Beyond Hogwarts

Search Beyond Hogwarts:

Reference Desk:
Beyond Hogwarts FAQ
Wizard to Muggle Currency Converter
Harry Potter Spelling Reference

Dumbledore's Horcrux

by Jan-Marie Spanard

How does a wizard learn about the existence and properties of Horcruxes? Who knows what they are, how to make them, what they can do? What wizard would make a Horcrux? Under what circumstances? And for what reasons? And why are they so evil? Hermione is working very hard to answer these questions. As Hogwarts virtual library search-engine, she is coming up empty. But Tom Riddle did it, somehow.

> Read the full article

Pages:  <<  <  6  7  8  9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ...  >  >>

Reader Comments: (Page 16)

tom finds out about horcrux's by maybe reading that 1 book that mentioned it but said about them being very dangerous and doesnt mention again he wondered and asked

Posted by Natalie from Bromsgrove on January 27, 2007 12:39 PM

I don't agree with this article -- I think the production of, even the idea of a horcrux is inherently evil. When a person is ed and your soul splits, that's an inherently evil thing that happens. It is dark magic that enables this split portion of one's soul to be housed in another object or being. I agree Dumbledore knows all about dark magic, but I don't believe he would use it. Why? Because he's good, but moreover, because HE DOESN'T NEED TO. (From here on out, I'm sharing my own crackpot speculative theories, but to me they make more sense than those proposed in the article.)

My opinion (and I haven't yet investigated how well this is supported in the book) is that most operations of dark magic are mirror reflections of spells in white magic. The very existence of horcruxes, and Dumbledore's knowledge of them, to me implies that there may be a parallel idea in white magic with which he is also familiar.

If a horcrux is born out of the "ultimate act of evil", ing someone, then I suggest that an anti-horcrux (if you ) is born out of the "ultimate act of good". This would be sacrificing your life for another. Maybe like what Harry's parents did for him. Or maybe like Dumbledore did at the end of book 6... perhaps also for Harry?

Now if I recall correctly, Harry was being held immobile by Dumbledore under the invisibility cloak, forced to be a witness to his demise at Snape's hand. I agree with those who posit that Snape was acting at Dumbledore's behest when he ed him, and that Snape didn't really want to do it. But I think it was part of a spell prepared for long in advance by Dumbledore and Snape -- it needed to be Snape and not Malfoy -- and that the benefactor of this spell was Harry. That's why he had to be present, and was not allowed to intervene.

I haven't yet figured out what the exact effect of an "anti-horcrux" is yet. I doubt it's something to artificially prolong one's life. However, it may be we learn in book 7 that there is indeed a part of Dumbledore that lives on "in" Harry, to give him guidance and even protection, in addition to the other part of him that now inhabits the portrait in the headmaster's office.

And while I do believe that Dumbledore is truly , I wouldn't be too surprised if his close connections with Fawkes the phoenix bears some metaphorical fruit in a "rebirth" of some sort or another. And/or perhaps the connection that existed between Dumbledore and Fawkes now pass on to Harry and Fawkes.

Them're my two cents, anyhow.:-)

Posted by Lowell on February 2, 2007 10:26 AM

I totally don't buy it. There is a difference between "" and "ing," and Slughorn says you must commit a "" to create a Horcrux, even if simply "ing" does rip the soul asunder.

It also seems that creating a Horcux is something someone does when they are either afraid to or don't want to . It's deliberate, not opportunistic. Though I don't have specific proof of this, it seems like it has to be planned. Dumbledore said that he thought Voldemort was planning on making a Horcux the night he was going to Harry. Planning. I doubt Dumbledore was ever planning to someone.

But more importantly, Dumbledore isn't afaid to ! Like mentioned before, he says "To the well organized mind, is just the next great adventure." He also says to Voldemort at the Ministry of Magic that "There are things worse than ." Dumbledore isn't afraid to . Even his partner, Nicholas Flamell, wasn't made immortal by the philosophers stone -- it merely extended his life.

Besides, Horcruxes are "Magik most evile." Could such a great, good wizard have something so evil?

