![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tammaiyaLJ just deleted my entire entry. *twitch* Shall try to remember it, and THIS time, shall copy it first. Beh.
I have found an HP timeline. This timeline works on the basis that book 5 occurred in 1996, and it focusing mainly around the older generation, ie marauders, Lucius, Snape etc. Hagrid and Tom Riddle are also there. Not only is this person dedicated enough to assemble this timeline, though- they've actually got some knowledge of JKR interviews, and as such, this timeline includes the ages of the Marauders/Snape! Whoohoo!
Oh, and JKR specifically stated at one point that James was a chaser, not a seeker, by the way.
http://srfqf.dejabu.org/book5canon.html
As it is post book 5, usual spoiler drill applies. Also, it links off a Sirius/Remus slash page, so that's why there is specific focus on the cannon of those two individually at the top of the page.
THIS THING HAD BETTER BLOODY WORK THIS TIME.
I have found an HP timeline. This timeline works on the basis that book 5 occurred in 1996, and it focusing mainly around the older generation, ie marauders, Lucius, Snape etc. Hagrid and Tom Riddle are also there. Not only is this person dedicated enough to assemble this timeline, though- they've actually got some knowledge of JKR interviews, and as such, this timeline includes the ages of the Marauders/Snape! Whoohoo!
Oh, and JKR specifically stated at one point that James was a chaser, not a seeker, by the way.
http://srfqf.dejabu.org/book5canon.html
As it is post book 5, usual spoiler drill applies. Also, it links off a Sirius/Remus slash page, so that's why there is specific focus on the cannon of those two individually at the top of the page.
THIS THING HAD BETTER BLOODY WORK THIS TIME.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-07-08 12:24 am (UTC)hah, snape is *35* in the fourth year, and is thus *36* in OOTP and is thus STILL VERY CHECKOUTABLE.
Re:
Date: 2003-07-08 01:32 am (UTC)