Search Beyond Hogwarts:
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: << < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... > >>
Reader Comments: (Page 6)
If Dumbledore wasn't fully , then Harry wouldn't have been released from Dumbledore's hex that left him paralysed under the invisibility cloak, only to watch the events unfold.
Posted by Jitesh Mistry from Bradford, England on October 17, 2006 1:29 PM
You're assuming the only mechanism that can cause a spell to stop functioning, short of the spell caster removing it, is the of the spell caster. We don't know enough about spells to be able to say this for sure.
Indeed, we have many examples of spells that OUTLIVE their spell caster, ie., all the ancient protections and spells on Hogwarts like anti-apparition, moving staircases, etc. If you look at it this way, the fact the spell lifted when Dumbledore left the tower could be proof that he is alive, because the spell should have outlived him.
Posted by Dave Haber from Los Angeles, CA on October 17, 2006 1:39 PM
I don’t think DD created a horcrux because I think its Harry’s fight to destroy LV on his own. Therefore, unfortunately I believe DD is but may help HP from the sidelines via his portrait, twoway mirror etc. However, I do like that the article is interesting in that it points out his prior dealings with Nicolas Flamel and the pursuit of immortality so maybe he had an interest in horcruxes also. It is also possible that to defeat the dark wizard Grindewald he had to find and destroy horcruxes and was therefore familiar with them.
Also, is it possible that Nagini is a juvenile basilisk? Maybe they don’t turn people to stone until they’re adult. We know from her attack of Arthur Weasley that she’s quite poisonous. Considering the long life expectancy of basilisks that would make the decision to use her as a horcrux more sensible. Given the attachment of Salazar Slytherin and subsequently LV to the original basilisk it would make sense.
Posted by bart from Denver, Colorado on October 17, 2006 3:35 PM
Bart, I think if Nagini really is a baby Basilisk (or juvenile Basilisk), then its possible that she could be a Horcrux. Infact she could be a Horcrux ONLY then. Voldemort would not use a normal snake to put his soul into. And we don't know of any spells as such that prolong life. Nagini definitely did not make a horcrux and nor did she drink the elixir of life as the stone is destroyed. Like you said, her long life expectancy would give her more credibility for making her a Horcrux.
Also, do any of the books point out or give us a clue that Voldemort had Nagini before his downfall at Godric's Hollow?
Posted by Aditi Dani from Nagpur, India on October 18, 2006 12:46 AM
I have checked the comments but my topic seems to be untouched.
DD probably does have a Horcrux or some reason to other than just . You are right on that count. Now, if DD has a Horcrux I think there is another way to go with the animal thing. As you said, Fawkes and Nagini are quite different. Nagini s, Fawkes doesn't. Well, DD is smart. But would he be THAT intelligent? I mean it seems to be just a Phoenix. But without any hard evidence it's just a Phoenix I can't DISPROVE the theory. But let's look at another pet, a pet with one life, white like DD's beard, always knowing where to fly to meet Harry (Book 3), and having being "bought" by Hagrid. Yes, Hedwig, would be a possible choice. Even if JKR has said that Hedwig isn't an Animagus, he still could be a Horcrux. So try out that theory. See if it fits. Critique me all you want:).
Posted by Taylor Ray from PSL, FL on October 18, 2006 06:22 AM
I am still mulling all this over, and while I don't know if I buy into the DD horcrux theory or not, I thought I might suggest something that came to me as I read through all the entries.
It seems that some are having a problem with the theory of DD creating a horcrux of his own because of the evil connected to ing a person in order to construct the horcrux. Okay, I can well understand and buy that - but here is my thought:
What if Dumbledore created a horcrux for himself with the ing participation of another person, who volunteered, allowed and (dare I suggest) even insisted that Dumbledore them in order for Dumbledore to be able to construct the needed horcrux? A person who, in order to convince DD to take his/her life, absolved Dumbledore of any taint or "sin" in the taking of his/her life, all balanced against the greater good and necessity of Dumbledore being around to support Harry in his final confrontation with Voldemort? Would such a concept make it easier for folks to believe that Dumbledore did indeed make a horcrux for himself, if one considers that any association with the taint of evilness might be sufficiently removed, due directly to the person that was to be ed knowing EXACTLY what would be involved in the creation of DD's horcrux, and then insisting on sacrificing himself/herself to the cause?
Before you say "NO! DD would NEVER do such a thing!", bear in mind that DD may have already done this very thing after a fashion, only with himself being on the other end of the ing. If it turns out that the theory is true that DD insisted that Snape him if and when the time came, in order to cement Snape's trust within the Voldemort camp; sacrificing himself at Snape's hand (and absolving Snape of any evilness in the act beforehand, presumably) in order to fascilitate a greater good - then would it be too much of a stretch to think that another person, equally convinced that the only way to fool Voltemort and at the same time insure that DD is alive and in play at the final confrontation between Harry and Voldemort is to ing and freely give up their own life so that DD could construct a horcrux for himself?
