Did Dumbledore lie to Harry about how long he had James Potter's invisibility cloak when he was examining it? If so, why?Voldemort's Very Vexing VacationHow did Dumbledore know that Voldemort will return?How did Snape learn when Harry was to be moved?Why did Dumbledore say that the Ring (Hallow/Horcrux) “was sure to carry a curse”?Why did Malfoy's Petrificus Totalus work on Harry while he was wearing the Invisibility Cloak?Does Worthiness have Anything to do with Mastery of the Hallows?What is the basis for Harry to call Dumbledore the “best teacher”?Did Lily's sacrifice protection end when Harry turned 17 or not?How can Dumbledore cast a spell on Harry while Harry was under the invisibility cloak? Is this a plot mistake of JKR?Why did Harry resent Dumbledore at the beginning of Deathly Hallows?If Harry could come back, why couldn't Dumbledore?

Why are there no referendums in the US?

Opposite of a diet

How do I rename a Linux host without needing to reboot for the rename to take effect?

Is HostGator storing my password in plaintext?

Gears on left are inverse to gears on right?

Why escape if the_content isnt?

How does buying out courses with grant money work?

How do scammers retract money, while you can’t?

What happens if you roll doubles 3 times then land on "Go to jail?"

How to check is there any negative term in a large list?

Implement the Thanos sorting algorithm

Go Pregnant or Go Home

Different result between scanning in Epson's "color negative film" mode and scanning in positive -> invert curve in post?

How did Doctor Strange see the winning outcome in Avengers: Infinity War?

How long to clear the 'suck zone' of a turbofan after start is initiated?

Sort a list by elements of another list

Where does the Z80 processor start executing from?

Unreliable Magic - Is it worth it?

Do sorcerers' Subtle Spells require a skill check to be unseen?

Method to test if a number is a perfect power?

How to write papers efficiently when English isn't my first language?

Why Were Madagascar and New Zealand Discovered So Late?

Escape a backup date in a file name

Would a virus be able to change eye and hair colour?



Did Dumbledore lie to Harry about how long he had James Potter's invisibility cloak when he was examining it? If so, why?


Voldemort's Very Vexing VacationHow did Dumbledore know that Voldemort will return?How did Snape learn when Harry was to be moved?Why did Dumbledore say that the Ring (Hallow/Horcrux) “was sure to carry a curse”?Why did Malfoy's Petrificus Totalus work on Harry while he was wearing the Invisibility Cloak?Does Worthiness have Anything to do with Mastery of the Hallows?What is the basis for Harry to call Dumbledore the “best teacher”?Did Lily's sacrifice protection end when Harry turned 17 or not?How can Dumbledore cast a spell on Harry while Harry was under the invisibility cloak? Is this a plot mistake of JKR?Why did Harry resent Dumbledore at the beginning of Deathly Hallows?If Harry could come back, why couldn't Dumbledore?













27















Sorry if this is too long! I think it's different to previous questions...



In 'King's Cross', Dumbledore claims that James had showed him the cloak "just a few days previously" to the attack on Godric's Hollow (31st October, 1981), indicating he only possessed it for the purpose of examining it for a few days.




'You. You have guessed, I know, why the Cloak was in my possession on the night your parents died. James had showed it to me just a few days previously. It explained much of his undetected wrongdoing at school! I could hardly believe what I was seeing. I asked to borrow it, to examine it. '




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.714-5- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 35, King's Cross



However, from Lily's letter to Sirius we see that this cannot be possible, since Dumbledore clearly had the cloak from around Harry's birthday, 31st July. Note that this letter was written as a thank you letter for the present Sirius got Harry for his birthday.




Dear Padfoot,
Thank you, thank you, for Harry’s birthday present! It
was his favorite by far [...] We had a very quiet birthday tea, just us and old Bathilda who has always been sweet to us and who dotes on Harry. We were so sorry you couldn’t come, but the Order’s got to come first, and Harry’s not old enough to know it’s his birthday anyway! James is getting a bit frustrated shut up here, he tries not to show it but I can tell—also Dumbledore’s still got his Invisibility Cloak, so no chance of little excursions. "




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.180- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 10, Kreacher's Tale



Even allowing for a few days of response time after a birthday for a 'thank you' letter, it seems to me that there is very little chance of Lily having written this later than early August, following Harry's birthday. Dumbledore still had the cloak when the Potters were killed (31st October) and so this leaves a gap of almost three months when Dumbledore must have had the cloak, not the "just a few days previously" he claims at King's Cross. This is rather a long time to "borrow" something so precious!



First I thought he was feeling guilty for having deprived the Potters of a powerful magical object in a time of great peril, but in response to Dumbledore's statement earlier, Harry attempts to reassure him:




‘The Cloak wouldn’t have helped them survive, though,’ Harry said quickly. ‘Voldemort knew where my mum and dad were. The Cloak couldn’t have made them curse-proof.’

‘True,’ sighed Dumbledore. ‘True.’




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.715- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 35, King's Cross



The best theory I have come across thus far is that Dumbledore was ashamed of his obsession with the Hallows and so lied to Harry about how long he had the cloak.



http://dlewis.net/blog/2017/04/11/harry-potter-and-the-problem-with-the-pensieve-memories/ - (the relevant material starts Theory 3 - Part 1 Dumbledore's lie).



However, I do not find this entirely convincing, as Dumbledore is seemingly at his lowest point of self-loathing here and has very little to gain from lying - he is trying to get Harry to despise him:




You cannot despise me more than I despise myself.”
“But I don’t despise you —”
“Then you should,” said Dumbledore.




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.715- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 35, King's Cross



Do you believe the summarised theory presented in the blog I linked or do you find it more credible that Lily wrote the letter just before Halloween? It seems unlikely the Potters would be struggling to communicate with the outside world, given that they had contact with other people (Bathilda and Wormtail) during that time, so sending an owl to Sirius is unlikely to have been so difficult as to take 3 months to achieve. (I also do not believe they would have intentionally delayed replying so long to thank someone for a birthday present!)



My only other theory is that Rowling simply made a mistake, which I think I tend towards, but it seems so obvious an oversight!



TL;DR Dumbledore's statement about when he has the cloak contradicts the approximate date in Lily's letter when she states Dumbledore takes the cloak - is he lying (and why?) or just JKR oversight









share







New contributor




David Beer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 6





    Welcome to SFF! This is a very nice first post and is extremely well written and researched! +1 (it's times like these I also wish we could bounty questions...)

    – TheLethalCarrot
    11 hours ago






  • 2





    Calculating weeks the time he had the cloak from dates sounds a lot like math, and JKR is notoriously bad at math.....

    – AAlig
    9 hours ago







  • 1





    @AAlig Dumbledore also notoriously lies , so... pick one

    – atayenel
    9 hours ago











  • When you get to be Dumbledore's age, a few months will seem like a few days.

    – EvilSnack
    15 mins ago















27















Sorry if this is too long! I think it's different to previous questions...



In 'King's Cross', Dumbledore claims that James had showed him the cloak "just a few days previously" to the attack on Godric's Hollow (31st October, 1981), indicating he only possessed it for the purpose of examining it for a few days.




'You. You have guessed, I know, why the Cloak was in my possession on the night your parents died. James had showed it to me just a few days previously. It explained much of his undetected wrongdoing at school! I could hardly believe what I was seeing. I asked to borrow it, to examine it. '




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.714-5- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 35, King's Cross



However, from Lily's letter to Sirius we see that this cannot be possible, since Dumbledore clearly had the cloak from around Harry's birthday, 31st July. Note that this letter was written as a thank you letter for the present Sirius got Harry for his birthday.




Dear Padfoot,
Thank you, thank you, for Harry’s birthday present! It
was his favorite by far [...] We had a very quiet birthday tea, just us and old Bathilda who has always been sweet to us and who dotes on Harry. We were so sorry you couldn’t come, but the Order’s got to come first, and Harry’s not old enough to know it’s his birthday anyway! James is getting a bit frustrated shut up here, he tries not to show it but I can tell—also Dumbledore’s still got his Invisibility Cloak, so no chance of little excursions. "




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.180- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 10, Kreacher's Tale



Even allowing for a few days of response time after a birthday for a 'thank you' letter, it seems to me that there is very little chance of Lily having written this later than early August, following Harry's birthday. Dumbledore still had the cloak when the Potters were killed (31st October) and so this leaves a gap of almost three months when Dumbledore must have had the cloak, not the "just a few days previously" he claims at King's Cross. This is rather a long time to "borrow" something so precious!