Posted by Rachel from Providence, RI on February 2, 2007 10:44 PM

A horcrux results from a supreme act of selfishness - you take the life of another human being in order to extend your own. There is no way Dumbledore would ever perform this type of magic, regardless of the circumstances under which the other person might .

I also believe that Dumbledore is and won't come back. JK Rowling has far too much integrity as an author to resort to cheap stunts to revive a popular character. Her books are filled with loss - Harry's parents are , Cedric is , Sirius is and now Dumbledore is and none of them are coming back.

However I don't believe that Dumbledore d in vain. Harry was saved as an infant because his mother placed a charm on him. Her sacrifice sealed this charm and protected him from Voldemort's curse. I'm not saying that Dumbledore did the same spell, but it's possible that he put in place various protections and his was necessary to invoke them or ensure that they are at their strongest level.

Dumbledore believed that the most powerful force of all is love. If he needed to give up his life in order to protect Harry and wizardkind, his love for them would have compelled him to act and would have made his magic far more powerful than anything Voldemort could produce.

Speaking of love, I wonder if that was the critical flaw that Voldemort made when he used Harry's blood to regenerate his body. When Harry told Dumbledore that Voldemort chose him in order to nullify his mother's charm, there was a brief look of triumph in Dumbledore's eyes. Also, at the Ministry of Magic, Voldemort was unable to possess Harry because of Harry's abundance of love and goodness which is unbearable to Voldemort. I wonder if Voldemort has 'infected' himself with something he cannot tolerate and which weaken him at a critical moment. Who knows? I guess we'll find out in July!

Posted by Jay Cagey from Salt Lake City, UT on February 4, 2007 11:37 PM

After reading all comments posted for this topic, I have come to the conclusion that Dumbledore is definitely , and does not have a Horcrux specially not Fawkes, because then he would live for ever, and as he has mentioned before “For the organized mind, is only the next great adventure”.

Voldemort has put all his efforts in learning only dark magic, which can be his undoing, remember that he did not know or did not remember the “Ancient magic”, which Lily Potter used to save Harry, by ing herself.

Dumbledore was over 150 years old at the time of his , and a very powerful wizard with lots of resources and experience, who must have mastered the “Ancient magic”, which might allow him a “come-back” of sorts, not exactly as his old self, in his old body, but in a way that hi can still be useful, if only to guide Harry and friends (The order of the Phoenix and Dumbledore’s Army) in defeating The Dark Lord.

Posted by Emilio from Mexico City, Mexico on February 13, 2007 4:24 PM

This is my first time posting so I apologise if I ramble a bit. I personally think that Dumbledore wouldn't have created a horcrux even though he probably knew how they are made. I also think he is (sorry!) but I don't think he stop helping Harry. As he says in POA "You think the we have loved ever truly leave us? You think that we don't recall them more clearly than ever in times of great trouble?" I know this is a reference to Harry's stag patronus but I think it has a wider meaning and refers to Dumbledore and Sirius as well. The other reference that makes me think he be back (maybe the pensieve be helpful and the talking portraits) is the one that (I think) appears a couple of times about Dumbledore only truly being gone when no one is loyal to him (CoS I think but I can't find my copy to look - feel free to correct me)
On the horcrux subject I don't think Harry is a horcrux. I think that the missing one is something along the lines of Riddle's special award - partly because he truly believed he was performing a service to the school by getting rid of muggle-borns, and partly because I think it would give his warped mind great satisfaction to know it was sitting under Dumbledore's nose all along. And we have already told that he can afford to be a bit reckless with one or two as there are 6 horcuxes (hence using the diary as a weapon.)

Posted by Helen from Newcastle, UK on February 20, 2007 8:09 PM

Interesting, things seemed to get more and more far fetched as time went on.

Dumbledore said something to Draco in HBP that i suppose supports the theory that Albus might have ed

" is not nearly as easy as the innocent believe..."

This might imply that Dumbledore is not innocent and is speaking from experience.

Also in the duel in the minestry between Dumbledore and Voldemort, Voldemort says
"are you going to me Dumbledore? beyond such brutality are you?"
I think this might be in a mocking tone.

