I thought he was later killed by the betraying Dark Witch he had been serving in that battle, when she wanted to give his estates to a newer vassal. Thus showing that trying to gain more power by supporting a Dark Lord or Lady in rebellion against one's rightful king is a lose.

Around that time, Carol had a theory that all that talk in canon about 'blood' meant that magic is literally 'in the blood'. The theory was elegant analysis of the text, but didn't make too much sense to me: would a Muggle like me gain magic power by getting a large blood transfusion from a wizard? However, it perfectly answered my question about why Peeves is scared of the Bloody Baron. If only people who have magic blood can do magic, and BB is the only local ghost who has blood, then he is the only local ghost who can do magic and curse Peeves.

Geoff wrote in <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/188343>:

<< "I wear the chain I forged in life," replied the Ghost. "I made it link by link, and yard by yard; I girded it on of my own free will, and of my own free will I wore it." >>

Yes, probably that was in Rowling's mind, but there are a lot of other clanking ghosts haunting around. I've never thought that they had chains because they had been chained in dungeons while dying, but rather I have taken it for granted that they got the chains as part of their ghost act, whether the chains represent some Catholic doctrine about their souls being stuck in purgatory, or represent some psychology about their mind is chained to events from their life/dying. Or maybe just make noise to scare live people.

Janelle wrote in <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/188341>:

<< From those dates it's clear that Charlie's last year at Hogwarts had to have been 1986, which means that his first year was 1979 (assuming that he attended all 7 years) >>

Thank you for doing a Charlie Weasley time-line. I have tried to do one, but I get confused with all those dates. The mismatch of school year and calendar year helps confuse me

Rowling's outside the books remarks wildly juggle the characters' birthdays. It seems to me that if Bill had been born in August 1967 and Charlie in July 1968, they both would have started first year at Hogwarts in September 1979, which would explain why they divided the glory between them, Bill concentrating on academics and becoming Prefect and Head Boy, and Charlie concentrating on sport and becoming Quidditch Captain.

Carol wrote in <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/188344>:

<< Fleur's attraction to Bill (which would be fine if she's, say, eighteen and he's twenty-three but odd if he's eleven years older than Percy (two years older than Charlie, who's nine years older than Percy by this timeline), which would make him about twenty-eight and Bill about thirty at the end of GoF. It would also make Bill thirty-two at the end of HBP, which makes the distinction between Lupin (age thirty-seven) and Bill in HBP rather stretched >>

When she made those interview statements about wizards live longer than Muggles and Dumbledore is 150 (changed to 115 in DH, grrr), I thought she was going for wizards starting at the mystical age of 21 age one year for every two they live, so Dumblerdore at 150 would be the same as a Muggle at 85, Bill at 30 would be the same as 25, and McGonagal at 'a spritely 70' would be the same as 45. The Marauder generation would have had to be in their 60s to look like in their 40s. Okay, I was wrong.