First I thought he was feeling guilty for having deprived the Potters of a powerful magical object in a time of great peril, but in response to Dumbledore's statement earlier, Harry attempts to reassure him:




‘The Cloak wouldn’t have helped them survive, though,’ Harry said quickly. ‘Voldemort knew where my mum and dad were. The Cloak couldn’t have made them curse-proof.’

‘True,’ sighed Dumbledore. ‘True.’




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.715- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 35, King's Cross



The best theory I have come across thus far is that Dumbledore was ashamed of his obsession with the Hallows and so lied to Harry about how long he had the cloak.



http://dlewis.net/blog/2017/04/11/harry-potter-and-the-problem-with-the-pensieve-memories/ - (the relevant material starts Theory 3 - Part 1 Dumbledore's lie).



However, I do not find this entirely convincing, as Dumbledore is seemingly at his lowest point of self-loathing here and has very little to gain from lying - he is trying to get Harry to despise him:




You cannot despise me more than I despise myself.”
“But I don’t despise you —”
“Then you should,” said Dumbledore.




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.715- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 35, King's Cross



Do you believe the summarised theory presented in the blog I linked or do you find it more credible that Lily wrote the letter just before Halloween? It seems unlikely the Potters would be struggling to communicate with the outside world, given that they had contact with other people (Bathilda and Wormtail) during that time, so sending an owl to Sirius is unlikely to have been so difficult as to take 3 months to achieve. (I also do not believe they would have intentionally delayed replying so long to thank someone for a birthday present!)



My only other theory is that Rowling simply made a mistake, which I think I tend towards, but it seems so obvious an oversight!



TL;DR Dumbledore's statement about when he has the cloak contradicts the approximate date in Lily's letter when she states Dumbledore takes the cloak - is he lying (and why?) or just JKR oversight









share







New contributor




David Beer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 6





    Welcome to SFF! This is a very nice first post and is extremely well written and researched! +1 (it's times like these I also wish we could bounty questions...)

    – TheLethalCarrot
    11 hours ago






  • 2





    Calculating weeks the time he had the cloak from dates sounds a lot like math, and JKR is notoriously bad at math.....

    – AAlig
    9 hours ago







  • 1





    @AAlig Dumbledore also notoriously lies , so... pick one

    – atayenel
    9 hours ago











  • When you get to be Dumbledore's age, a few months will seem like a few days.

    – EvilSnack
    15 mins ago













27












27








27


3






Sorry if this is too long! I think it's different to previous questions...



In 'King's Cross', Dumbledore claims that James had showed him the cloak "just a few days previously" to the attack on Godric's Hollow (31st October, 1981), indicating he only possessed it for the purpose of examining it for a few days.




'You. You have guessed, I know, why the Cloak was in my possession on the night your parents died. James had showed it to me just a few days previously. It explained much of his undetected wrongdoing at school! I could hardly believe what I was seeing. I asked to borrow it, to examine it. '




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.714-5- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 35, King's Cross



However, from Lily's letter to Sirius we see that this cannot be possible, since Dumbledore clearly had the cloak from around Harry's birthday, 31st July. Note that this letter was written as a thank you letter for the present Sirius got Harry for his birthday.




Dear Padfoot,
Thank you, thank you, for Harry’s birthday present! It
was his favorite by far [...] We had a very quiet birthday tea, just us and old Bathilda who has always been sweet to us and who dotes on Harry. We were so sorry you couldn’t come, but the Order’s got to come first, and Harry’s not old enough to know it’s his birthday anyway! James is getting a bit frustrated shut up here, he tries not to show it but I can tell—also Dumbledore’s still got his Invisibility Cloak, so no chance of little excursions. "




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.180- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 10, Kreacher's Tale



Even allowing for a few days of response time after a birthday for a 'thank you' letter, it seems to me that there is very little chance of Lily having written this later than early August, following Harry's birthday. Dumbledore still had the cloak when the Potters were killed (31st October) and so this leaves a gap of almost three months when Dumbledore must have had the cloak, not the "just a few days previously" he claims at King's Cross. This is rather a long time to "borrow" something so precious!



First I thought he was feeling guilty for having deprived the Potters of a powerful magical object in a time of great peril, but in response to Dumbledore's statement earlier, Harry attempts to reassure him:




‘The Cloak wouldn’t have helped them survive, though,’ Harry said quickly. ‘Voldemort knew where my mum and dad were. The Cloak couldn’t have made them curse-proof.’

‘True,’ sighed Dumbledore. ‘True.’




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.715- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 35, King's Cross



The best theory I have come across thus far is that Dumbledore was ashamed of his obsession with the Hallows and so lied to Harry about how long he had the cloak.



http://dlewis.net/blog/2017/04/11/harry-potter-and-the-problem-with-the-pensieve-memories/ - (the relevant material starts Theory 3 - Part 1 Dumbledore's lie).



However, I do not find this entirely convincing, as Dumbledore is seemingly at his lowest point of self-loathing here and has very little to gain from lying - he is trying to get Harry to despise him:




You cannot despise me more than I despise myself.”
“But I don’t despise you —”
“Then you should,” said Dumbledore.




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.715- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 35, King's Cross



Do you believe the summarised theory presented in the blog I linked or do you find it more credible that Lily wrote the letter just before Halloween? It seems unlikely the Potters would be struggling to communicate with the outside world, given that they had contact with other people (Bathilda and Wormtail) during that time, so sending an owl to Sirius is unlikely to have been so difficult as to take 3 months to achieve. (I also do not believe they would have intentionally delayed replying so long to thank someone for a birthday present!)



My only other theory is that Rowling simply made a mistake, which I think I tend towards, but it seems so obvious an oversight!



TL;DR Dumbledore's statement about when he has the cloak contradicts the approximate date in Lily's letter when she states Dumbledore takes the cloak - is he lying (and why?) or just JKR oversight









share







New contributor




David Beer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












Sorry if this is too long! I think it's different to previous questions...



In 'King's Cross', Dumbledore claims that James had showed him the cloak "just a few days previously" to the attack on Godric's Hollow (31st October, 1981), indicating he only possessed it for the purpose of examining it for a few days.




'You. You have guessed, I know, why the Cloak was in my possession on the night your parents died. James had showed it to me just a few days previously. It explained much of his undetected wrongdoing at school! I could hardly believe what I was seeing. I asked to borrow it, to examine it. '




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.714-5- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 35, King's Cross



However, from Lily's letter to Sirius we see that this cannot be possible, since Dumbledore clearly had the cloak from around Harry's birthday, 31st July. Note that this letter was written as a thank you letter for the present Sirius got Harry for his birthday.




Dear Padfoot,
Thank you, thank you, for Harry’s birthday present! It
was his favorite by far [...] We had a very quiet birthday tea, just us and old Bathilda who has always been sweet to us and who dotes on Harry. We were so sorry you couldn’t come, but the Order’s got to come first, and Harry’s not old enough to know it’s his birthday anyway! James is getting a bit frustrated shut up here, he tries not to show it but I can tell—also Dumbledore’s still got his Invisibility Cloak, so no chance of little excursions. "




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.180- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 10, Kreacher's Tale



Even allowing for a few days of response time after a birthday for a 'thank you' letter, it seems to me that there is very little chance of Lily having written this later than early August, following Harry's birthday. Dumbledore still had the cloak when the Potters were killed (31st October) and so this leaves a gap of almost three months when Dumbledore must have had the cloak, not the "just a few days previously" he claims at King's Cross. This is rather a long time to "borrow" something so precious!



First I thought he was feeling guilty for having deprived the Potters of a powerful magical object in a time of great peril, but in response to Dumbledore's statement earlier, Harry attempts to reassure him:




‘The Cloak wouldn’t have helped them survive, though,’ Harry said quickly. ‘Voldemort knew where my mum and dad were. The Cloak couldn’t have made them curse-proof.’

‘True,’ sighed Dumbledore. ‘True.’




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.715- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 35, King's Cross



The best theory I have come across thus far is that Dumbledore was ashamed of his obsession with the Hallows and so lied to Harry about how long he had the cloak.



http://dlewis.net/blog/2017/04/11/harry-potter-and-the-problem-with-the-pensieve-memories/ - (the relevant material starts Theory 3 - Part 1 Dumbledore's lie).



However, I do not find this entirely convincing, as Dumbledore is seemingly at his lowest point of self-loathing here and has very little to gain from lying - he is trying to get Harry to despise him:




You cannot despise me more than I despise myself.”
“But I don’t despise you —”
“Then you should,” said Dumbledore.




Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - p.715- Levine (pdf) - Chapter 35, King's Cross



Do you believe the summarised theory presented in the blog I linked or do you find it more credible that Lily wrote the letter just before Halloween? It seems unlikely the Potters would be struggling to communicate with the outside world, given that they had contact with other people (Bathilda and Wormtail) during that time, so sending an owl to Sirius is unlikely to have been so difficult as to take 3 months to achieve. (I also do not believe they would have intentionally delayed replying so long to thank someone for a birthday present!)



My only other theory is that Rowling simply made a mistake, which I think I tend towards, but it seems so obvious an oversight!



TL;DR Dumbledore's statement about when he has the cloak contradicts the approximate date in Lily's letter when she states Dumbledore takes the cloak - is he lying (and why?) or just JKR oversight







harry-potter albus-dumbledore invisibility-cloak





share







New contributor




David Beer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.










share







New contributor




David Beer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








share



share






New contributor




David Beer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 11 hours ago









David BeerDavid Beer

13914




13914




New contributor




David Beer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





David Beer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






David Beer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







  • 6





    Welcome to SFF! This is a very nice first post and is extremely well written and researched! +1 (it's times like these I also wish we could bounty questions...)

    – TheLethalCarrot
    11 hours ago






  • 2





    Calculating weeks the time he had the cloak from dates sounds a lot like math, and JKR is notoriously bad at math.....

    – AAlig
    9 hours ago







  • 1





    @AAlig Dumbledore also notoriously lies , so... pick one

    – atayenel
    9 hours ago











  • When you get to be Dumbledore's age, a few months will seem like a few days.

    – EvilSnack
    15 mins ago












  • 6





    Welcome to SFF! This is a very nice first post and is extremely well written and researched! +1 (it's times like these I also wish we could bounty questions...)

    – TheLethalCarrot
    11 hours ago






  • 2





    Calculating weeks the time he had the cloak from dates sounds a lot like math, and JKR is notoriously bad at math.....

    – AAlig
    9 hours ago







  • 1





    @AAlig Dumbledore also notoriously lies , so... pick one

    – atayenel
    9 hours ago











  • When you get to be Dumbledore's age, a few months will seem like a few days.

    – EvilSnack
    15 mins ago







6




6





Welcome to SFF! This is a very nice first post and is extremely well written and researched! +1 (it's times like these I also wish we could bounty questions...)

– TheLethalCarrot
11 hours ago





Welcome to SFF! This is a very nice first post and is extremely well written and researched! +1 (it's times like these I also wish we could bounty questions...)

– TheLethalCarrot
11 hours ago




2




2





Calculating weeks the time he had the cloak from dates sounds a lot like math, and JKR is notoriously bad at math.....

– AAlig
9 hours ago






Calculating weeks the time he had the cloak from dates sounds a lot like math, and JKR is notoriously bad at math.....

– AAlig
9 hours ago





1




1





@AAlig Dumbledore also notoriously lies , so... pick one

– atayenel
9 hours ago





@AAlig Dumbledore also notoriously lies , so... pick one

– atayenel
9 hours ago













When you get to be Dumbledore's age, a few months will seem like a few days.

– EvilSnack
15 mins ago





When you get to be Dumbledore's age, a few months will seem like a few days.

– EvilSnack
15 mins ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















13














It's hard to give a definitive answer to this question because there is conflicting information, but here are a few points:



Note the wording of the letter: "Dumbledore’s still got his Invisibility Cloak". This indicates that Sirius was already aware that Dumbledore borrowed it, and Lily is merely telling him that Dumbledore has not returned it yet. If Dumbledore had borrowed the cloak after Harry's birthday then this letter would necessarily be at least the second communication to Sirius since the birthday. As such it would be odd that Lily is first talking about Harry's birthday in this letter, and not in the previous communication. The contents of this letter imply that it is the first communication to Sirius since Harry's birthday. This would point to the fact that Dumbledore had borrowed the cloak before Harry's birthday, which means he indeed must have had it for at least three months contrary to his statement to Harry.



On the other hand, when Harry reads the letter he seems to assume that it was written shortly before his parents' death:




Wormy was here... Pettigrew, the traitor, had seemed "down," had he? Was he aware that he was seeing James and Lily alive for the last time?




Harry, who knew that there was a three month gap between his birthday and his parents death, still seemed to think that "last weekend" could have been the last time Pettigrew would see Harry's parents, which would likely place it much closer to Halloween than to Harry's birthday.



However, it is possible that Harry didn't really fully think it through, and/or he simply made a mistake.



Another clue from the letter is the following line:




but that was probably the news about the McKinnons;




We don't know much about the McKinnons, but Moody gives us one bit of information about them in Order of the Phoenix when he shows Harry the photograph of the original order:




That’s Marlene
McKinnon, she was killed two weeks after this was
taken, they got her whole family.




We don't know exactly when the photograph was taken, but we can perhaps infer something from how Moody describes the rest of the dead people in the photograph:




That’s Frank and
Alice Longbottom —”







and that’s Emmeline Vance,
you’ve met her, and that there’s Lupin, obviously...
Benjy Fenwick, he copped it too, we only ever found
bits of him...







“That’s Edgar Bones... brother of Amelia Bones, they
got him and his family too, he was a great wizard..
Sturgis Podmore, blimey, he looks young... Caradoc
Dearborn, vanished six months after this, we never
found his body... Hagrid, of course, looks exactly the
same as ever... Elphias Doge, you’ve met him, I’d
forgotten he used to wear that stupid hat... Gideon
Prewett, it took five Death Eaters to kill him and his
brother Fabian, they fought like heroes... budge
along, budge along...”







“That’s Dumbledore’s brother, Aberforth, only time I
ever met him, strange bloke... That’s Dorcas
Meadowes, Voldemort killed her personally... Sirius,
when he still had short hair... and... there you go,
thought that would interest you!”



Harry’s heart turned over. His mother and father were
beaming up at him, sitting on either side of a small,
watery-eyed man Harry recognized at once as
Wormtail: He was the one who had betrayed their
whereabouts to Voldemort and so helped bring about
their deaths.




Notice how Moody only gives a time frame for the McKinnons and for Caradoc Dearborn, two weeks and six months respectively. It would seem Moody was emphasizing the immediacy of those events, which might imply that the other deaths happened significantly later. If that is the case then it would make sense that James and Lily were killed several months after the McKinnons, which would be consistent with Lily's letter to Sirius being dated around the time of Harry's birthday, once again indicating that Dumbledore's statement to Harry was incorrect.



On the other hand, there is perhaps an indication that the letter was in fact written shortly before they died. Note the following statement:




James is getting a bit frustrated shut up here




The fact that James was "shut up" might imply that the Fidelius Charm had already been implemented. In Prisoner of Azkaban Cornelius Fudge describes when that was done:




"And then, barely a week after the Fidelius Charm had been performed —"



"Black betrayed them?" breathed Madam Rosmerta.




If the letter was written after the Fidelius Charm was performed and the charm was performed a week before Voldemort attacked them then the letter would have been written within a week of Halloween. This would support Dumbledore's version of the Invisibility Cloak timeline.



However, it is not necessarily clear that "shut up" would refer only to the Fidelius Charm. In this question I noted that Fudge in the very same conversation also indicated that Dumbledore advised the Potters to go into hiding immediately upon learning that Voldemort heard part of the prophecy:




According to Fudge in chapter 10 of Prisoner of Azkaban:




"Not many people are aware that the Potters knew You-Know-Who was after them. Dumbledore, who was of course working tirelessly against You-Know-Who, had a number of useful spies. One of them tipped him off, and he alerted James and Lily at once. He advised them to go into hiding. Well, of course, You-Know-Who wasn't an easy person to hide from. Dumbledore told them that their best chance was the Fidelius Charm."




So it seems that as soon as Snape told Dumbledore that Voldemort was planning on going after the Potters, Dumbledore told the Potters to hide.




As I discussed in that question, it is hard to understand why they would have hid for so long without the Fidelius Charm, but be that as it may, it is thus possible to understand "shut up" from Lily's letter as referring to the longer period of hiding, in which case it would still be consistent with the other information pointing to the letter having been written earlier.



