What is going on with the HP Timeline?

[Froggs]

Begging your pardon, but where does it say that the book was originally owned by Snapes mother?

I thought it was a given.

[Snow_Crystal]

Ok up to this point 9 people have been in this thread

I am the only one at the moment that thinks Snape wasn't the original owner of the book. Poll shows that 5 others think it was Snape

But the views expressed are slightly different - totally confused...

[Augusta Longbottom]

You're right...it doesn't come right out and say that Eileen Prince was the original owner, we just came to that conclusion on our own -- I was guilty of it too. But I went back and looked and it never comes right out and says that.

The facts in the book are:
* Eileen Prince is Snapes mom
* The book is 50 yrs old
* Hermione suspects Eileen Prince is the HBP and vows to look into it further.
* Snape is the Half Blood Prince

and we (myself included) just let ourselves come to the conclusion -- whether it's right or wrong, only time will tell. Even though I'd assumed the book belonged to his mom, now I;m having doubts -- it's not like JKR to give us gaps like this and let it fall into place in the most obvious ways.

[Froggs]

But really, when has she (JKR) ever pulled a fast one? Most of the "what on earth happened..." questions are answered by the end of a book, she doesn't leave much to be resolved in the next book in her series. I think there are some basic stuff in HBP that has been laid out for the readers, but we keep trying to find ways around it! And I am curious, what would it mean to you (plural) if we find out in the last book that Voldy gave it to Snape? Would another book be a Horcrux? I don't see how the ownership of the Potions book would affect the 7th book's plot.

[digby202]

It just occured to me that Eileen Prince and Tom Riddle were at school at the same time, maybe this has some bearing on Snapes decision to join Voldy?

[carsten]

...The facts in the book are:
* Eileen Prince is Snapes mom
* The book is 50 yrs old
* Hermione suspects Eileen Prince is the HBP and vows to look into it further.
* Snape is the Half Blood Prince

We might come to an additional conclusion: Eileen visited school during the same time Tom Riddle did. Calculations show, that it must have been around 1945, the year of the Grindelwald incident mentioned in book 1 about DD.

[Tanuki]

I don't think the book has anything to do with other people. It doesn't have a dark intelligence to it, it's just scribbled on to death. Plus, we can assume that Snape had his own potions books. I don't think he was THAT destitute to need either his mothers or voldermort's old school things

[annachie]

With no other option, I vote neither. Snapes mother would be my guess, for all the reasons above.

[Snow_Crystal]

I don't think the book has anything to do with other people. It doesn't have a dark intelligence to it, it's just scribbled on to death.

Really? I’m astonished…what about the sectumsempra curse for enemies? If that wasn’t dark intelligence, what is?

Plus, we can assume that Snape had his own potions books. I don't think he was THAT destitute to need either his mothers or LV’s old school things

Someone in HBP (I can't remember who) told Harry to look at the date the book was published to get an idea of who might have owned the book. By my calculations in my first post on this thread, this book was published 10 years before Snape was even born... it MUST have been second-hand surely as new books in bookstores would probably have a re-published date on them. The book was published 35 years before Harry was born, 10 years before Snape, Lily, James and Sirius were born (who we know to be the same age because they came out of that exam together when James and Sirius were tormenting him), so by the time Snape was at Hogwarts studying Potions in his 6th year at the age of 16 the book was already 26 years old.

When I first wrote about my concerns over the HP Timeline, I hadn’t thought of Eileen Prince. She could indeed have been the original owner and that would certainly fit with the timeline because if she bought the book at 16 years old, she would have been 26 when she gave birth to Snape – that would fit wouldn’t it.

But we are not told whether Eileen was a dark wizard. I’d love to know whether she was because it would suggest how Snape had been brought up. I'm just not entirely convinced about her yet - someone please convince me!!

What I want to establish at the moment is… if the book was owned by LV, is this the missing link that indicates why Snape joined the Death Eaters? Something caused him to join approximately 9 years before Harry was born (which incidentally was the time he was studying potions in his 6th year at the age of 16, and also incidentally at the same time that LV was recruiting his DE’s) – what was it? It seems to me to be too much of a coincidence!

Even though I stand alone on this (and could be eating my words when the next book is out), I am still convinced the book was originally LV’s but if someone can convince me the original owner was Snape (if the book had been on the shelf for so many years) or Eileen (who we don't know much about) please, please do as all I want to know is what is going on with the timeline.

A couple of things I don't think we know is whether the handwriting was all in the same hand and whether Snape was lying when he said he invented the Sectumsempra curse - he could have easily been covering for the person who gave him the book.


(By the way these calculations all assume that Lily and James were 25 when they died...!)

[b.scheller]

Harry was killed at the age of 1 and a bit
Lily and James were supposedly between 20-25 when Harry died.

I dont want to be picky but I think you've made a mistake.

[Froggs]

Well hey, maybe Harry is am inferi and no one has noticed yet

[Tanuki]

What I want to establish at the moment is… if the book was owned by LV, is this the missing link that indicates why Snape joined the Death Eaters? Something caused him to join approximately 9 years before Harry was born (which incidentally was the time he was studying potions in his 6th year at the age of 16, and also incidentally at the same time that LV was recruiting his DE’s) – what was it? It seems to me to be too much of a coincidence!

Of course it can't be that Snape, is an evil, mercenary, cowardly sadistic freak. Naw, there has to be a good reason, maybe the devil made him to it. Come on, Snape's akways been a bad guy, get over it

[Phoenix in the Ashes]

Wasn't the original owner of the book Snape's mom? Eileen Prince?

That's right as far as I can gather.
Eileen Prince bought the book when she was going to school 50-odd years ago. She might not have been awesome at potions or something, or maybe they just couldn't afford a new book (or maybe they just didn't want to get one) so Eileen just gave Severus the book.
Nothing deep and meaningful hidden there I think. I can't remember when or if we actually got told it... But that's what I assumed anyway.

[Snow_Crystal]

Harry was killed at the age of 1 and a bit
Lily and James were supposedly between 20-25 when Harry died.

I dont want to be picky but I think you've made a mistake.

Oh god did I really write that!!! I think I was so mixed up with all the maths my head was all over the place.

Incidentally I was just reading this...

http://www.hpana.com/news.18734.html and this too http://www.hp-lexicon.org/timelines/tim ... emort.html

Kind of adds to the theory that this timeline is really all over the place!!! However The one thing that did really interest me was that L&J learned they were a target from a spy in the midst of LV's DEs... could that be Regulas or Snape?

[crystallised_pineapple]

i think the book belonged to either LV or Eileen Prince, simply the fact that the dates seem to fit and it would be simple enough to pass books along.

on the other hand maybe snape just picked it up in a second hand bookstore...