Talk: Bathilda Bagshot

This is the talk page for the page "Bathilda Bagshot".

This space is used for discussion relating to changes to the page, not for a discussion about the topic in question. Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Click here to start a new topic.

Age[]

Xcuse me, how is possible, that Bathilda is grand-aunt of G.Grindelwald, you 've written that she has born in 1881 and Grindelwald in 1881 too, what 's going on here, I couldn't understand! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.78.55.234 (talk • contribs).

It says prior to 1881 86.170.196.187 12:37, April 29, 2010 (UTC)

According to the article, she was born "prior to" 1881. "Prior to" means "before"--Rodolphus 12:39, April 29, 2010 (UTC)

I just said that. 86.170.196.187 13:02, April 29, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe we could guesstimate her birth year. Since great-aunt means aunt of a parent, we could say the parent was about 25 when Grindelwald was born, and Bathilda was about 25 when the parent was born. That would give us a date of 1831. You could call it 1830's or 1840's. I think if you just say prior to 1881 that doesnt really give the feel of how old she really is. Maybe we're not allowed to do that per the guessing policy, but that's just my thoughts. 75.54.94.163 20:40, December 27, 2011 (UTC) Guest

That is somewhat speculative. While it is plausible, there is nothing in canon to suggest that Grindelwald's parents (and their parents) were 25 when their children were born. There are wizards, in canon, who have had children in the age of 13 (!), like Bellatrix Lestrange's father, Cygnus Black. Also, on the opposite end, we don't know when a regular wizard's fertility ends; for all we know, given wizards' larger lifespans, they might be able to bear children in their 50s or 60s. Anyway, my point is that while a 1830s birthdate is credible, there is nothing in canon to support it. -- Seth Cooper owl post! 22:23, December 27, 2011 (UTC)

Early Transformation[]

I have noticed that on the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part One DVD, on the special features, it shows Bathilda transforming into Nagini in a very different way. It clearly shows her looking up into the air before Nagini launches straight out of her mouth. This may support the theory of her being an Inferi, as in the actual film her body actually changes into Nagini's, as if Nagini had disguised herself with Polyjuice Potion (quite unlikely.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.140.33.35 (talk • contribs).

Who's Speaking Through Bagshot?[]

I was wondering what everyone thought about something. Bathilda talks to Harry a little before it's revealed that's she's dead and been reanimated by the Dark Arts. Does anyone have any idea who's actually speaking through Bagshot? Is it Nagini? Anyone have any ideas? Deathislife2011 23:44, March 31, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it was Nagini who spoke. She spoke Parseltongue and Harry understood at that time Parseltongue, but did not recognise that he heard this language.
Harry granger Talk contribs 11:25, April 2, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. It's odd that the only time we ever actually see Nagini speak is through Bagshot, but that makes the most sense. Thanks for answering. Deathislife2011 05:04, April 3, 2012 (UTC)

Blood Type[]

How do we know she was either a pure-blood or a half-blood? Voldemort could have ordered that she was not to be imprisoned because he needed to use her for his plan and have Nagini possess her - as far as we know, she could easily be muggleborn and be related to Grindelwald as her brother (or sister) would have been muggleborn too and then Grindelwald would have been the grandson - and by then the line would have married other wizards and become half-blood - of a sibling. So, technically, Bathilda COULD be a Muggleborn. HarryPotterRules1 21:56, April 6, 2012 (UTC)

I dont see how her blood status would have been an issue or reason as to why Voldiepants had her killed to be Nagini's puppet. I think it was all done because he knew Harry was bound to travel to Godric's Hollow so he just put Nagini there as a trap for Harry, remember Nagini did say her motives when she was constricting Harry. 173.60.132.103 18:06, February 27, 2013 (UTC)

Godric's Hollow participant[]

Are you sure that Bathilda should be considdered an attack at Godric's Hollow participant? She was already dead by this point, and all of her actions were controlled by Nagini. I don't think a lifeless corpse can be a participant. What do you think? Rodolphus (talk) 11:44, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't think so. I agree Bathilda herself did not participate. Nagini did through her so it doesn't sound quite right to label her a participant. - Kates39 (talk) 11:48, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I'd probably remove the participants then, if no one disagrees for a few days.Rodolphus (talk) 11:54, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Hmm. I agree, hadn't thought of that. - MrSiriusBlack Talk 12:36, 12 March 2022 (UTC)