Based on the above arguments, I would think it more likely that Dumbledore's claim of "a few days" is incorrect. However, that does not necessarily mean that Dumbledore was maliciously or deliberately misleading Harry. He may have simply made a mistake. Granted Dumbledore is supposed to be brilliant, but keep in mind that he is talking about events that occurred 16 years previously. The precise amount of time that he had the cloak for may not have been an important detail in his mind so he may not have remembered it correctly. He may have just been remembering that he borrowed the cloak shortly before they died, and without remembering the exact timeline he just stated that it was for a few days. Indeed, in his letter to Harry in Philosopher's Stone, Dumbledore simply used the vague phrase "before he died":




Your father left this in my possession before he died.




On the other hand, at the end of Philosopher's Stone Dumbledore does lie to Harry about the circumstances of the cloak, when he makes it sound like it was a coincidence that James gave it to him:




"Ah — your father happened to leave it in my possession, and I thought you might like it."




However, at that time Dumbledore was nowhere near ready to tell Harry the truth about the Hallows, so the bit of misinformation is understandable. By the time he tells Harry everything at the end of Deathly Hallows there wouldn't be much of a reason for him to deliberately lie about how long he had had the cloak for.



Of course, as noted in the question, this is very possibly simply an authorial mistake. However brilliant and truthful Dumbledore is supposed to be in the story, he is still at the mercy of the author not tripping him up by forgetting other details.






share|improve this answer

























  • He's not supposed to be truthful, though.

    – Adamant
    8 hours ago






  • 1





    @Adamant Once in a while he is.

    – Alex
    8 hours ago










Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "186"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);






David Beer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f208022%2fdid-dumbledore-lie-to-harry-about-how-long-he-had-james-potters-invisibility-cl%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









13














It's hard to give a definitive answer to this question because there is conflicting information, but here are a few points:



Note the wording of the letter: "Dumbledore’s still got his Invisibility Cloak". This indicates that Sirius was already aware that Dumbledore borrowed it, and Lily is merely telling him that Dumbledore has not returned it yet. If Dumbledore had borrowed the cloak after Harry's birthday then this letter would necessarily be at least the second communication to Sirius since the birthday. As such it would be odd that Lily is first talking about Harry's birthday in this letter, and not in the previous communication. The contents of this letter imply that it is the first communication to Sirius since Harry's birthday. This would point to the fact that Dumbledore had borrowed the cloak before Harry's birthday, which means he indeed must have had it for at least three months contrary to his statement to Harry.



On the other hand, when Harry reads the letter he seems to assume that it was written shortly before his parents' death:




Wormy was here... Pettigrew, the traitor, had seemed "down," had he? Was he aware that he was seeing James and Lily alive for the last time?




Harry, who knew that there was a three month gap between his birthday and his parents death, still seemed to think that "last weekend" could have been the last time Pettigrew would see Harry's parents, which would likely place it much closer to Halloween than to Harry's birthday.



However, it is possible that Harry didn't really fully think it through, and/or he simply made a mistake.



Another clue from the letter is the following line:




but that was probably the news about the McKinnons;




We don't know much about the McKinnons, but Moody gives us one bit of information about them in Order of the Phoenix when he shows Harry the photograph of the original order:




That’s Marlene
McKinnon, she was killed two weeks after this was
taken, they got her whole family.




We don't know exactly when the photograph was taken, but we can perhaps infer something from how Moody describes the rest of the dead people in the photograph:




That’s Frank and
Alice Longbottom —”







and that’s Emmeline Vance,
you’ve met her, and that there’s Lupin, obviously...
Benjy Fenwick, he copped it too, we only ever found
bits of him...







“That’s Edgar Bones... brother of Amelia Bones, they
got him and his family too, he was a great wizard..
Sturgis Podmore, blimey, he looks young... Caradoc
Dearborn, vanished six months after this, we never
found his body... Hagrid, of course, looks exactly the
same as ever... Elphias Doge, you’ve met him, I’d
forgotten he used to wear that stupid hat... Gideon
Prewett, it took five Death Eaters to kill him and his
brother Fabian, they fought like heroes... budge
along, budge along...”







“That’s Dumbledore’s brother, Aberforth, only time I
ever met him, strange bloke... That’s Dorcas
Meadowes, Voldemort killed her personally... Sirius,
when he still had short hair... and... there you go,
thought that would interest you!”



Harry’s heart turned over. His mother and father were
beaming up at him, sitting on either side of a small,
watery-eyed man Harry recognized at once as
Wormtail: He was the one who had betrayed their
whereabouts to Voldemort and so helped bring about
their deaths.




Notice how Moody only gives a time frame for the McKinnons and for Caradoc Dearborn, two weeks and six months respectively. It would seem Moody was emphasizing the immediacy of those events, which might imply that the other deaths happened significantly later. If that is the case then it would make sense that James and Lily were killed several months after the McKinnons, which would be consistent with Lily's letter to Sirius being dated around the time of Harry's birthday, once again indicating that Dumbledore's statement to Harry was incorrect.



On the other hand, there is perhaps an indication that the letter was in fact written shortly before they died. Note the following statement:




James is getting a bit frustrated shut up here




The fact that James was "shut up" might imply that the Fidelius Charm had already been implemented. In Prisoner of Azkaban Cornelius Fudge describes when that was done:




"And then, barely a week after the Fidelius Charm had been performed —"



"Black betrayed them?" breathed Madam Rosmerta.




If the letter was written after the Fidelius Charm was performed and the charm was performed a week before Voldemort attacked them then the letter would have been written within a week of Halloween. This would support Dumbledore's version of the Invisibility Cloak timeline.



However, it is not necessarily clear that "shut up" would refer only to the Fidelius Charm. In this question I noted that Fudge in the very same conversation also indicated that Dumbledore advised the Potters to go into hiding immediately upon learning that Voldemort heard part of the prophecy:




According to Fudge in chapter 10 of Prisoner of Azkaban:




"Not many people are aware that the Potters knew You-Know-Who was after them. Dumbledore, who was of course working tirelessly against You-Know-Who, had a number of useful spies. One of them tipped him off, and he alerted James and Lily at once. He advised them to go into hiding. Well, of course, You-Know-Who wasn't an easy person to hide from. Dumbledore told them that their best chance was the Fidelius Charm."




So it seems that as soon as Snape told Dumbledore that Voldemort was planning on going after the Potters, Dumbledore told the Potters to hide.




As I discussed in that question, it is hard to understand why they would have hid for so long without the Fidelius Charm, but be that as it may, it is thus possible to understand "shut up" from Lily's letter as referring to the longer period of hiding, in which case it would still be consistent with the other information pointing to the letter having been written earlier.



Based on the above arguments, I would think it more likely that Dumbledore's claim of "a few days" is incorrect. However, that does not necessarily mean that Dumbledore was maliciously or deliberately misleading Harry. He may have simply made a mistake. Granted Dumbledore is supposed to be brilliant, but keep in mind that he is talking about events that occurred 16 years previously. The precise amount of time that he had the cloak for may not have been an important detail in his mind so he may not have remembered it correctly. He may have just been remembering that he borrowed the cloak shortly before they died, and without remembering the exact timeline he just stated that it was for a few days. Indeed, in his letter to Harry in Philosopher's Stone, Dumbledore simply used the vague phrase "before he died":




Your father left this in my possession before he died.




On the other hand, at the end of Philosopher's Stone Dumbledore does lie to Harry about the circumstances of the cloak, when he makes it sound like it was a coincidence that James gave it to him:




"Ah — your father happened to leave it in my possession, and I thought you might like it."




However, at that time Dumbledore was nowhere near ready to tell Harry the truth about the Hallows, so the bit of misinformation is understandable. By the time he tells Harry everything at the end of Deathly Hallows there wouldn't be much of a reason for him to deliberately lie about how long he had had the cloak for.



Of course, as noted in the question, this is very possibly simply an authorial mistake. However brilliant and truthful Dumbledore is supposed to be in the story, he is still at the mercy of the author not tripping him up by forgetting other details.






share|improve this answer

























  • He's not supposed to be truthful, though.

    – Adamant
    8 hours ago






  • 1





    @Adamant Once in a while he is.

    – Alex
    8 hours ago















13














It's hard to give a definitive answer to this question because there is conflicting information, but here are a few points:



Note the wording of the letter: "Dumbledore’s still got his Invisibility Cloak". This indicates that Sirius was already aware that Dumbledore borrowed it, and Lily is merely telling him that Dumbledore has not returned it yet. If Dumbledore had borrowed the cloak after Harry's birthday then this letter would necessarily be at least the second communication to Sirius since the birthday. As such it would be odd that Lily is first talking about Harry's birthday in this letter, and not in the previous communication. The contents of this letter imply that it is the first communication to Sirius since Harry's birthday. This would point to the fact that Dumbledore had borrowed the cloak before Harry's birthday, which means he indeed must have had it for at least three months contrary to his statement to Harry.



