Perhaps this should be renamed "Trelawney's Prophecy"? Mafalda Hopkirk 13:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm ... but the Prophecy concerns Harry. It might be confusing. - Cavalier One(Wizarding Wireless Network) 13:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
- 'The' works unless there are any other notable prophecies it's competing with. Ty 06:14, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
Links in the Quote
In the quotation of the prophecy, it links 'those who have thricce defied him' to the Potters. But this is misleading, for the Longbottoms also thrice defied Voldemort. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Silverdrama (talk • contribs) 14:40, 30 March 2009.
- You're correct. I've removed the links from the quote. ★ Starstuff (Owl me!) 13:25, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
I think the title of this article needs to be changed, because it currently implies that Trelawney's first prophecy was the only one in history, when there is an entire Hall filled with prophecies in the Department of Mysteries. Any ideas? ★ Starstuff (Owl me!) 13:40, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Voldemort and death eaters
Why did Voldemort and his death eaters didn't take immediality the prophecy, since they fast found Harry and his friends. This wouldn't caused Sirius death, because they already had the prophecy if they stealed it. They had all the time in harry potter 5 to take that prophecy, but they didn't take it. Why had Harry give that prophecy to Lucius? They could have it all immediality. So I would say, YOU'RE NOT SMART VOLDEMORT. lol. Could someone explain that to me?--Station7 20:40, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
Propecies can only be removed my whom they are made about. This is why Voldemort lured Harry to the Ministry, as his Death Eaters couldn't have retrieved it themselves. Merlin. 10:13, March 21, 2011 (UTC)
Oh, just realised this has already been answered :) Merlin. 10:14, March 21, 2011 (UTC)
Death Eater Question
To the Death Eater question:
The reason Lucius didn't just take it was because he was unable to. The only people who are allowed to take the prophecy are the ones that prophecy mentions. So the only people who would be able to retrieve the prophecy from the shelf was Harry Potter, Voldemort (and maybe even Neville cause the prophecy could have ment him.) That is why Lucius needed to have Harry give it to him. That is also why Voldemort sent the false vision of Sirius being tortured in the first place, so Harry could grab the prophecy from the self. JUST in case you are wondering, the reason why Voldemort never went there himself to retrieve the prophecy was that the Minister of Magic didn't believe him to be back and was separating the wizardry community from Harry and Dumbledore, so Voldemort couldn't risk being seen by the Ministry. Ashbaum17 04:56, December 21, 2009 (UTC)
/* Reaction */
"Oddly enough, the prophecy referred to two people who would be born at the end of July: Harry Potter and Neville Longbottom. Although the prophecy referred to both Potter and Longbottom, Voldemort decided that it was Harry to whom the prophecy was referring."
This is just a thought, but I just feel like it shouldn't say that Voldemort decided it was Harry, because Harry hasn't been born yet. Would it be more appropriate to say the child of James and Lily? And when it said "two people who would be born at the end of July: Harry Potter and Neville Longbottom", could it be put later known as? Maybe?
Maybe that doesn't make sense, hmm, but just a thought. Theonlyhermione 15:45, March 9, 2010 (UTC)Theonlyhermione
- Well, we don't know the time frame in which Lord Voldemort chose Harry, but that change would still work either way. --JKoch(Owl Me!) 15:52, March 9, 2010 (UTC)
Very true, but to know that Snape overheard the prophecy, can we assume that he told Voldemort immediately? Of course then that doesn't mean he made that decision right away, but I can't imagine him making it a last minute decision. Theonlyhermione 16:04, March 9, 2010 (UTC)Theonlyhermione
Neither can live
Does anyone understand that last part? Clearly both of them were alive and living while the other was surviving. Furthermore, the destruction of Harry actually hastened Voldemort's death since he was a Horcrux. Harry poses a risk to Voldemort but doesn't prevent him from living. Is it just to mean that they both really want to kill each other?
It's almost sort of self-fulfilling though since the reaction to the paranoia about the prophecy was what gave Harry the means and motivation to fight Voldemort. Ty 06:14, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
Did his contribution in slaying the final horcrux relate to the prophecy in some way? Ty 06:14, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
It was mentioned in Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban;
'Professor Dumbledore – yesterday, when I was having my Divination exam, Professor Trelawney went very – very strange.' 'Indeed?' said Dumbledore. 'Er – stranger than usual, you mean?' 'Yes… her voice went all deep and her eyes rolled and she said… she said Voldemort's servant was going to set out to return to him before midnight… she said the servant would help him come back to power.' Harry stared up at Dumbledore. 'And then she sort of became normal again, and she couldn't remember anything she'd said. Was it – was she making a real prediction?' Dumbledore looked mildly impressed. 'Do you know, Harry, I think she might have been,' he said thoughtfully. 'Who'd have thought it? That brings her total of real predictions up to two. I should offer her a pay rise…' —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk • contribs).
Shouldn't the year be 1979, rather than 1980? J.K. Rowling said in an interview that Lily and James went into hiding when she got pregnant. That requires 9 months. 9 months prior to July 1980 is surely in 1979.
I changed 1979 to 1980, simply because every other resource says that 1980 was the correct year. If JK Rowling did indeed say that, then everything else should be changed. Do you have a source for this interview? AlastorMoody (talk) 04:27, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
| This discussion is listed as an Active Talk Page.|
Please remove this template when the question has been answered.
I'm assuming that the chapter "The Lost Prophecy" was called such after this prophecy, and I do think it would do better as a name than the somewhat conjectural yet accurate "Sybill Trelawney's first prophecy". Should it perchance be renamed? --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 21:03, September 2, 2014 (UTC)