I think not. If Dumbledore was truly convinced that ing with premeditation was evil and unforgivable no matter the circumstances, then I doubt that he would have insisted that Snape take his life, as I believe he did. While I don't know if I believe that the horcrux idea is what J.K. has in that devious noggin of hers, I *DO* believe that if it is true, Dumbledore could mitigate the evilness attached to ing a person in the construction of a horcrux IF, and ONLY if, the person to be ed was a person who ing, freely, and without external manipulation, CHOSE to sacrifice themselves in the creation of the horcrux in order to accomplish a greater necessity - in this case, the ultimate, total and irreversible destruction of Lord Voldemort.
Posted by Eric Scott from Salt Lake City, Utah on October 20, 2006 7:25 PM
Well, it is mentioned in one of the previos books that DD did someone who was evil. So probably a Horcrux was created then.
Posted by Poojitha from Dubai, U.A.E. on October 21, 2006 10:49 AM
Eric, for the creation of a Horcrux you'd have to split your soul. And this very splitting is unnatural and tainted. What you're suggesting is DD commmitted a for something of far greater nature to be achieved (ing LV). But that still makes the the an act of evil as it would split the soul. If the was indeed an act not inspired by anything evil, I don't think the soul would be ripped apart anyway because your heart would remain pure.
I am more inclined to think that DD did create a Horcrux but not by ing anyone. In the fifth book, DD tells LV in the big Ministry duel 'we both know there are other ways of destroying a man, Tom.' Maybe he created a Horcrux by 'another' way of destroying Grindelwald.
Posted by Aditi from Nagpur, India on October 22, 2006 01:02 AM
I belive that dumbledore is not , *BUT* could R.A.B be sirius' brother? Regulas A. Black?
It would make a great appearance in book 7 if somehow someone is helping harry destroy voldemort's horcruxes, someone invisible and then near the end voldemort disarms harry and is about to harry when suddenly dumbledore who never d appeares and attacks voldemort.
J.K says that dumbledore does but i belive that he come back in book 7 and be ed by voldemort while harry attacks and s voldemort once and for all!
but until book 7 we can only wait but j.k needs to write sooo much in book 7 (4 remaining horcruxs, voldemort or harrys end, fleur and bills wedding....) that i think either book 7 come out in 5 or 6 years being about 1000 pages or j.k may leave it unfished with harry meeting voldemort, taking out his wand and then leaving it unfinished...
if you think any of this could happen or know anything about R.A.B then please write back, oh and i think that the portrate of dumbledore that appears the the new head's office may give harry advice in book 7...
Posted by alex from Barton on October 23, 2006 05:11 AM
As we have seen in each and every book so far, it's hard to keep any secret hidden for long at Hogwarts. It's my theory that now, with the apparent of Prof. Dumbledore in Book 6, we are witnessing an entirely different level of hidden magic, one not so easily discovered.
Whatever the truth behind the apparent and disappearance of Albus Dumbledore, it was accomplished in a truly Occult fashion. Very ancient magic is afoot here, techniques older than almost any living memory, known to very few, that require the combined talents of two wizards-- two minds, two hearts-- working side by side.
There are magical forces that cannot be summoned by the efforts of any one individual acting alone-- not even the Dark Lord. This is why LV be defeated in the end: even if he has somehow learned of these hidden, ancient techniques, there is literally no one he can trust. Except perhaps the horcruxes, his own foul creations, Nagini among them.
It makes perfect sense that Snape is working alongside Dumbledore to accomplish this remarkable work of practical magic. Not only does Snape have more-than-a-lifetime's worth of still to repay, but he has remarkable inner talent perhaps understood only by Dumbledore himself. As an occlumens, Snape's use of silent spells in combination with the art of illusion is key to the events surrounding the of Dumbledore in Book 6.
But whatever the ultimate answer behind these mysteries, I am truly in awe at the magical artistry of JKR's remarkable literary plots.
Posted by ~Ann G. from Boston on October 24, 2006 1:02 PM
i was reading your theory while thinking OMG my theory EXACTLY! except i think that R.A.B is sirius' brother, Regulus A. Black, but that would have to have been long before, seeing as he is suppposed to be . Or is he? When i was doing some 5th book sluething, they say that they never found regulus' body. what if he's not ?
Posted by k o. from nj on November 2, 2006 2:05 PM
Sorry, but ive found a flaw.
Why would Fawks be a horcrux? Dumbledore is not a er. That is an essential part in creating a horcrux. " you must split your soul with such an evil deed" or something like that. I too want to believe that dumbledore is not , but i am merely bringing up a point.
Posted by kelly from upper township, new jersey on November 2, 2006 2:14 PM
Pages: << < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... > >>