On the other hand, when Harry reads the letter he seems to assume that it was written shortly before his parents' death:




Wormy was here... Pettigrew, the traitor, had seemed "down," had he? Was he aware that he was seeing James and Lily alive for the last time?




Harry, who knew that there was a three month gap between his birthday and his parents death, still seemed to think that "last weekend" could have been the last time Pettigrew would see Harry's parents, which would likely place it much closer to Halloween than to Harry's birthday.



However, it is possible that Harry didn't really fully think it through, and/or he simply made a mistake.



Another clue from the letter is the following line:




but that was probably the news about the McKinnons;




We don't know much about the McKinnons, but Moody gives us one bit of information about them in Order of the Phoenix when he shows Harry the photograph of the original order:




That’s Marlene
McKinnon, she was killed two weeks after this was
taken, they got her whole family.




We don't know exactly when the photograph was taken, but we can perhaps infer something from how Moody describes the rest of the dead people in the photograph:




That’s Frank and
Alice Longbottom —”







and that’s Emmeline Vance,
you’ve met her, and that there’s Lupin, obviously...
Benjy Fenwick, he copped it too, we only ever found
bits of him...







“That’s Edgar Bones... brother of Amelia Bones, they
got him and his family too, he was a great wizard..
Sturgis Podmore, blimey, he looks young... Caradoc
Dearborn, vanished six months after this, we never
found his body... Hagrid, of course, looks exactly the
same as ever... Elphias Doge, you’ve met him, I’d
forgotten he used to wear that stupid hat... Gideon
Prewett, it took five Death Eaters to kill him and his
brother Fabian, they fought like heroes... budge
along, budge along...”







“That’s Dumbledore’s brother, Aberforth, only time I
ever met him, strange bloke... That’s Dorcas
Meadowes, Voldemort killed her personally... Sirius,
when he still had short hair... and... there you go,
thought that would interest you!”



Harry’s heart turned over. His mother and father were
beaming up at him, sitting on either side of a small,
watery-eyed man Harry recognized at once as
Wormtail: He was the one who had betrayed their
whereabouts to Voldemort and so helped bring about
their deaths.




Notice how Moody only gives a time frame for the McKinnons and for Caradoc Dearborn, two weeks and six months respectively. It would seem Moody was emphasizing the immediacy of those events, which might imply that the other deaths happened significantly later. If that is the case then it would make sense that James and Lily were killed several months after the McKinnons, which would be consistent with Lily's letter to Sirius being dated around the time of Harry's birthday, once again indicating that Dumbledore's statement to Harry was incorrect.



On the other hand, there is perhaps an indication that the letter was in fact written shortly before they died. Note the following statement:




James is getting a bit frustrated shut up here




The fact that James was "shut up" might imply that the Fidelius Charm had already been implemented. In Prisoner of Azkaban Cornelius Fudge describes when that was done:




"And then, barely a week after the Fidelius Charm had been performed —"



"Black betrayed them?" breathed Madam Rosmerta.




If the letter was written after the Fidelius Charm was performed and the charm was performed a week before Voldemort attacked them then the letter would have been written within a week of Halloween. This would support Dumbledore's version of the Invisibility Cloak timeline.



However, it is not necessarily clear that "shut up" would refer only to the Fidelius Charm. In this question I noted that Fudge in the very same conversation also indicated that Dumbledore advised the Potters to go into hiding immediately upon learning that Voldemort heard part of the prophecy:




According to Fudge in chapter 10 of Prisoner of Azkaban:




"Not many people are aware that the Potters knew You-Know-Who was after them. Dumbledore, who was of course working tirelessly against You-Know-Who, had a number of useful spies. One of them tipped him off, and he alerted James and Lily at once. He advised them to go into hiding. Well, of course, You-Know-Who wasn't an easy person to hide from. Dumbledore told them that their best chance was the Fidelius Charm."




So it seems that as soon as Snape told Dumbledore that Voldemort was planning on going after the Potters, Dumbledore told the Potters to hide.




As I discussed in that question, it is hard to understand why they would have hid for so long without the Fidelius Charm, but be that as it may, it is thus possible to understand "shut up" from Lily's letter as referring to the longer period of hiding, in which case it would still be consistent with the other information pointing to the letter having been written earlier.



Based on the above arguments, I would think it more likely that Dumbledore's claim of "a few days" is incorrect. However, that does not necessarily mean that Dumbledore was maliciously or deliberately misleading Harry. He may have simply made a mistake. Granted Dumbledore is supposed to be brilliant, but keep in mind that he is talking about events that occurred 16 years previously. The precise amount of time that he had the cloak for may not have been an important detail in his mind so he may not have remembered it correctly. He may have just been remembering that he borrowed the cloak shortly before they died, and without remembering the exact timeline he just stated that it was for a few days. Indeed, in his letter to Harry in Philosopher's Stone, Dumbledore simply used the vague phrase "before he died":




Your father left this in my possession before he died.




On the other hand, at the end of Philosopher's Stone Dumbledore does lie to Harry about the circumstances of the cloak, when he makes it sound like it was a coincidence that James gave it to him:




"Ah — your father happened to leave it in my possession, and I thought you might like it."




However, at that time Dumbledore was nowhere near ready to tell Harry the truth about the Hallows, so the bit of misinformation is understandable. By the time he tells Harry everything at the end of Deathly Hallows there wouldn't be much of a reason for him to deliberately lie about how long he had had the cloak for.



Of course, as noted in the question, this is very possibly simply an authorial mistake. However brilliant and truthful Dumbledore is supposed to be in the story, he is still at the mercy of the author not tripping him up by forgetting other details.






share|improve this answer

























  • He's not supposed to be truthful, though.

    – Adamant
    8 hours ago






  • 1





    @Adamant Once in a while he is.

    – Alex
    8 hours ago













13












13








13







It's hard to give a definitive answer to this question because there is conflicting information, but here are a few points:



Note the wording of the letter: "Dumbledore’s still got his Invisibility Cloak". This indicates that Sirius was already aware that Dumbledore borrowed it, and Lily is merely telling him that Dumbledore has not returned it yet. If Dumbledore had borrowed the cloak after Harry's birthday then this letter would necessarily be at least the second communication to Sirius since the birthday. As such it would be odd that Lily is first talking about Harry's birthday in this letter, and not in the previous communication. The contents of this letter imply that it is the first communication to Sirius since Harry's birthday. This would point to the fact that Dumbledore had borrowed the cloak before Harry's birthday, which means he indeed must have had it for at least three months contrary to his statement to Harry.



On the other hand, when Harry reads the letter he seems to assume that it was written shortly before his parents' death:




Wormy was here... Pettigrew, the traitor, had seemed "down," had he? Was he aware that he was seeing James and Lily alive for the last time?




Harry, who knew that there was a three month gap between his birthday and his parents death, still seemed to think that "last weekend" could have been the last time Pettigrew would see Harry's parents, which would likely place it much closer to Halloween than to Harry's birthday.



However, it is possible that Harry didn't really fully think it through, and/or he simply made a mistake.



Another clue from the letter is the following line:




but that was probably the news about the McKinnons;




We don't know much about the McKinnons, but Moody gives us one bit of information about them in Order of the Phoenix when he shows Harry the photograph of the original order:




That’s Marlene
McKinnon, she was killed two weeks after this was
taken, they got her whole family.




We don't know exactly when the photograph was taken, but we can perhaps infer something from how Moody describes the rest of the dead people in the photograph:




That’s Frank and
Alice Longbottom —”







and that’s Emmeline Vance,
you’ve met her, and that there’s Lupin, obviously...
Benjy Fenwick, he copped it too, we only ever found
bits of him...







“That’s Edgar Bones... brother of Amelia Bones, they
got him and his family too, he was a great wizard..
Sturgis Podmore, blimey, he looks young... Caradoc
Dearborn, vanished six months after this, we never
found his body... Hagrid, of course, looks exactly the
same as ever... Elphias Doge, you’ve met him, I’d
forgotten he used to wear that stupid hat... Gideon
Prewett, it took five Death Eaters to kill him and his
brother Fabian, they fought like heroes... budge
along, budge along...”







