Talk:Hogwarts founders/Archive 1

message: I'm going to go ahead, and remove the sorting hat as one of Griffindor's known relics. This is due to a recent interview with Rowling on the origins of the sorting hat, which seems to suggest that the Sorting Hat involved all four founders, rather than just Godrics.
ES: Has the sorting hat ever been wrong?
JKR: No.
ES: Really?
JKR: Mm-mm. Do you have a theory?
ES: I have heard a lot of theories.
JKR: [laugh] I bet you have. No. [laugh] Sorry.
MA: That's interesting, because that would suggest that the voice comes more from a person's own head than the hat itself -
JKR: [makes mysterious noise]
MA: And that maybe when it talks on its own it comes from -
JKR: The founders themselves.
http://www.mugglenet.com/jkrinterview2.shtml
In its song in GoF, the Sorting Hat stated plainly that it was originally Gryffindor's, though each of the four founders played a role in shaping its personality:
"Twas Gryffindor who found the way
He whipped me off his head
The founders put some brains in me
So I could choose instead!"
Whether the Sorting Hat deserves to be considered solely a relic of Gryffindor is open to question, but there is no question that it was once Gryffindor's hat. My feeling is that it reinforces the "first among equals" position that Gryffindor appears to have held among the founders. 
Serendipitous 08:34, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Griffindor and the Sorting Hat

message: There are alot of assumations and speculatioons riddled throughout this article. I think that until the last book is published, speculations should be kept to a minimum, especially because some of the founders play critical roles in the next book. See the article on the HBP.
I dunno. What does everyone here think? How much speculation is good speculation? After all, we're unlikely to learn much more about the Founders at this point. Should we remove any and all speculation, or should we keep some and discard others? If so which?Serendipodous 23:03, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that speculation should certainly be kept to a minimum, and it should always be made clear that it is speculation. For example, when you talk about the origin of Slytherin's first name, my objection was at the use of the word 'probably', which I think is overstating the theory. Some of the details on where the founders are from seem to read quite a lot into four lines of a Sorting Hat song, lines which probably don't have any real relevance to the story.--Victim Of Fate 11:35, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Speculation

message: This page has been processed by N-Bot, which, for browsing convenience, changes links to redirects to lists to links to the relevant list sections: e.g. Salazar Slytherin is changed to Salazar Slytherin.
As a result, anyone who intends to split a section out of this page should be aware that, as of 3 September 2005, the following sections were linked to from the following pages:
* Salazar Slytherin: Lord Voldemort, Hogwarts, Timeline of fictional historical events, Magic in Harry Potter, List of characters in the Harry Potter books, Blood purity (Harry Potter), R.A.B., Marvolo Gaunt
* Helga Hufflepuff: Hogwarts, Timeline of fictional historical events, List of characters in the Harry Potter books, Horcrux
* Godric Gryffindor: Hogwarts, Timeline of fictional historical events, List of characters in the Harry Potter books, Horcrux
* Rowena Ravenclaw: Hogwarts, Timeline of fictional historical events, List of characters in the Harry Potter books, Horcrux
~~ N-Bot (t/c) 19:30, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note to anyone intending on splitting off a section 

message: i'm curious why the four founders are said to have lived in "what is now Britain". surely it was britain then, as well. is this an attempt to avoid the anachronistic use of a term, or is it a nod to the muggle/magic divide? if the latter, i don't really know enough to comment. if the former, however, i should point out that it is reasonable to use the term britain up to the norman invasion at least. the phrasing now is rather wordy. Ptomng
It was to avoid anachronism. At the time, the nation of Great Britain did not exist, though the island now called Britain did. I made the distinction largely because I was uncertain whether Britain had gained its modern name by that time or whether it was still called "Britannia."Serendipodous 09:46, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "What is now Britain"?

message: Fan drawings are original research, and thus should not be in articles. Besides, the drawing of Rowena Ravenclaw is plain wrong, I'm pretty sure she has black hair. Borisblue 00:21, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh? I didn't know that. Put that back in if you feel it's right. Borisblue 01:20, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Fan drawings

message: The famous wizard card information was written by Rowling. She reveals as much on the "About the Books" section of her website's FAQ. The Harry Potter Lexicon has a list of which cards were Rowling-written, and the names of the four founders are among them. Serendipodous 22:18, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. My mistake. Superm401 | Talk 03:00, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Famous wizard cards

message: While I think it's a fairly safe bet that Rowena Ravenclaw's hailing from a glen would indicate a Scottish origin, it is simply too much of a stretch to suggest that just because someone is described as being from a valley, that means she was from Wales. Yes, it is true that in Britain people from Wales are often described as being from "the valley," but valleys are not unique to Wales in the way that (in Britain anyway) glens are unique to Scotland. Helga isn't described as being from "the valley" anyway, she's "from valley broad", which is far more generic. Serendipodous 12:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The whole "Hufflepuff from Wales" debate