* If the whole book in its Muggle-published form is supposed to be an artifact from the Potterverse, does that mean Dumbledore wrote the introduction years after his supposed death?
** Maybe this is another facet of his Will. He writes the commentary well before hand, then writes in his Will “in the event of my death, it is my request that these books should find their way to the muggle population”
*** Which of course leads to the question: how does Dumbledore - in his will or in person - have the right to publish an exact copy of Harry Potter's personal property?
*** Dumbledore, break the law? Surely not.
*** Maybe it was Harry's idea?
*** Dumbledore's intro specifically states Harry agreed to it.
** Is the commentary not simply in the original book? Seems quite logical that the textbook would include some of the history behind the classification of magical creatures. Dumbledore was a highly intelligent and decorated wizard. Not out of the realm of possibility that he leant commentary to a textbook. I think the book is meant to be the one that Harry actually used in class. Essentially Harry's copy has been duplicated and sold to muggles.
* Why do the graffities in the book reference the events up to the fourth book, but not afterwards? Harry and Ron gave up Care of Magical Creatures in their sixth year, but in their fifth they still should have used the book.
** It's possible that, that's when their copy was copied.
** Or they were a little more mature in their fifth year - [[FridgeBrilliance maybe one of Umbridge's Educational Decrees banned writing in books]].
*** [[TyrantTakesTheHelm Umbridge]] making a ''reasonable'' rule? Surely not.
*** Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Dolores was a sociopath par excellence but on some level a lot of her comments were correct. Lying is wrong, after all.
** In RealLife this book was released between ''Goblet'' and ''Order'' (not to take away the validity of the above headscratchers, just pointing it out to anyone who doesn't know)
** They don't seem to study Dark creatures in their fifth year (or at least under Umbridge) or in 6th year either. So they probably stopped using it for class and therefore no longer had the opportunity to write in it.
** And it might be that this book only gives a general overlook of the creatures. When starting Care of Magical Creatures class, they're assigned a different book - so it's possible they just stopped using this one.
* Dude was kicked out of Hogwarts for "endangering human lives". Hogwarts. The school that has a house entirely dedicated to turning out what are for all intents and purposes wizard nazis literally since its founding. Just how dangerous was his research that even Hogwarts was like "Nah, we don't want none of that"?
** Because that's not generalizing at all. First off, it's not the school's fault if some of its students grow up to be pureblood supremacists or Death Eaters, and they don't just come from one house - need I remind you of Peter Pettigrew, for example? As Dumbledore says, "It is our choices, not our abilities, that define who we are." Most of the Slytherins we saw during Harry's time at school were just a bunch of schoolyard bullies who were ''descended'' from former Death Eaters (apart from Slughorn), and many of them were able to put their parents' backgrounds aside and fight for the school. It's even been mentioned that by the time Dracois there to send his son to Hogwarts - he's sending his son to a school that he formerly belittled and mocked at every opportunity - he's apparently matured enough to be on civil terms with Harry, and realized the mistakes he made when he was young to the point where he ensured Scorpio wouldn't turn out like him.
** Not to mention Hagrid was previously expelled from Hogwarts after a very long string of incidents that could be called dangerous as well, such as keeping werewolf cubs under his bed and numerous other moments like that. Scamander may have done something like that, but whatever caused his expulsion wasn't serious enough to have him lose his wand like Hagrid did.