“That’s Dumbledore’s brother, Aberforth, only time I
ever met him, strange bloke... That’s Dorcas
Meadowes, Voldemort killed her personally... Sirius,
when he still had short hair... and... there you go,
thought that would interest you!”



Harry’s heart turned over. His mother and father were
beaming up at him, sitting on either side of a small,
watery-eyed man Harry recognized at once as
Wormtail: He was the one who had betrayed their
whereabouts to Voldemort and so helped bring about
their deaths.




Notice how Moody only gives a time frame for the McKinnons and for Caradoc Dearborn, two weeks and six months respectively. It would seem Moody was emphasizing the immediacy of those events, which might imply that the other deaths happened significantly later. If that is the case then it would make sense that James and Lily were killed several months after the McKinnons, which would be consistent with Lily's letter to Sirius being dated around the time of Harry's birthday, once again indicating that Dumbledore's statement to Harry was incorrect.



On the other hand, there is perhaps an indication that the letter was in fact written shortly before they died. Note the following statement:




James is getting a bit frustrated shut up here




The fact that James was "shut up" might imply that the Fidelius Charm had already been implemented. In Prisoner of Azkaban Cornelius Fudge describes when that was done:




"And then, barely a week after the Fidelius Charm had been performed —"



"Black betrayed them?" breathed Madam Rosmerta.




If the letter was written after the Fidelius Charm was performed and the charm was performed a week before Voldemort attacked them then the letter would have been written within a week of Halloween. This would support Dumbledore's version of the Invisibility Cloak timeline.



However, it is not necessarily clear that "shut up" would refer only to the Fidelius Charm. In this question I noted that Fudge in the very same conversation also indicated that Dumbledore advised the Potters to go into hiding immediately upon learning that Voldemort heard part of the prophecy:




According to Fudge in chapter 10 of Prisoner of Azkaban:




"Not many people are aware that the Potters knew You-Know-Who was after them. Dumbledore, who was of course working tirelessly against You-Know-Who, had a number of useful spies. One of them tipped him off, and he alerted James and Lily at once. He advised them to go into hiding. Well, of course, You-Know-Who wasn't an easy person to hide from. Dumbledore told them that their best chance was the Fidelius Charm."




So it seems that as soon as Snape told Dumbledore that Voldemort was planning on going after the Potters, Dumbledore told the Potters to hide.




As I discussed in that question, it is hard to understand why they would have hid for so long without the Fidelius Charm, but be that as it may, it is thus possible to understand "shut up" from Lily's letter as referring to the longer period of hiding, in which case it would still be consistent with the other information pointing to the letter having been written earlier.



Based on the above arguments, I would think it more likely that Dumbledore's claim of "a few days" is incorrect. However, that does not necessarily mean that Dumbledore was maliciously or deliberately misleading Harry. He may have simply made a mistake. Granted Dumbledore is supposed to be brilliant, but keep in mind that he is talking about events that occurred 16 years previously. The precise amount of time that he had the cloak for may not have been an important detail in his mind so he may not have remembered it correctly. He may have just been remembering that he borrowed the cloak shortly before they died, and without remembering the exact timeline he just stated that it was for a few days. Indeed, in his letter to Harry in Philosopher's Stone, Dumbledore simply used the vague phrase "before he died":




Your father left this in my possession before he died.




On the other hand, at the end of Philosopher's Stone Dumbledore does lie to Harry about the circumstances of the cloak, when he makes it sound like it was a coincidence that James gave it to him:




"Ah — your father happened to leave it in my possession, and I thought you might like it."




However, at that time Dumbledore was nowhere near ready to tell Harry the truth about the Hallows, so the bit of misinformation is understandable. By the time he tells Harry everything at the end of Deathly Hallows there wouldn't be much of a reason for him to deliberately lie about how long he had had the cloak for.



Of course, as noted in the question, this is very possibly simply an authorial mistake. However brilliant and truthful Dumbledore is supposed to be in the story, he is still at the mercy of the author not tripping him up by forgetting other details.






share|improve this answer















It's hard to give a definitive answer to this question because there is conflicting information, but here are a few points:



Note the wording of the letter: "Dumbledore’s still got his Invisibility Cloak". This indicates that Sirius was already aware that Dumbledore borrowed it, and Lily is merely telling him that Dumbledore has not returned it yet. If Dumbledore had borrowed the cloak after Harry's birthday then this letter would necessarily be at least the second communication to Sirius since the birthday. As such it would be odd that Lily is first talking about Harry's birthday in this letter, and not in the previous communication. The contents of this letter imply that it is the first communication to Sirius since Harry's birthday. This would point to the fact that Dumbledore had borrowed the cloak before Harry's birthday, which means he indeed must have had it for at least three months contrary to his statement to Harry.



On the other hand, when Harry reads the letter he seems to assume that it was written shortly before his parents' death:




Wormy was here... Pettigrew, the traitor, had seemed "down," had he? Was he aware that he was seeing James and Lily alive for the last time?




Harry, who knew that there was a three month gap between his birthday and his parents death, still seemed to think that "last weekend" could have been the last time Pettigrew would see Harry's parents, which would likely place it much closer to Halloween than to Harry's birthday.



However, it is possible that Harry didn't really fully think it through, and/or he simply made a mistake.



Another clue from the letter is the following line:




but that was probably the news about the McKinnons;




We don't know much about the McKinnons, but Moody gives us one bit of information about them in Order of the Phoenix when he shows Harry the photograph of the original order:




That’s Marlene
McKinnon, she was killed two weeks after this was
taken, they got her whole family.




We don't know exactly when the photograph was taken, but we can perhaps infer something from how Moody describes the rest of the dead people in the photograph:




That’s Frank and
Alice Longbottom —”







and that’s Emmeline Vance,
you’ve met her, and that there’s Lupin, obviously...
Benjy Fenwick, he copped it too, we only ever found
bits of him...







“That’s Edgar Bones... brother of Amelia Bones, they
got him and his family too, he was a great wizard..
Sturgis Podmore, blimey, he looks young... Caradoc
Dearborn, vanished six months after this, we never
found his body... Hagrid, of course, looks exactly the
same as ever... Elphias Doge, you’ve met him, I’d
forgotten he used to wear that stupid hat... Gideon
Prewett, it took five Death Eaters to kill him and his
brother Fabian, they fought like heroes... budge
along, budge along...”







“That’s Dumbledore’s brother, Aberforth, only time I
ever met him, strange bloke... That’s Dorcas
Meadowes, Voldemort killed her personally... Sirius,
when he still had short hair... and... there you go,
thought that would interest you!”



Harry’s heart turned over. His mother and father were
beaming up at him, sitting on either side of a small,
watery-eyed man Harry recognized at once as
Wormtail: He was the one who had betrayed their
whereabouts to Voldemort and so helped bring about
their deaths.




Notice how Moody only gives a time frame for the McKinnons and for Caradoc Dearborn, two weeks and six months respectively. It would seem Moody was emphasizing the immediacy of those events, which might imply that the other deaths happened significantly later. If that is the case then it would make sense that James and Lily were killed several months after the McKinnons, which would be consistent with Lily's letter to Sirius being dated around the time of Harry's birthday, once again indicating that Dumbledore's statement to Harry was incorrect.



On the other hand, there is perhaps an indication that the letter was in fact written shortly before they died. Note the following statement:




James is getting a bit frustrated shut up here




The fact that James was "shut up" might imply that the Fidelius Charm had already been implemented. In Prisoner of Azkaban Cornelius Fudge describes when that was done:




"And then, barely a week after the Fidelius Charm had been performed —"



"Black betrayed them?" breathed Madam Rosmerta.




If the letter was written after the Fidelius Charm was performed and the charm was performed a week before Voldemort attacked them then the letter would have been written within a week of Halloween. This would support Dumbledore's version of the Invisibility Cloak timeline.



However, it is not necessarily clear that "shut up" would refer only to the Fidelius Charm. In this question I noted that Fudge in the very same conversation also indicated that Dumbledore advised the Potters to go into hiding immediately upon learning that Voldemort heard part of the prophecy:




According to Fudge in chapter 10 of Prisoner of Azkaban:




"Not many people are aware that the Potters knew You-Know-Who was after them. Dumbledore, who was of course working tirelessly against You-Know-Who, had a number of useful spies. One of them tipped him off, and he alerted James and Lily at once. He advised them to go into hiding. Well, of course, You-Know-Who wasn't an easy person to hide from. Dumbledore told them that their best chance was the Fidelius Charm."




So it seems that as soon as Snape told Dumbledore that Voldemort was planning on going after the Potters, Dumbledore told the Potters to hide.




