Tonks's age: A possible solution RE: [the_old_crowd] Re: Snape the Half-Blood Pr

[potioncat]

> 
>Anne: Snape was born in 1959 or 1960 (based on a chat question).  
> Eileen:
> I'm beginning to wonder if this isn't the fact to throw out. Like 
the
> other infamous age given in a chat: the Weasley eldest two's ages, 
it
> doesn't play very well with the rest of the text and it isn't 
primary
> canon. 
> 
> Of course, it's the age we got first, so perhaps people would be 
less
> inclined to let go of it.
> 
Kathy W:
I think we've narrowed it down to the most likely explanation: a 
mistake in math or at least, a mistake in birth order. I think the 
order of Andromeda, Bella, Cissy works better, sort of like naming 
storms.

Even if we toss out the Lexicon's dates, the narrative doesn't work 
out for Bella to be at school with Snape if her younger sister is 
Tonks's mother. We can come with all sorts of explanations, some of 
which would work if these were real people and certain facts were 
written in stone. But these are pencil and paper people and no two 
facts have to fit. (But of course, ought to.)

Having said that, there's this thought. Doesn't Sirius say that Snape 
came to school knowing more curses and he was part of a gang. That 
sounds like both things are current at first year. Just like Harry 
was part of a gang that included Oliver Wood.

If Severus was only part of Bella's gang his first year, that is, she 
was gone afterwards, then it might help explain Spinner's End better. 
Narcissa certainly knows him better than Bella does. 

There I go, trying to make things fit that don't.