Another point- Whilst i dont believe Dumbledore would create a horcrux on principal even if he did have to Grimwald. who is to say that it had to be the er that had to create the Horcrux, maybe someone else who was there took the opportunity to create a horcrux for Dumbledore if they knew Dumbledore wouldn't.

But there is a part that tells me beyond all doubt that Dumbledore has nothing tying him to the earth (which is what a horcrux does)
"...Just as he [Harry] knew then that Dumbledore had left Hogwarts, had left this world, had left Harry"
Harry knew he had left the world. Proves it for me.

Posted by Ivor Johnson from Edinburgh on February 22, 2007 12:44 PM

This theory makes no sense, and it actually frightens me that you'd think it acceptable for someone to someone (like Grindewald) for utterly good reasons, or even accidentally, then USE the damage caused by that to promote one's own welfare. It is the USE of this act, and not necessarly the act itself, that is evil, hence the distinction between , which benefits the self and is thoroughly evil, and accidental . "Oh well, he's , I might as well make myself immortal while I'm at it." I don't think so.

Lowell, your idea is brilliant and it's got me thinking now....

Posted by Daniel on February 22, 2007 3:05 PM

I'm not getting this "Dumbledore has a Horcrux" thing either.. We all *correctly* believe that Albus Dumbledore is a good kind man and certainly not evil.
But randomness flows in the mind of Ashley. Can you share a Horcrux with someone? Like, someone with the same DNA? So like if Albus only helped to Grindewald could he and his brother put a fraction of each of their souls in the same Horcrux? So that if one s... I don't know this is as far as I've gotten down this theory...

Posted by Ashley from Missouri on February 22, 2007 6:28 PM

Lowell: very interesting. Would it work the same way than the "Bond of blood"? I mean that if Aberforth accepted to care about Harry, it would protect Harry the same way than when Petunia protected him. Harry is now emancipated from his relatives, he has no more godfather. Would Albus Dumbledore be his "spiritual father, and Aberforth, as I would say, his "spiritual uncle" giving him protection against evil?

Posted by herve from strasbourg on February 23, 2007 06:38 AM

Frankly, I don't believe it possible that Dumbledore would have made a Horcrux. I think there is more than the ing aspect of it that makes them evil. Many theories have been put out for Dumbledore ing someone- the dark wizard, people allowing him to do it, etc.- but if this is true, there are certainly circumstances under which other wizards would have had the opportunity to make one as well. For example, why wouldn't Voldemort have had his Eaters make horcruxes? They've certainly ed people and it'd be rather practical to have an immortal army. It seems there must be more to them; some other evil aspect that puts them in their own dimension.

There have also been theories put forward that Dumbledore may have done something like ed a ing person to make his Horcrux. Would this really have counted as the necessary ? Is it really if the person requested it? Wouldn't that count more as suicide? Even if it didn't, the Horcruxes themselves are called a 'magik most evile', not just the required to create them. It seems only very knowledgeable, world-weary wizards know of their existence; would they be so frightened by , which they have probably had to deal with before?

Posted by Kate from Minnesota, USA on February 24, 2007 5:20 PM

Very interesting article, can't say I agree, but I would like to point out one absolutely crucial thing. If Dumbledore is not , then the Unbreakable Vow forged between Snape and Narcissa at the beginning of HBP would have been broken.

"And, should it prove necessary... if it seems Draco fail... Will you carry out the deed that the Dark Lord has ordered Draco to perform?"

If you've read the book, then you know Snape agrees to Dumbledore.
Now for the important part: If Dumbledore had a Horcrux, then Snape would have failed to him, and having broken the Unbreakable Vow, Snape would . The details of how the Unbreakable Vow s the breaker is unknown, but I would imagine that it would be immediately obvious that something had gone wrong.

Posted by Aaron from Kirkland, Wa on February 24, 2007 11:06 PM

Pages:  <<  <  6  7  8  9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ...  >  >>

Featured Discussions | The Septology | Harry's World | Harry Potter Movies | Dumbeldore Is Not Dead | FAQ is not affiliated with or approved by
Scholastic Books, Bloomsbury, Warner Bros., or J.K. Rowling
Original Content Copyright © 2006-2010 David Haber, All Rights Reserved