As I discussed in that question, it is hard to understand why they would have hid for so long without the Fidelius Charm, but be that as it may, it is thus possible to understand "shut up" from Lily's letter as referring to the longer period of hiding, in which case it would still be consistent with the other information pointing to the letter having been written earlier.



Based on the above arguments, I would think it more likely that Dumbledore's claim of "a few days" is incorrect. However, that does not necessarily mean that Dumbledore was maliciously or deliberately misleading Harry. He may have simply made a mistake. Granted Dumbledore is supposed to be brilliant, but keep in mind that he is talking about events that occurred 16 years previously. The precise amount of time that he had the cloak for may not have been an important detail in his mind so he may not have remembered it correctly. He may have just been remembering that he borrowed the cloak shortly before they died, and without remembering the exact timeline he just stated that it was for a few days. Indeed, in his letter to Harry in Philosopher's Stone, Dumbledore simply used the vague phrase "before he died":




Your father left this in my possession before he died.




On the other hand, at the end of Philosopher's Stone Dumbledore does lie to Harry about the circumstances of the cloak, when he makes it sound like it was a coincidence that James gave it to him:




"Ah — your father happened to leave it in my possession, and I thought you might like it."




However, at that time Dumbledore was nowhere near ready to tell Harry the truth about the Hallows, so the bit of misinformation is understandable. By the time he tells Harry everything at the end of Deathly Hallows there wouldn't be much of a reason for him to deliberately lie about how long he had had the cloak for.



Of course, as noted in the question, this is very possibly simply an authorial mistake. However brilliant and truthful Dumbledore is supposed to be in the story, he is still at the mercy of the author not tripping him up by forgetting other details.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 7 hours ago

























answered 9 hours ago









AlexAlex

18.9k45794




18.9k45794












  • He's not supposed to be truthful, though.

    – Adamant
    8 hours ago






  • 1





    @Adamant Once in a while he is.

    – Alex
    8 hours ago

















  • He's not supposed to be truthful, though.

    – Adamant
    8 hours ago






  • 1





    @Adamant Once in a while he is.

    – Alex
    8 hours ago
















He's not supposed to be truthful, though.

– Adamant
8 hours ago





He's not supposed to be truthful, though.

– Adamant
8 hours ago




1




1





@Adamant Once in a while he is.

– Alex
8 hours ago





@Adamant Once in a while he is.

– Alex
8 hours ago










David Beer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded


















David Beer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












David Beer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











David Beer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














Thanks for contributing an answer to Science Fiction & Fantasy Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f208022%2fdid-dumbledore-lie-to-harry-about-how-long-he-had-james-potters-invisibility-cl%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Is it wise to focus on putting odd beats on left when playing double bass drums?What does the tie across other different notes mean?How to improve right hand picking/strumming technique for electric and acoustic guitar?How fast is the BPM should you start to use double bass pedal?Alternative or more advanced methods for counting rhythmsLost direction in practicing drumsIs there any way at all to tell if these measures are 6/4 vs. 3/2?Why is alberti bass so tiring?How does 'meter' differ from 'rhythm' in music?Rhythm question about piano sheet notationWhy is Bach's Cello Suite 1 written in 16th notes

