Humor will not be tolerated!! -Portia

Were you brought out of retirement DL?

Nah. But the question was over hours so Marguerite asked for my help and Yellow posted it for me last night (which is nice because he can attach it to my account, so I can still search for it in My Answers). It used to say ℅ Yellow, but we had some technical difficulties and had to repaste everything and we forgot to put the ℅ back on.

Just out of curiosity, why do you feel this part occurs?

- Dumbledore warns the Potters.
- The Potters go into hiding.
- This lasts several months, but less than a year. But probably close to a year.
- The Potters decide to go into deeper hiding and get a secret keeper.
- Dumbledore agrees that this is a good plan. He offers to be secret keeper.
- The Potters respectfully decline and tell him that Sirius will be the secret keeper.

I never inferred that they were in hiding for any length of time before using the Fidelius Charm. I guess I just assumed that because the Fidelius Charm was on their own house, they just stayed put when they were warned, but I could be wrong.

Well, mostly because, from what I remember, they were in hiding for about a year, but once the Fidelius Charm was placed, they only lasted about a week.

I'd have to do some research to back that up, but that seems right in my head.

Does it not in yours? Should I do some research?

I'm with DL. And so is HP Lexicon. http://www.hp-lexicon.org/timelines/ess ... tters.html

The Fidelius was only on the house a week. And Lily's letter that Harry found in Sirius' room mentions how tired they were of being "shut up here" during the time of Harry's birthday in July (DH pg 180). Severus and Dumbledore met on the hilltop in the cold with "leafless trees" (DH pg 676). So Severus warned them in the fall/winter, they were sick of being in hiding that summer, and then they died in October.

Interesting.

Apparently they would have been better off just hiding, seeing as how they lasted almost a year that way.

Apparently. But in theory, they should have been safer. They just picked the wrong friend. Personally, I would have taken Dumbledore up on his offer.

Also, HM, why did you ask the question in the first place?

Because I've long disagreed with your asserted timeline of events and wondered what the consensus was.

Incidentally, I was a little disappointed when you answered.

But, now, it seems you may perhaps have possibly been a bit right all along. Interesting.

Humble Master wrote:Because I've long disagreed with your asserted timeline of events and wondered what the consensus was.

I guess I didn't remember discussing it with you.

Humble Master wrote:Incidentally, I was a little disappointed when you answered.

Gee, thanks. But for what it's worth, I was asked only after the current writers ignored it for over 300 hours. In future, if you don't want me to answer, I'd suggest mentioning that in the question, since many writers still ask for my opinion on HP questions.

Humble Master wrote:But, now, it seems you may perhaps have possibly been a bit right all along. Interesting.

[cough] [rolls eyes]

Someday you'll learn that I am always right.

I certainly wasn't upset to see another Niffler answer, I was just specifically looking for another opinion. But if your was the right one it will be more than sufficient.

I'm sorry, I did mean to get to it, but the HP Lexicon timelines were always broken when I checked. (Marguerite's my friend too, but I don't have quite the staying power as Niffler.)

If you want, I can ignore DL's answer and come up with my own, just give me 100 more hours.

So, wait, DL wasn't right until I backed her up?

I'll try not to get a big head about that.

TheAnswerIs42 wrote:So, wait, DL wasn't right until I backed her up?

I'll try not to get a big head about that.

Nono. Niffler, not DL.

Dragon Lady wrote:

TheAnswerIs42 wrote:So, wait, DL wasn't right until I backed her up?

I'll try not to get a big head about that.

Nono. Niffler, not DL.

Hi Dragon Lady! Where did Niffler go? He (it?) was here just a minute ago! Strange . . .