History of India Contents Prehistoric era (until c. 3300 BCE) Bronze Age – "First urbanisation" (c. 3300 – c. 1800 BCE) Climate change, de-urbanisation, and Indo-Aryan migrations (c.1800 – 1500 BCE) Iron Age - Vedic period (c. 1500 – c. 600 BCE) "Second urbanisation" (c. 600 – c. 200 BCE) Classical to early medieval periods (c. 200 BCE – c. 1200 CE) Late medieval period (c. 1200 – 1526 CE) Early modern period (c. 1526–1858 CE) Modern period and independence (after c. 1850 CE) Historiography See also References Further reading External links Navigation menureviewedee[update]The crisisThe Evolution and History of Human Populations in South Asia: Inter-disciplinary Studies in Archaeology, Biological Anthropology, Linguistics and GeneticsThe Ancient Indus: Urbanism, Economy, and Society"Indus River Valley Civilizations"The Ancient Indus: Urbanism, Economy, and Society"India before the British: The Mughal Empire and its Rivals, 1526–1857"Why Europe Grew Rich and Asia Did Not: Global Economic Divergence, 1600–1850Development Centre Studies The World Economy Historical Statistics: Historical StatisticsDeveloping cultures: case studiesEthnic Groups of South Asia and the Pacific: An Encyclopedia: An Encyclopedia"Indian Economy During British Rule""Economic Impact of the British Rule in India | Indian History"The Bone Readers: Science and Politics in Human Origins Research"Out of Africa: new hypotheses and evidence for the dispersal of Homo sapiens along the Indian Ocean rim"10.3109/0301446100363924920334598"Genetic and archaeological perspectives on the initial modern human colonization of southern Asia"2013PNAS..11010699M10.1073/pnas.1306043110369678523754394"Edakkal Caves|Places Around in Wayanad"Protecting megaliths to keep history alive The Hindu daily"Archaeologists rock solid behind Edakkal Cave"The Global Prehistory of Human Migration"Indus Valley 2,000 years older than thought"the original"Stepwells -Cosmology of Subterranean Architecture as seen in Adalaj"A History of Ancient and Early medieval India : from the Stone Age to the 12th century"Stone celts in Harappa"the original"Peoples and languages in pre-islamic Indus valley"the original"The Sindhi language"the originalThe Aryan chromosome"Fluvial landscapes of the Harappan Civilization"2012PNAS..109E1688G10.1073/pnas.1112743109338705422645375"Is River Ghaggar, Saraswati? Geochemical Constraints""An Ancient Civilization, Upended by Climate Change""Huge Ancient Civilization's Collapse Explained"2003GeoRL..30.1425S10.1029/2002GL0168222006QSRv...25.1283M10.1016/j.quascirev.2005.10.0122011QuInt.229..140M10.1016/j.quaint.2009.11.012Climate Change and the Course of Global History: A Rough JourneyA History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th CenturyA History of Ancient and Mediaeval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th CenturyAntennae SwordA History of IndiaA History of IndiaAn Introduction to Hinduism"India: The Late 2nd Millennium and the Reemergence of Urbanism"The Coinage of Ancient IndiaA Sanskrit reader: with vocabulary and notesPedigree: the origins of words from nature"Early Sanskritization. Origins and Development of the Kuru State"10.11588/ejvs.1995.4.823The Sanskrit epics, Part 2The City in South AsiaThe UpanishadsAn Introduction to HinduismReligions of the World, Second Edition: A Comprehensive Encyclopedia of Beliefs and PracticesA History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th CenturyEarly India: From the Origins to AD 1300Republics in ancient Indiapp. 83ff"Magadha Empire""Lumbini Development Trust: Restoring the Lumbini Garden"the originalThe great armies of antiquityarchived"The Achaemenid Persian Empire (550–330 B.C.)""East–West Orientation of Historical Empires"1076-156X"Dinner on the Grand Trunk Road"10.2307/32502263250226"Silappathikaram Tamil Literature"the originalManimekalai – English transliteration of Tamil originalIndian Temple Architecture: Form and Transformation : the Karṇāṭa Drāviḍa Tradition, 7th to 13th CenturiesBuddhist ArchitectureA History of India"The World Economy (GDP) : Historical Statistics by Professor Angus Maddison"The World Economy – Volume 1: A Millennial Perspective and Volume 2: Historical Statistics10.2307/32502140004-36483250214A Comprehensive History of India: Volume 2Between the Empires: Society in India, 300 to 400Emergence of Viṣṇu and Śiva Images in India: Numismatic and Sculptural Evidence"Parthian Pair of Earrings"the originalThe Medical Times and Gazette, Volume 1Greatest emporium in the worldThe Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 BCBuddhist Records of the Western WorldArchaeology in Soviet Central AsiaThe Grandeur of Gandhara: The Ancient Buddhist Civilization of the Swat, Peshawar, Kabul and Indus ValleysIndian Sculpture: Circa 500 B.C.-A.D. 700"The History of Pakistan: The Kushans"Gupta Dynasty – MSN Encartathe original"India – Historical Setting – The Classical Age – Gupta and Harsha""Gupta Dynasty, Golden Age Of India"the original"The Age of the Guptas and After"the originalNumber Theory and Its History"Gupta dynasty (Indian dynasty)""Gupta dynasty: empire in 4th century"the original"The Story of India – Photo Gallery"The ASI say499315420"Pallava script"p. 145"CNG: eAuction 329. INDIA, Post-Gupta (Ganges Valley). Vardhanas of Thanesar and Kanauj. Harshavardhana. Circa AD 606–647. AR Drachm (13mm, 2.28 g, 1h)""Harsha""Sthanvishvara (historical region, India)""Harsha (Indian emperor)"Shyama Kumar Chattopadhyaya (2000) The Philosophy of Sankar's Advaita VedantaShankara's IntroductionShankara's Introduction19373677Shankara's IntroductionIs The Buddhist 'No-Self' Doctrine Compatible With Pursuing Nirvana?The Seven Spiritual Laws Of YogaIndia: The Ancient Past. A History of the Indian-Subcontinent from 7000 BC to AD 1200The Kashmir Series: Glimpses of Kashmiri Culture – Vivekananda Kendra, Kanyakumari (p. 57).Al-Hind: Early Medieval India and the Expansion of Islam, 7th–11th CenturiesHistory of GopāchalaLand of Two Rivers: A History of Bengal from the Mahabharata to MujibEuropean Trade and Colonial ConquestA History of IndiaA Comprehensive History Of Ancient India (3 Vol. Set)"The Last Years of Cholas: The decline and fall of a dynasty"the originalFascinating Hindutva: Saffron Politics and Dalit MobilisationGazetteer of the province of OudhAl- Hind: The slave kings and the Islamic conquest. 2"Shahi Family"The Cambridge history of Islam"Ameer Nasir-ood-deen Subooktugeen"Gazetteer of the Attock District, 1930, Part 1Land of seven rivers: History of India's GeographyTemple Desecration and Indo-Muslim StatesIslam in South Asia: A Short HistoryBeyond Orientalism: The Work of Wilhelm Halbfass and Its Impact on Indian and Cross-cultural StudiesThe Making of Terrorism in Pakistan: Historical and Social Roots of ExtremismOrnament in Indian ArchitectureA historical review of Hindu India: 300 B.C. to 1200 A.D."Indian States and Union Territories"Islam in South Asia: A Short HistoryA Brief History of the Indian PeoplesThe Modern ReviewDelhi Sultanate"Battuta's Travels: Delhi, capital of Muslim India"the original"Timur – conquest of India"the originalIndia HandbookBhaktiThe Four Denomination of Hinduism10.1007/s11407-008-9049-925691067"Vijayanagara Research Project::Elephant Stables"10.2307/26465262646526Historical Dictionary of the TamilsBihar General Knowledge DigestMapping Bihar: From Medieval to Modern TimesPopular Literature and Pre-modern Societies in South AsiaA manual of the Kistna district in the presidency of MadrasAncient Indian History and CivilizationFragmented Memories: Struggling to be Tai-Ahom in India"The Islamic World to 1600: Rise of the Great Islamic Empires (The Mughal Empire)"the originalDynasties: A Global History of Power, 1300–1800, p. 105"Whose fort is it anyway"10.1111/0020-8833.000532600793Development Centre Studies The World Economy Historical Statistics: Historical Statistics"India's Deindustrialization in the 18th and 19th Centuries"The Mughal Empire, p. 190"The Long Globalization and Textile Producers in India"The Mughal World: Life in India's Last Golden AgeAurangzeb: The Life and Legacy of India's Most Controversial KingIn the Shadow of the Taj: A Portrait of Agra"Iran in the Age of the Raj"p. 8610.2307/20539802053980Delhi, the Capital of IndiaAn Advanced History of Modern India"Journal of the Tanjore Maharaja Serfoji's Sarasvati Mahal Library"The Rediscovery of India: A New SubcontinentIslamic Renaissance In South Asia (1707–1867) : The Role Of Shah Waliallah & His SuccessorsAn Advanced History of Modern IndiaThe Great Maratha Mahadaji Scindia"Full text of "Selections from the papers of Lord Metcalfe; late governor-general of India, governor of Jamaica, and governor-general of Canada""The Discovery Of IndiaThe Sacred City of the Hindus: An Account of Benares in Ancient and Modern TimesResurrecting Banaras: Urban Space, Architecture and Religious BoundariesFaith & Philosophy of Sikhism"Missiles mainstay of Pak's N-arsenal"History Modern India By S.N. Sen"Sirajuddaula"ArchivedLongman History & Civics (Dual Government in Bengal)Madhya Pradesh National Means-Cum-Merit Scholarship Exam (Warren Hasting's system of Dual Government)A Military History of Britain: from 1775 to the PresentIndian Cultural Heritage Perspective For TourismHindu Rulers, Muslim Subjects: Islam, Rights, and the History of KashmirIndian HistoryAn Atlas and Survey of South Asian HistoryAn Historical Account of the British Trade Over the Caspian SeaIndian Merchants and Eurasian Trade, 1600–1750The Indian diaspora in Central Asia and its trade, 1550–1900From Constantinople to the home of Omar Khayyam: travels in Transcaucasia and northern Persia for historic and literary researchA journey from Bengal to England: through the northern part of India, Kashmire, Afghanistan, and Persia, and into Russia, by the Caspian-SeaA Second Journey through Persia, Armenia, and Asia Minor, to Constantinople, between the Years 1810 and 1816Reports from the consuls of the United States, 1887Portugal and its Empire, 1250–1800 (Collected Essays in Memory of Glenn J. Ames).: Portuguese Studies Review, Vol. 17, No. 1The Dutch Power in Kerala, 1729–1758http://mod.nic.inArchivedDossier Goa – A Recusa do Sacrifício InútilAn Imperial Crisis in British India: The Manipur Uprising of 1891The Truth of Babri Mosque"Kolkata (Calcutta) : History"the original"Robert Clive, Baron Clive, 'Clive of India', 1725–1774""The Transformation from a Pre-Colonial to a Colonial Order: The Case of India"10.2307/25955872595587A versatile geniusArchived10.1109/MWSYM.1997.602854"Rabindranath Tagore on Education"the original"Essay on 'Derozio and the Young Bengal Movement'"Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation"Plague"the originalPopulation Growth and Land Use"Reintegrating India with the World Economy""Census Of India 1931"A history of modern India, 1480–1950"'India's well-timed diversification of army helped democracy' | Business Standard News"Bal Gangadhar Tilak: Struggle for Swaraj"Participants from the Indian subcontinent in the First World War""Commonwealth War Graves Commission Annual Report 2007–2008 Online"the original1462689197110.1017/s0010417500016534178920Eurocentrism: a marxian critical realist critique"Ranjit Guha, "On Some Aspects of Historiography of Colonial India""10.2307/2168385216838510.7202/016593ar"Harvard scholar says the idea of India dates to a much earlier time than the British or the Mughals""In The Footsteps of Pilgrims""India's spiritual landscape: The heavens and the earth""India: A Sacred Geography by Diana L Eck – review"Modern India: The Origins of an Asian Democracy10.2307/21694222169422964322464"The Indian Subcontinent and 'Out of Africa 1'"254043308Encyclopedia of World ReligionsThe Evolution and History of Human Populations in South Asia: Inter-disciplinary Studies in Archaeology, Biological Anthropology, Linguistics and Genetics"The Early Paleolithic of the Indian Subcontinent: Hominin Colonization, Dispersals and Occupation History"Ancient Indian History and CivilizationAncient Indian Social History: Some Interpretationsthe originalIndia Before EuropeA Concise History of Modern India"The beginning of the historical period, c. 500–150 BCE"full textA History of Indiathe originalexcerpt and text searchexcerptexcerptAn Economic History of India: From Pre-Colonial Times to 1991excerpt and text searchexcerpt and text searchIndia as known to the ancient world10.1111/j.1468-0289.1985.tb00391.x2597191onlineThe History of India, as told by its own historians. The Muhammadan Periodonline editionHans William Brown research collection on 19th-century missionary work in India, 1882–1932, Ms. Coll. 1033, Kislak Center for Special Collections, Rare Books and Manuscripts, University of Pennsylvaniaee

map list to bin numbersquantilization (if that is a word)Map efficiently over duplicates in listGenerating a list of cubefree numbersIs there an equivalent to MATLAB's linspace?Convert a list of hexadecimal numbers to decimalTaking one list Mod a second listlist of items and group of alternative itemsHow find numbers in this list of inequalities?Selecting list entries with a True False index list of similar lengthReplace element in array by checking condition in another listAttempting to fill a table with the number of elements in each bin and make a table with the elements in the bins?